By The Right Scoop


***UPDATED***

Newt Gingrich won South Carolina in a big landslide, one that can be best understood by looking at how many counties he won in South Carolina – all but three of them and that could still change:

Here are the actual numbers:

He’s got plenty of Newtmentum now going into Florida. He should be able to turn that into votes if he stays on his conservative message.

Also, Santorum came in third and beat out Ron Paul. You don’t know how happy I am that Ron Paul finished last. Ecstatic, really. But kudos to Santorum.

***

Here’s the poll from earlier:

About 

Blogger extraordinaire since 2009 and the owner and Chief Blogging Officer of the most wonderful and super fantastic blog in the known and unknown universe: The Right Scoop

Trending Now

Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.


NOTE: If the comments don't load properly or they are difficult to read because they are on the blue background, please use the button below to RELOAD DISQUS.

  • poljunkie

    Sure wish we still had Perry on the list.

    • Anonymous

      I suspect it could end up Newt/Perry come November.

      • poljunkie

        I could live with that.

        • http://www.facebook.com/david.masiwchuk David Scott Masiwchuk

          How many different ways does he have to say he doesn’t want it until you guys believe him?

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ricardo-Galvan/100001729378103 Ricardo Galvan

            When he cuts it into his forehead!

        • Trust1TG

          Rubio can’t be VP – his parents were not citizens when he was born, though he was born in the US. He is making a great Senator, though.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VVZODHFH7JZH7YGYOHGY6P7DY4 JR Dogman

            Is that correct? If they were legal immigrants, would that fulfill the natural born requirement?

            If not, it’s a shame we won’t have a President Rubio after President West.

          • Anonymous

            The 1874 Minor v Happersett SCOTUS set a precedent (not dicta) and defined the definition of natural-born citizen, a precedent that was not overturned in the 1898 case against Mr Wu or the other three cases Article 2 Section 1 doesn’t define natural-born citizen for POTUS, but SCOTUS has already decided what that definition is. I believe the 12th amendment says that the VP must also have the same qualifications asthe POTUS…ie He/She must be:

            •35 years old or older
            •Must be a natural-born U.S. citizen
            •Must have lived in the United States for fourteen years

            “The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”

            – SCOTUS 1874 Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 168.

            Slaughterhouse, Wong Kim Ark, Elk v Wilkins and the Perkins cases do not trump the 1874 precedent.

            • https://id.mixi.jp/9700106 Danny

              Right, Minor v. Happerset was about Woman Suffrage, and the paragraph that you quoted goes on to read….

              Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.

              I believe what he is saying here is that the second class of people, i.e. those born here to non-citizen parents (and let us not forget that Obama’s mother was a citizen) is up for debate, but the court has no need to involve itself in that debate when judging Minor v Happerset.

              So actually it established nothing.

              Try reading Wong Kim Ark… it’s pretty explicit in its recognition of natural-born citizenship being conferred upon anyone born in the US as long as their parents weren’t diplomats etc.

              • Anonymous

                What you just wrote is pure dicta. The 1874 decision defined natural-born citizenship. The question before the 1898 court case concerned only citizenship and it did not throw out the 1874 decision which still stands. Both parents must be born in this country and that offspring must also be born in this country to be considered a natural-born citizen.

              • Anonymous

                The reason for the court’s ruling on citizenship, was that they had to first determine Ms Minor’s citizenship before deciding to make a ruling on voting rights for women. In the process they apparently ignored the 1802 case and went ahead and defined natural-born citizenship or maybe just made it clearer and made a ruling in line with the 1802 casel and what the Founders probably understood from DeVattel’s 1757 treatise which defined natural-born citizenship for nations.

                • https://id.mixi.jp/9700106 Danny

                  No, they established that there are two possible categories for natural-born citizenship, the former to which Ms. Minor belonged, and the latter of which was not to be decided by the court at that time.

                  Meanwhile Wong Kim Ark goes to great lengths to establish what constituted English common law at the time of the adoption of the constitution and concludes that, in spite of Vattel, English law held that all people born in England – regardless of where their parents hailed from – were English subjects.

                • Anonymous

                  You can parse it anyway that you want to. The fact remains that the SCOTUS has established that natural-borne citizenship is exactly what I said it is.

                • Anonymous

                  One last point. When the Founders mentioned natural-born citizens they were also big fans of the Old Testament whom they quoted often, mostly through their studies of John Locke. They would have been well aware of the passage that states “Do not appoint foreigners to rule over you.” So they knew exactly what natural-born citizen ment.

                • Anonymous

                  And yet another little gem that I found in my notes:

                  “Extending citizenship to non-citizens through birth based solely upon locality is nothing more than mere municipal law that has no extra-territorial effect as proven from the English (that would be dual citizenship) practice of it. On the other hand, citizenship by descent through the father is natural law and is recognized by all nations (what nation doesn’t recognize citizenship of children born wherever to their own citizens?). Thus, a natural-born citizen is one whose citizenship is recognized by law of nations rather than mere local recognition.

                  Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, James F. Wilson of Iowa, confirmed this in 1866: “We must depend on the general law relating to subjects and citizens recognized by all nations for a definition, and that must lead us to the conclusion that every person born in the United States is a natural-born citizen of such States, except that of children born on our soil to temporary sojourners or representatives of foreign Governments.”*

                  When a child inherits the citizenship of their father, they become a natural-born citizen of the nation their father belongs regardless of where they might be born. It should be pointed out that citizenship through descent of the father was recognized by U.S. Naturalization law whereby children became citizens themselves as soon as their father had become a naturalized citizen, or were born in another country to a citizen father. (That leaves out Obama and includes McCain.)

                  Yes, birth is prima facie evidence of citizenship, but only the citizenship of the nation the father is a member. (Obama’s old man was a citizen of the British Empire).

            • Anonymous

              Here’s another little fun fact that the libsticks don’t both with:

              “In 1802 congress revisited the naturalization laws in order to correct abuses that had taken place under the previous administration. The Act of 1802 repealed all previous naturalization Acts and in their place, stated:

              An Act To establish an uniform rule of Naturalization and to repeal the acts heretofore passed on that subject
              Approved April 14 1802 US Statutes at Large Vol 2 pg 155

              SEC 4 And be it further enacted That the children of persons duly naturalized under any of the laws of the United States or who previous to the passing of any law on that subject by the government of the United States may have become citizens of any one of the said states under the laws thereof being under the age of twenty one years at the time of their parents being so naturalized or admitted to the rights of citizenship shall if dwelling in the United States be considered as citizens of the United States”

          • Anonymous

            That is true, much like the O’s father was a British/Kenyan citizen/dual citizen.

          • Anonymous

            If Rubio were to be nominated as VP candidate, the resulting political firestorm from the Dems referencing his non-citizen parents at the time of his birth would be hysterical.

            • https://id.mixi.jp/9700106 Danny

              They wouldn’t. We might refer to how hilarious it is that – while Obama being born in the US with one citizen parent and one alien parent made him ineligible, miraculously the right has chosen to forget all of this when it comes to nominating someone born in the US of two alien parents, but I don’t foresee anyone bothering to challenge his eligibility.

              • Anonymous

                And why wouldn’t they? The left has a double standard for Republicans. They had no problem vetting McCain. Not so with their little Marxist. No College Transcripts, no history of how Obama got into an Ivy League school, etc. His entire history has disappeared thanks to his lawyers and Axlerod. But McCain being born in the old Canal Zone (which meant automatic US citizenship) became an issue of him being eligable for POTUS. Hmmm…seems to me that if Dhimiratz didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all.

          • Anonymous

            It never stopped Oh-Bummer.

          • Anonymous

            Was President Obama’s father, Barack Obama Sr. a US citizen? No.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VVZODHFH7JZH7YGYOHGY6P7DY4 JR Dogman

          I agree. Rubio or West — I’d be very happy w/ the former and beyond happy with the latter.

        • Anonymous

          Rubio seems to have it together. Unfortunately, he (or Jindal) is ineligible for Pres or VP, as both of their parents were not citizens at the time of his birth. The media gave Obama a pass, and was/is ready to screw anyone into the ground who dares challenge him. A number of citizens in several states have filed motions challenging Obama’s right to be on their ballots. The next big one coming up is January 26th, in which a Georgian judge has agreed to hear the evidence (never has been done before, as judges always found a technical reason not to even consider the evidence).

          • Anonymous

            I say run Rubio, Jindal, whomever……..let the dems protest and when they do, the flood gates of evidence will pour forth exposing BO the fraud. Illegitimate prez and everything he signed null and void! And then I woke up……….

            • Anonymous

              At this point, anyone could run, and the establishment would not appose it. They wouldn’t touch the issue, because of what you just said.

      • http://twitter.com/metro_con metro_con

        “I suspect it could end up Newt/Perry come November.”

        Boy, would that be a mistake. Perry is about the 50th person who should be the GOP VP nominee in 2012.

    • http://twitter.com/tregp Tré Goins-Phillips

      However, we don’t. Newt is the man for the job, and Perry knows that. I hope to see all of Perry’s supporters also swing their support over to Gingrich. We have one goal in 2012: defeat Obama and secular-socialism. Newt Gingrich is capable of that and will bring the Reagan Legacy back to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

      • Anonymous

        Gingrich is “a man who fought in Congress for my father’s programs, a man who believes that President Obama’s vision for America is a dangerous one and must be stopped and reversed.”

        Recounting Gingrich’s amazing career, Reagan says that, after he was first elected to Congress in 1978, he “began to confront the usual politics and became a leading ally of my father, Ronald Reagan. He
        helped Congress push through massive tax cuts. He worked to secure a military buildup that helped defeat the Soviet Union. Under his leadership, Congress also limited the welfare state. As a leader in the
        Reagan revolution, Gingrich began to confront both Republicans and Democrats in Congress for their cozy insider deals.”

        Michael Reagan also reminds viewers that House Speaker Newt Gingrich was the key conservative figure behind the Contract with America, which helped the GOP gain control of Congress in 1994 and led to the first balanced budget in decades. And since leaving Congress, Reagan adds, Gingrich “has remained at the forefront of an American political scene” and “helped keep my father’s legacy alive.”

        http://tinyurl.com/7a3gq8e

        • Anonymous

          The good son has spoken. The other one is a bum.

          • Anonymous

            The other son is a pickle smooching toe dancer

            • Anonymous

              Oh yeah. That’s one apple that fell so far from the tree it begs us all to rethink Newton, gravity, and physics.

              Maybe there was a tornado or something on his birfday. That would explain things :-)

              • http://no-apologies-round2.blogspot.com/ AmericanborninCanada

                Interesting how it’s the adopted son who is so much like the father than the natural born son.

                • Anonymous

                  A lot like naturalized citizens.

                • Anonymous

                  Yes it is.

                • https://id.mixi.jp/9700106 Danny

                  Spending your entire life unsuccessfully trying to win someone’s approval tends to make you then try and emulate them.

                  I shouldn’t speak, since I don’t know him personally, but Michael Reagan candidly admits to essentially having no contact with his father throughout his life.

                  http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1988-04-17/features/8803090826_1_michael-reagan-four-reagan-children-maureen

                  It’s a pretty tragic story, actually.

                • Anonymous

                  That’s an interesting line. I recall seeing Michael Reagan at quite a few WH functions and always spoke well of his father…who was busy all his life as an actor, a governor and an activist for conservative causes. The bitter one wasn’t Michael or his sister Maureen…it was Ronnie Jr and his sister.

                  Having little contact with his dad never spoiled Michael’s opinion of him. I’ve heard him speak many times and he still adores his father.

              • Anonymous

                Pickles… it’s pickles that tend to bounce far from the tree. Apple trees rarely produce pickles… but meh! Stuff happens…. and it evidently happened to the littler ronnie.

              • Anonymous

                I think a stork brought him to the Reagans.

                This comes to mind:
                :)

            • https://id.mixi.jp/9700106 Danny

              You know he’s been married for like 30 years, right?

          • https://id.mixi.jp/9700106 Danny

            You mean the son who actually knew his father growing up?

            • Anonymous

              So you don’t like RR eh? Well you won’t find many allies here.

      • Anonymous

        Which Reagan Legacy is that…the one that fired the striking air traffic controllers and cut tax rates in his first term or the one that raised taxes and granted amnesty to over 3 million alien invaders duruing his 2nd term?

        I trusted Reagan because he could be trusted. I do not trust Gingrich…if his wives can’t than neither can I.

        • PFFV

          Total BS! Thumbs down!

          • Anonymous

            OK…where am I wrong?

            • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ricardo-Galvan/100001729378103 Ricardo Galvan

              To be fair, Reagan agreed to the amnesty thing expecting a secured border. It is likely that Reagan would never have agreed to it a second time considering history’s lessons on this. Namely, that the border never gets secured, that amnesty always comes first. Also, I believe the Reagan amnesty was estimated for a far smaller number of people, but skyrocketed into the millions.

              • Anonymous

                I remember the advertised number 2-3 million but ended up well over 3+ million. But my point was Reagan should have never done this at all. This and his raising taxes his second term, plus not shutting down the Dept. of Education like he campaigned on were my biggest disappointment about him. That’s all.

                • cabensg

                  We will never agree totally with whoever we elect. Never. But as a prediction I hope I’m wrong. There’s always a first time. We do have something else going for us and that’s vocal disagreement with what we don’t want. Have to give Bush credit there. He wanted a totally unqualified nominee for the Supreme Court. We yelled, he listened and now we have one of the best Roberts. Obama listens to. It’s just to the wrong people.

        • Anonymous
    • bobemakk

      I agree, but only one thing bothered me about Perry, he wanted to educate the children of illegal aliens. They are already a drain on our economy, and now educate them too…no way. But I guess we can’t have the perfect candidate.

      Gingrich is the man for the presidency. The lamestream media is trashing Newt for “historical” baggage. All politicians have baggage if we dig deep enough, but the lamestream/left socialists won’t expose democrats, they love the big zero/Obama. Newt has made his mark with his “Contract with America,” a contract he fulfilled that no other politician can match. He is a true conservative, and gaining in the polls. He also now has the support of the Palin family and Rick Perry and now Chuck Norris. Newts daughters also wrote to ABC about Brian Ross interview with their mother and said it was a mean and nasty move right before a primary, which he won anyway. We need this man to bring back our country into prosperity. However, I will vote for anyone who runs against the Obama regime.

  • Anonymous

    I couldn’t vote for one. I like both Santorum and Gingrich. Gingrich and Santorum. Hep!! That sounds like a winning ticket!

    • http://no-apologies-round2.blogspot.com/ AmericanborninCanada

      :-) I voted for Rick.

      • http://www.facebook.com/david.masiwchuk David Scott Masiwchuk

        Cant do it. How he answered the SOPA question means he is not for freedom first.

        • Anonymous

          My understanding from his answer was that he was not for SOPA but was still for protecting the intellectual property rights of individuals and thought that there needs to be a way to do that. I’m not sure how that is not for freedom. Part of freedom is that my rights are protected by the government from others.

          • http://www.facebook.com/david.masiwchuk David Scott Masiwchuk

            There is a way to do that. it is called copyright law. We dont need more government intruding on our free speech. Any candidate that thinks we do is not very conservative in my book. Only Sanatorum seems okay with SOME censorship. Well some is to much.

            • orthodoxyordeath

              He’s not ok with censorship. He’s against SOPA’s censorship, but what he’s not against, is people breaking the law and illegally downloading and sharing things that aren’t their own intellectual property.

              • Anonymous

                …but more Government is not the answer!

                • orthodoxyordeath

                  Property rights are big government?

              • Anonymous

                There is an existing law for that already. Enforce the one law then you won’t have to enforce ten more for not enforcing the one that was in place already. Thats why Santorum can’t be the nominee. If he can’t figure that out then maybe he should go get beat in another Senate race.

            • Anonymous

              That’s what SOPA does. It enforces copyright law which currently does not affect (or is not enforced) on the Internet.

            • Anonymous

              Exactly!! Don’t make a law in an attempt to enforce the law that already exists. Enforce the existing law and there will be no need for another one on top of it. Kinda like hate crimes.

        • Anonymous

          I agree David!

      • Anonymous

        After giving it some thoughts, I went with my heart and voted for Santorum! :)

        • Anonymous

          Santorum is a principled and conservative candidate. If not for Newt’s blow out debates, he would be number one for me. Romney has soooo much money that the conservatives need a bomb thrower to have even the slightest chance to beat Romney. The GOP cannot afford another mod/lib candidate as it’s a certain loss to Obama.

          • Anonymous

            “What is right is not always popular and what is popular is not always right.”
            ― Albert Einstein

          • Anonymous

            The only reason Newt is in the lead is because the media tosses him softballs in debates and then he crushes the media for their stupid questions. Nobody else calls the media as it is and the pc that exists as it is stupid. Thats why he does so well. If it weren’t for that he wouldn’t be in the lead.

        • http://no-apologies-round2.blogspot.com/ AmericanborninCanada

          :-) That’s my sister!

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

      flip a coin, i hope you can at least pick which one to be heads and other be tails

  • quietwolf

    I would like to see a Gingrich/West ticket followed by a West/Rubio. It’ll take that long to strighten out the mess left by 4yrs of the SiC (Socialist in Chief).

    • Anonymous

      Completely agree. My only regret is it won’t be West debating Obama this go around. I’d love for America to see what a real black man stands for.

    • Anonymous

      “…4yrs of…” And almost 100 years preceding.

      It will take decades of restoring, if it ever is accomplished.

      GB

      • Anonymous

        One step at a time…we are the gatekeepers, then our children will be.

        DeMint’s new book “Now Or Never” is a well written outline for restoring our Constitutional rights. We need to focus on our legislators and never stop!

        • Anonymous

          Oh, I agree with getting the congress “straightened out,” but that is a drum I have beaten for 40 years. Many thought the Reagan Revolution was “IT.” It was over, we could relax. Like roaches, ants and some other denizens of this planet, the left will never be finished. It just keeps many thinking that we have gained on them sometimes.

          Today, JFK would probably be in our line up to the right of Mr. Huntsman and Mr. Romney at least.

          If you thought Mr. Goldwater was considered radical in the 1960s, can you imagine that he would even be a voice today?

          In other words, for many of us, who have watched our freedoms eroded systematically, the 2012 election will not even be the beginning of the beginning, but it will be a step if it can be done.

          GB

    • Anonymous

      I originally wanted to see a Palin/West ticket. But Gingrich/West will do just fine, thanks.

  • Anonymous

    Why would Obama want to run against the man who helped balance budgets, paid down debt, lowered taxes, helped put policy in place for a booming economy whcih created jobs jobs jobs and is capable of motivating the base etc…

    You know because:

    Why would Obama want to run against a flip flopper from MA when he himself is polling under 50% and most especially since it didn’t work out so well for Bush. ;)

    Why would Obama want to run against Romney whom he can easily paint as a 1%er and Wall St’s boy toy who hides his money offshore and made a fortune as a corporate raider. Surely in this political environment that’s a big mistake because people just love those CEOs who cash out credit give themselves raises then bankrupt the companies, send jobs to China and such. People love and reelect Governors who impose fees on the blind and try to impose them on the mentally challenged. Its a sure loser for Obama.

    No way, not in this economic and political environment. Obama would be a fool to wish for someone whom he can say my O-Care was based on your R-Care and some of your people even helped us write it.

    Nope, No way Obama wants to run against Mittens who doesn’t defend himself or conservatism very well. Nope, not in a million years does Obama want to run against Mittens.

    Seriously, think about it. Why would Obama want to run against a guy who doesn’t motivate the base of the Republican party.

    And of course we all know Newt’s affairs will take him down like they did Bill Clinton in 1992. Bill would have been POTUS if it weren’t for them flings. And Newt actually marrying the women is far worse than Clinton dumping them right after he had his fun.

    /sarcasm

    It sure would be fun seeing Obama diss Clinton and his legacy to try and make the point against Newt that budgets weren’t balanced, debt wasn’t paid down etc… Do you think that will PO the Clintonites who are already POed Obama played the race card on (of all people) the Clintons last election. Quite the conundrum for Obama if Newt is the nominee. What else does Obama have other than personal attacks that people aren’t going to care about?

    Oh wait! The people that worked with him hate him blah blah blah.

    Newt passed the only conservative entitlement reform in our lifetime. Why would I trust what the people who ran him out of town on trumped up BS charges say ie Romney is the guy? Those people doubled the debt in his absence while they grew the size and scope of government more than any since LBJ. Those people left the GOP brand so tainted that Republicans were basically unelectable in 2006 and 2008 and we got Nancy, Harry, Obama another 5 trillion in debt piled onto our children and Obamacare as a result.

    The fact the establishment GOPers call themselves ‘conservative’ is a joke because conservatism begins with and ends without fiscal sanity. The fact they call Newt immoral because of his personal business which does not affect my children is laughable because piling 10 trillion onto the backs of my children is far more immorally irresponsible and reprehensible than anything Newt ever did in his private life.

    We know why the establishment wants the flip flopping milquetoast mush that is Romney and its because they can push him around and its quite the contrary with Newt.

    The American people don’t want business as usual, we want big reform in DC and Newt can deliver it and knows how to twist arms to get it done. Romney’s executive experience will frustrate him more than it helps him because he can’t order pols around like his subordinates at Bane and he won’t have line item veto like he did as governor. We don’t need another Harvard know-it-all who knows nothing about how to operate in DC in the WH.

    Romney motivates the base even less than McCain and will lose or at best it will be too close to comfort and the last thing the country needs is another Gore vs Bush type debacle ending up in the courts.

    • Anonymous

      Like, like, like, like.

      I take issue with your last statement, though. If it’s close, it won’t be like Gore/Bush. Remember Obama is out of Chicago. They already have the winning votes ready to deliver like a truck load of Pizzas.

      • Anonymous

        LMAO! Even though that’s scary true!

        • Anonymous

          And that’s one reason we can’t let Romney go against Obama. It’s going to be close with those two and the Pizza truck will take him down, no matter what we say.

      • quietwolf

        I remember Daddy Dailey, who had every Dem hopeful coming to kiss his ring or a$$ for a very long time mainly because he had the graveyard vote.

      • Amy

        It’s the Chicago way!

    • Steve Young

      Your rant against Romney and the “evil” establishment bored me. I think I read like two words from your hate filled rhetoric.

      • Anonymous

        Hate filled? LMAO!
        Just so you know I don’t hate anyone. Hate is destructive non productive force. Better to have a clear head to defeat an adversary than one clouded with hate. ;)

        You sound like an Obama supporter that calls everyone a racist because they don’t trust or disagree with Obama. Romney and some of his supporters are Obama-lite in more ways than one.

      • Anonymous

        Amazing. You only read *two words* and found his post “hate filled”? And how could it “bore you” if you only read two words? You must have a very, very short attention span and little to no reading comprehension.

        • Anonymous

          So you didn’t vote for it to read what was in it?

    • Trust1TG

      I love Newt because he has used the Liberals most hated, feared, reviled FOUR-LETTER WORD in every debate.

      It is an old-fashioned word that can be used in mixed company when ladies, grandmothers and children are present, has scarcely seen use in the modern political parlance.

      Newt has used this FOUR-LETTER WORD as a solution in reference to college debt, poverty, entitlements, education, veterans, and the economy.

      He will probably use it again over and over, because this word is Liberal KRYPTONITE, DYNAMITE, NUCLEAR FISSION. They go nuclear. they explode.

      Whenever Newt uses this FOUR-LETTER WORD it is like a switch that activates every Liberal mouth from Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, Chris Matthews and all the Liberal media – they start writhing, foaming at the mouth, getting apoplexy, going into contortions to get on the air and make noises, trotting out all their Alinsky tactics. They call him racist, insensitive, etc.

      This word is banned at OWS sites and in all Liberal speeches. If Newt hyphenates it with another Liberal most-hated word, as he has done numerous times, it causes Union bosses great anger and great fear and they start to issue threats of all sorts, even violence.

      This FOUR-LETTER WORD gives Conservatives courage and actual hope for a real healthy change in our society and economy.

      This FOUR-LETTER WORD gives Conservatives a vision of freedom, peace, prospeity and joy.

      This FOUR-LETTER WORD has made conservatives stand up and cheer loudly at every debate.

      I will type the word backwards and in ‘Pig-Latin’ just in case there are Liberals lurking here: ( KROW, ‘ork-way’ )

      Keep on making the Liberals eat KROW, Newt.

      Nuke’em, Newt!

      • Anonymous

        Very nice :-)

      • Anonymous

        You vile racist! You are going to make the liberals krow to figure it out! How dare you?! Don’t you know you are supposed to give them things without them having to krow?

        Hmph.

        Fortunately, liberals who know better would never ever bother to do the krow necessary to figure it out so they can remain blissfully ignorant of your real meaning here.

      • Anonymous

        “Krow!” I like it!

  • Anonymous

    Rubio has said he would not consider a VP role..but I have to wonder if it was put forward to him as a real question and not a hypothetical, would he actually turn it down?

  • PFFV

    Unless Santorum gets hot I have to back Gingrich at this point. Newt has performed very strong and above all the others so I think he deserves the vote. I know all the past issues but I also know people change and learn from their mistakes too. I am one of those people as i’m sure most of you all are as well. I like his plan, I like his superior leadership abilities, and I like the fact that he wants to be the next Ronald Wilson Reagan.

  • Anonymous

    Are you talking about the same Gingrich that was spooning Pelosi on the couch about global warming or feeding like a pig at Freddie Mac(1.6+ million) or the Gingrich that favors a single payer health care system…just like Obama.

    Michael Reagan is wrong about this Charlatan…we can not trust him.

    • quietwolf

      I’m talking about the Gingrich who said:”Why would you vote for the guy who lost to the guy who lost to the guy who now sits in the Whitehouse?”

      • Anonymous

        That quote is the same thing I’ve been thinking since the beginning. Doesn’t make sense.

        • quietwolf

          What doesn’t make sense, the comment or voting for Mitt, who lost to McCain, who lost to Obama?

          • Anonymous

            No, no. I agree with you. It doesn’t make sense to vote for a guy who lost to the guy who lost to Obama.

            • Anonymous

              It does make sense to vote for the guy who come up with zing with sting on the spot.

              “As an American, I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name. America gave him the White House, based on the same credentials.” -Newt Gingrich

              • Anonymous

                I, as well as many, many others thought the same thing at the time. Just not as eloquently. lol

              • Anonymous

                I think one of the great problems we have in the Republican Party is that we don’t encourage you to be nasty. We encourage you to be neat, obedient, loyal and faithful and all those Boy Scout words, which would be great around a campfire but are lousy in politics.
                Newt Gingrich

                • Anonymous

                  Indeed! Newt’s political acumen is unmatched in the GOP. They didn’t even believe he could win the House in 1994 let alone pass major entitlement reform etc… And we know what they did after they teamed with Pelosi and chased him out they piled 10 trillion on my children’s back as they grew the size and scope of government more than any since LBJ. Yet they call themselves ‘conservatives’ its quite laughable because conservatism begins with fiscal sanity and ends without it. The establishment hacks are saying the most bizarre hypocritical things about Newt considering ie he cost us majorites, he can’t lead etc… blah blah.

      • Anonymous

        “Why would you vote for the guy who lost to the guy who lost to the guy who now sits in the Whitehouse?”

        Mitt also lost to Huckabee. Funny how no one remembers that part. That’s right… ‘Mr. Inevitable’ came in Third in the final delegate count in 2008.

      • http://twitter.com/Professor_Why Professor Why

        To be fair, Reagan lost to Ford in ’76, who lost to Carter in that election… We know how that turned out in ’80…

        Note that I am NOT saying that Mittens is like Reagan, nor am I a Mittens supporter! I’m just throwing this out to show how that quote (great though it might be) can be disarmed somewhat…

        • cabensg

          Except Mitt had more losses which makes it more effective.

    • Anonymous

      Its better to allow Democrats to demagogue that conservatives hate the environment and want dirty air and water blah blah…. ? ? ?

      Newt understands to get people to listen to conservative solutions you have to speak their language to get them to listen because if they don’t listen they can’t hear you. Remember what Herman Cain said about some Black people? If you agree with Cain but lambast Newt then I think its a bit hypocritical. My opinion I could be wrong but the couch thing is a lame talking point.

    • Anonymous

      Paulbot alert!

    • Anonymous

      I”m leery of Newt. I’ll support him if he’s the candidate but I prefer Rick. Not to keen on the fact that Newt is so high on Wilson (progressive), FDR (the cause of all our current problems), and Teddy (also progressive). I hope Rick pulls one out or at the very least comes in a very very close second. He is more for the family and God than any candidate and I think has the values this country needs to be restored.

      • cabensg

        Boo! For not listening to the exact words said in the context of history not in favor of actual governing overall.

        • Anonymous

          what part of history? imprisoning thousands of american-japanese in camps? getting us into the league of nations (later the UN)? Not sure of your point.

    • cabensg

      Boo! for outdated information.

  • Anonymous

    So, Santorum has said he’s not dropping out, no matter what and that he’s heading to Florida. Ron Paul won’t drop out for any reason, Newt may well win it, and Mitt Romney has had solid polling all along, admitting that he knows he’ll win some and lose some when asked about SC.

    Conclusion: these 4 are all going to Florida.

    • Anonymous

      And unless Newt catches fire at the same time the other two drop out, Mitt gets the next four primaries.

      I think Newt will win SC, but if he didn’t and Santorum dropped out, I think a certain Alaskan Ex-Governor would jump in prior to the end of the month.

      I know, it sounds wacko, but why else would she hold back an endorsement of Newt at the same time saying, if she were in SC, she would vote for him?

      She wants Santorum to drop and she has been plotting an entrance (one big rogue chess match for her). I won’t be convinced she’s out until after Feb 1st.

      Having said that, I’m all for Newt to take out the Mitt.

      • Anonymous

        I’d love nothing more than for Sarah to get in… just don’t see it happening though.

        • quietwolf

          That would be great, just not likely. My dream ticket would be a Palin/West ticket. Followed by West/Rubio.

      • cabensg

        Palin isn’t stupid and as a savy politician there’s no way she’s going to jump in. I think she’ll back Gingrich in the end.

        • Anonymous

          I suspect you’re right, but then why not do it now when it would help a lot more than a ‘kinda endorsement’. She seems to have something calculated out. We will see what happens.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

      Hummm, If he has enough $$$ to make to Florida if he loses Ron Paul in SC.

  • Anonymous

    My heart left when Cain left…so I’m going with my brain and who I think can best take a hard fight to Obama and the leftist media…thats Newt

  • Anonymous

    On this page I’m surprised Romney even got 11 votes.

    • Anonymous

      That is really surprising, isn’t it. Who are these people??

  • Erik McA

    One round house kick for freedom please! Courtesy of Newt/Norris

  • Anonymous

    Romney’s people are such scumbags and like Willard Obama-lite in more ways than one. I will not support that POS and his holier than thou BS if he is the nominee.

    Phony email claims Gingrich forced second wife to have abortion
    http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/20/phony-email-claims-gingrich-forced-second-wife-to-have-abortion/

    • quietwolf

      While I have NO love for Mitt, I’m not going to sit on my hands come election day. This time around we need every vote possible to send Obama & Co. packing.

      • Anonymous

        Why? Because you can trust Mitt not to let the establishment push him around?
        You can trust the liberal judges he’ll nominate?
        You trust he won’t flip flop?

        At least the GOP would oppose Obama and he’d be a lame duck for four instead of the traditional two years of a second term President. I think gridlock would be more conservative by default.

        Romney’s record and rhetoric since his first run for office suggests that the only constant over the years has been his flexibility. You may not know exactly which Romney is going to show up once in office, but it’s a safe bet that it won’t be the one people voted for.
        http://reason.com/blog/2012/01/18/mitt-romney-political-shape-shifter

        • quietwolf

          I just want the SiC (Socialist in Chief) out before he makes any more “recess” appointments.

        • cabensg

          I do not Romney to be the nominee. Now is the time to make certain that doesn’t happen. If he is the nominee I will cry all the way to the polls to vote for him. We already have two commie’s put on the Supreme court we don’t need any more. We already have 36 or so Czars ruling through Obama by fiat. We can not let this Muslim loving Alinsky radical stay in the White House. I care about more than just my pocket book. We have enemies that will make our financial problems look like child’s play compared to what they intend for us. If were really concerned about Romney being the nominee then now is the time to get him out.

          • Anonymous

            Romney cannot be trusted to appoint judges either. AT least the GOP will oppose Obama’s appointments. Obama would be a lame duck second termer for fours years instead of just the typical two. No thanks! I believe gridlock would be more conservative than Romney and the establishment which believes they can push him around. I know they hate Newt because he doesn’t let them oush him around and its quite the contrary. I will NOT be fear mongered into supporting the establishment guy because I understand exactly why they’re doing what they’re doing. We need big reform and Newt has proven himself in the past. I will not allow them to play me for a fool because they think they’re smarter than us dumb conservative rubes because it only invites more of the same.

    • Steve Young

      Romney’s people are scumbags? What? Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, Jim DeMint, Jim Talent, Nikki Haley, Chris Christie, Bob McConnell, Sununu, NRO, Scott Brown, George HW Bush are scumbags?

      Hell, even Rush and Glenn are starting to come to Romney’s defense.

      Pretty soon, you’re going to sound like an Obama supporter if you don’t join us scumbags.

      • Anonymous

        Did DeMint endorse Willard? Anyway your list is mostly RINO, you forgot the best of all, McCain and Huntsman. GHW Bush sure as hell is RINO, read my lips…

        I’ll take Mr and Mrs Palin, Gov. Perry, Michael the GOOD Reagan son, Art Laffer (Reagan economist), the great Walter E Williams and Chuch Effing Norris, thank you very much.

        Hahahahahaha!

        • Steve Young

          DeMint endorsed Mitt Romney last time around, he’s sure to back Romney or Santorum over the RINO Gingrich.

          The Gingrich endorsement list is laughable, you had like two credible people backing up Gingrich. Chuck Norris, uhhh, okay, this is from a guy that endorsed Huckabee last time around, hahaha.

          You hate the evil RINO establishment and the evil RINO pundits, but you don’t have any clue as to how much these people have contributed to the conservative movement.

          You’re a small time blogger on a marginal website and you’re contribution to conservatism is backing Gingrich? Pleeeeeease.

          Gingrich is the biggest RINO, establishment candidate in the whole world. Gingrich did one year as a history professor, and started running for politics full time afterwards. He’s a true, lifelong, career politican who lobbied for Fannie and Freddie. You diss Christie for his cap and trade, uhhhh, Gingrich sat on a couch with freaking Nancy Pelosi.

          Romney ran as a moderate, governed as a conservative. Gingrich is pulling the wool over your gullible eyes, claiming he’s a Reagan conservative and his past is unethical, immoral and he embodies the essence of big government progressivism.

          But it doesn’t matter. Santorum or Romney will take the nomination. And you will learn to love them.

          • StNikao

            Here’s what Mitt Romney supported in Massachusetts:

            1. Pro-abortion with taxpayer funding (added it to RomneyCare, kept abortion in his plan, refused to line-item veto it).

            2. Pro-government mandated healthcare (RomneyCare has cost the state over 20,000 jobs and has actually increased the cost of healthcare in Massachusetts).

            3. Pro-government mandates in general (“I like mandates” his own words on tape).

            4. Pro-gay marriage with full state sponsorship (was first Governor to install it, earlier broke a law in his zeal to issue gay marriage licenses, then called opponents of his actions “right-wing”).

            5. Pro-transgender education to children in public schools (promoted by Governor Romney’s administration, read Amy Contrada’s book: “Mitt Romney’s Deception”).

            6. Pro-gay scout masters in the boy scouts (“I feel that all people should be allowed to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation.” U.S. Senate debate on Oct. 26, 1994. Massachusetts News, June 18, 2002.)

            7. Pro-global warming caused by human activity (his own words: “I believe the world is getting warmer… and I believe humans are contributing to that”).

            8. Pro-environmental regulations to combat global warming (imposed massive environmental regulations in Massachusetts, according to the Wall Street Journal: “Mr. Romney joined activists outside an aging, coal-fired plant in 2003 to show his commitment to the emissions caps. “I will not create jobs or hold jobs that kill people, and that plant, that plant kills people,” he said. On Dec. 7, 2005, the Romney administration unveiled the final orders. “These carbon emission limits will provide real and immediate progress in the battle to improve our environment,” then-Gov. Romney said in a press release touting Massachusetts as “the first and only state to set CO2 emissions limits on power plants.”).

            9. Pro-taxes on businesses (closed loopholes, then raised business taxes by 20%, a $309 million increase, as governor of Massachusetts).

            10. Pro-taxes and fees on the public (Romney raised state fees and taxes more than $740 million per year, according to independent experts. He raised fees by roughly $500 million in his first year alone, a figure that was highest in the nation. The state and local tax burden rose more than 7% during Romney’s administration, while property taxes skyrocketed by 26% under Romney the highest level in 25 years).

            11. Pro-amnesty for illegal immigrants (supports path to citizenship for illegals, his own words in 2006)

            12. Anti-second amendment (In 2004, signed gun control legislation in Massachusetts permanently banning the sale of automatic firearms).

            13. Mitt declared himself a “moderate” and says his views are “progressive.” (his own words on tape).

            14. Mitt opposed the Bush tax cuts, earning himself the praise of Barney Frank.

            15. Under Romney’s progressive policies of increased taxation on businesses, the state of Massachusetts ranked 47th in the nation in job creation.

            NOT conservative.

            Romney’s record is to the Left of most Democrats.

            • Anonymous

              Great post, I had to save this to my archives!

          • Amy

            Hmm.. your elitist attitude appears to be shining through. Speaking only for myself, I’m quite tired of hearing from the lefties and the big gov righties.

        • cabensg

          Demint did not endorse Romney. He said he thought he would win. Big difference.

      • Anonymous

        Ann? Yes she’s a scumbag. Said she’d vote for Hillary over McCain. Big Krispy Kreme Kristy supporter. Said Romney is the best conservative in the race!

        Savage: really no explanation needed. He’s a disgrace. Just bitter that he’s an afterthought.

        When did DeMint endorse Mittens??

        Haley: she’s a disgrace. The Tea Party got her the governorship and she stabbed them in the back!

        Krispy KReme Christie??? belives in cap and tax, won’t fight Obamacare, pro gun control, appointed radical Muslim judges

        Sunnunu: Establishment hack scumbag piece of trash.

        All of the Bush’s: Establishment. They are a huge reason we’re in the mess we’re in.

        Sounds like you’ve taken too many shots to the head Steve!

        • Steve Young

          Hahaha, the evil RINO establishment and the evil RINO pundits. You don’t have any clue as to how much these people have contributed to the conservative movement.

          You’re a small time blogger on a marginal website and you’re contribution to conservatism is backing Gingrich? Pleeeeeease.

          Gingrich is the biggest RINO, establishment candidate in the whole world. Gingrich did one year as a history professor, and started running for politics full time afterwards. He’s a true, lifelong, career politican who lobbied for Fannie and Freddie. You diss Christie for his cap and trade, uhhhh, Gingrich sat on a couch with freaking Nancy Pelosi.

          Romney ran as a moderate, governed as a conservative. Gingrich is pulling the wool over your gullible eyes, claiming he’s a Reagan conservative and his past is unethical, immoral and he embodies the essence of big government progressivism.

          But it doesn’t matter. Santorum or Romney will take the nomination. And you will learn to love them.

          • Anonymous

            Hey Moron,

            I’m supporting Santorum. If it came down it, I’d pick Newt over Mittens.

            I pointed out the truth about those pundit clowns. Using their platform to promote the biggest RINO in the field does NOT help the conservative movement!

            Mittens governed as a conservative??? He raised fees and the state was 46th in job creation. And he implemented ROmneycare, the blueprint for Obamacare! MA has the highest health care costs in the country and 50% of it is paid for by the rest of the country! Yeah that’s really governing as a conservative!

            At least Newt has done some conservative things. Ever hear of the Contract With America? He fought Clinton and got him to sign welfare reform. Newt actually cut the budget and sucessfully fought against Hillarycare.

            Stop embarrassing yourself.

            • Steve Young

              Moron? Haha. We’re on the same team.

              Let me educate you a bit about Romney, because you are reading too much from Wasserman Schultz talking points.

              Romney ran in the bluest state in all of America. Imagine if the city of San Francisco became a state, that’s MA.

              The economy. He took a several billion dollar deficit and turned it around into a several billion dollar surplus.

              Life. Each and every time a pro-choice bill came on his desk he vetoed it, there were a lot, stem cell research, abortion pills for minors, etc.

              Illegal immigration. Gave his officers the ability to enforce immigration law. Romney is in favor of putting illegals at the back of the line, Gingrich wants ammesty for illegals at 25 years.

              Family. He fought the judges over gay marriage ALL the way.

              Global warming. He doesn’t know who causes it, that’s fine, but he’s never going to force global warming legislation down our throats, he didn’t sit on a couch with Nancy Pelosi.

              Ethics. He never cheated on multiple wives. He didn’t take money from Fannie and Freddie. He never got fined 300,000 for ethics violations in the senate. He never pardoned anyone in MA.

              He did this in MA. That’s freaking amazing. He’s going to push back a lot of Obama’s agenda.

              Newt cannot win, period. He’s done some good, but his messy past, his big government solutions, will prevent him from getting the nomination and the presidency.

              • KenInMontana

                After looking over your comment history I have but one thing to say to you, “Good bye and Good riddance, troll.”

              • Anonymous

                Yes MORON.

                YOu’re a worthless troll.

                So Newt can’t win due to his big gov’t solutions but Mittens can???

                Again, MORON, Mittens record is far worse than Newt’s.

                Santorum is my pick, but at least Newt has actually cut gov’t. He cut taxes, balanced the budget, got Clinton to sign welfare reform, and successfully fought Hillarycare.

                Mittens is a spineless wimp who won’t even call Maobama a socialist. Newt is not afraid to fight Maobama and the media.

                The only thing you’ve educated me on is how ignorant of the facts you really are. You need to look no further than St. Nikao’s post just above. Here’s what he said:

                Here’s what Mitt Romney supported in Massachusetts:

                1. Pro-abortion with taxpayer funding (added it to RomneyCare, kept abortion in his plan, refused to line-item veto it).

                2. Pro-government mandated healthcare (RomneyCare has cost the state over 20,000 jobs and has actually increased the cost of healthcare in Massachusetts).

                3. Pro-government mandates in general (“I like mandates” his own words on tape).

                4. Pro-gay marriage with full state sponsorship (was first Governor to install it, earlier broke a law in his zeal to issue gay marriage licenses, then called opponents of his actions “right-wing”).

                5. Pro-transgender education to children in public schools (promoted by Governor Romney’s administration, read Amy Contrada’s book: “Mitt Romney’s Deception”).

                6. Pro-gay scout masters in the boy scouts (“I feel that all people should be allowed to participate in the Boy Scouts regardless of their sexual orientation.” U.S. Senate debate on Oct. 26, 1994. Massachusetts News, June 18, 2002.)

                7. Pro-global warming caused by human activity (his own words: “I believe the world is getting warmer… and I believe humans are contributing to that”).

                8. Pro-environmental regulations to combat global warming (imposed massive environmental regulations in Massachusetts, according to the Wall Street Journal: “Mr. Romney joined activists outside an aging, coal-fired plant in 2003 to show his commitment to the emissions caps. “I will not create jobs or hold jobs that kill people, and that plant, that plant kills people,” he said. On Dec. 7, 2005, the Romney administration unveiled the final orders. “These carbon emission limits will provide real and immediate progress in the battle to improve our environment,” then-Gov. Romney said in a press release touting Massachusetts as “the first and only state to set CO2 emissions limits on power plants.”).

                9. Pro-taxes on businesses (closed loopholes, then raised business taxes by 20%, a $309 million increase, as governor of Massachusetts).

                10. Pro-taxes and fees on the public (Romney raised state fees and taxes more than $740 million per year, according to independent experts. He raised fees by roughly $500 million in his first year alone, a figure that was highest in the nation. The state and local tax burden rose more than 7% during Romney’s administration, while property taxes skyrocketed by 26% under Romney the highest level in 25 years).

                11. Pro-amnesty for illegal immigrants (supports path to citizenship for illegals, his own words in 2006)

                12. Anti-second amendment (In 2004, signed gun control legislation in Massachusetts permanently banning the sale of automatic firearms).

                13. Mitt declared himself a “moderate” and says his views are “progressive.” (his own words on tape).

                14. Mitt opposed the Bush tax cuts, earning himself the praise of Barney Frank.

                15. Under Romney’s progressive policies of increased taxation on businesses, the state of Massachusetts ranked 47th in the nation in job creation.

                NOT conservative.

                Romney’s record is to the Left of most Democrats.

      • Anonymous

        If any of those people were sending those emails then yes they would be scumbags but I suspect you just pulled an Obama type tactic of building a strawman so you can burn it.

        Romney and some of his supporters are Obama-lite in more ways than one.

      • StNikao

        Difference between Newt and Mitt:
        Mitt claims to be conservative, but he governed liberal left. (supported abortion, gay marriage, mandated health care)
        Newt listens/talks to the Liberals, but he legislated conservative right.
        He bucked Bush Sr. on that tax hike…and lost his endorsement. It takes guts to oppose a President who was once the head of the CIA – and who never forgets to take down an opponent. We generally see Bush I as a wimpy, meek, ‘kinder, gentler’ conservative, who inspired ‘a thousand points of light’, but he has a dark, very dark side.

        • Anonymous

          Well said.

          You may be wasting your time with Steve Young though.

          Steve’s taken too many shots to the head.

  • http://twitter.com/CharlieZangelQQ DaMz

    I voted for Santorum.

    Thought I’d also let you know that Obummers new slogan is…… Change is
    Could he have made it any easier for us? LOL #ChangeIs < hashtag , go at it folks!

    #changeis 13 million Americans out of work.

    • Anonymous

      change is $0.14, when it used to be $0.95.

  • Anonymous

    This is getting tough. All of my hopefuls either didn’t run or have already dropped out. For those that are left, I’ll have to hold me nose to vote, but I will. The only reason I voted for Newt is I would love to see him in a debate with POTUS. That being said, I wouldn’t be very proud to have “helmet head” Calista as the first lady, but oh well. Anybody but Obummer in 2012.

    • Anonymous

      Helmet head LOL

      • Anonymous

        I know that was a bit “snarky” of me but that women really bugs me for a lot of reasons. But hey, she’s part of the package, but she certainly isn’t a Laura Bush and many others who we were proud to have as our First Lady.

        • Anonymous

          Did you notice that every time Newt had an answer, the cameras flashed to Calista, but I didn’t notice that happening to the other candidates. Am I wrong on that? Or do you suppose the media was trying to use that to hurt Newt?

          • Anonymous

            They were probably all set up for reaction shots, knowing the ex-wife questions might be a factor.

          • Anonymous

            Yes, I noticed that as well. And every time he speaks at a gathering, she’s right there in the video, so I’m not sure “what’s up with that”?

        • StNikao

          Turns out Laura Bush was very pro-abortion.

        • cabensg

          Better still she’s not Michelle Obama who never loved this country until her socialist hubby won the nomination. Personally I think Callista will make a very good first Lady. She won’t embarrass us and the causes she’s supported as Newt’s wife are very commendable. She has more courage for going through this than M has in her entire body.

  • Anonymous

    My heart says to go with Santorum but my mind knows Santorum is done. Therefore I go with Newt.

  • Anonymous

    I hope this poll is representative of what happens in SC. Of course, Paul will be a factor, but hopefully less and less (much of his support probably includes liberal kids on campus that are for legalizing drugs). I give a lot of credit to Santorum, but I think we’re coming down to the slugfest between Newt and Mitt.

    • Anonymous

      Maybe in this state. We’ll see how long Newt can hold on. I believe that Newt is in it to be a spoiler to Paul. Newt knows he can’t win in the general against Obama. Newt staying in is a vote for Romney.

      • Anonymous

        There is no such thing as a ‘spoiler’ against Ron Paul because his base is so small. Now go and occupy something will ya?

  • Steve Young

    The Republican party is the party of values, which is why Gringrich could never be the President, let alone the nominee. We’re the ones who impeached Clinton after he was caught in his sexual affair with Lewinsky. Ironically, this was the same time Gringrich was having an affair with 27 year old Callista.

    Yeah, yeah, he found God. Hermain Cain found God too after he was caught sending money to Ginger White, but Cain did the proper thing and bowed out after his cheating was discovered.

    In reality, Gringrich had no right to run for the Presidency with his messy background. He would lose handily to Barack Obama and contrasted against Obama’s beautiful family.

    It has to be either Romney or Santorum at this point.

    • Anonymous

      Newt won’t last, but Santorum can’t beat Paul. The two of them staying in is just keeping Paul at bay, while Romney takes the win.

      • Steve Young

        I agree w/ your analysis librtifirst. Oh, haha, while spelling your name I was pronouncing it, I get it. Witty screenname.

        Santorum will bow out at some point, some of his people will go to Romney, some to Newt. Even with a 50/50 split of Santorum voters going for their second choice, Romney will stay ahead.

        Newt will try and go toe to toe w/ Romney, but will eventually implode under the weight of his own grandiosity. Paul will kind of help Romney all the way to the convention (they have something going on, they’re not attacking each other at all). Paul will get an awesome speaking assignment. And Romney will probably get it.

        • Anonymous

          I think that will be the case if Romney comes out of the Freaking Closet. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t underestimate Romney. He can play hard ball but for some reason he is trying to stay reserved. I don’t know why. If he can’t start making peoples heart beat faster like “NEWTY” can with his sharp one liners. Or how Santorum Ripped him apart in the last debate; so bad that it over shadowed Romney’s strongest debate yet. Romney better start letting loose or he is going to find himself beat by Newt. I am still holding out for Santorum. Romney is my second. Paul is my third. A vote for Newt is a Vote for Obama; to me anyway.

          • Anonymous

            How is Mittens more conservative than Newt??

            I hate Mittens..but neithe him nor Newt is a Marxist like Maobama!

          • Steve Young

            Agree, agree, agree. Dang lapitup, you must have been educated in the Rush Limbaugh School of Conservatism or something. You are a freaking genius.

            Yeah, I don’t understand why Romney is holding back so much. I think one reason is that he has to be super careful. His father was completely taken out of the presidential race by one line, that he was brainwashed in Vietnam. That’s part of Romney’s history. He doesn’t want and can’t afford to make a single, big mistake.

            So he’s almost taking to McCain’s tact of completely holding back. So yes, Romney has to be much more aggressive and really lay out a big vision for us. I really like his Saving the Soul of America theme…

            Santorum is amazing. I don’t know if it’s his time now though, I wish he had more executive experience for sure, but conviction wise you know exactly where he stands.

            • Anonymous

              Thank you. Someone gets it. Lol.

        • Anonymous

          Romney is playing the “good candidate” as much as possible. Paul is not a natural attack dog. His supporters criticized him for being too nice in 08′ and have pushed him to get serious. I don’t know if there is something going on or not.

          Newt is a smart guy. I think that he knows he won’t get the nomination. Santorum knows it as well. Paul may suspect it, in his gut, but is so idealistic that he will stay in it to win, and get his message out.

          I believe that Newt and Santorum are entrenched establishment people. Whether or not they are in office, they live off of the system through backdoor corporate cronyism. They will campaign to protect the status quo. Mitt Romney is the status quo. No real change, just make the people believe that the two parties are different while pushing the same agenda.

          If you were to pick two people from the past to go up against Obama, would Newt and Santorum be the ones. We live in a time when people are more disenfranchised than ever before. So much so that the dems are defecting to vote for a Libertarian/Republican. Newt and Santorum are just distractions, and vote pullers. They do this job, while Mitt sits back and enjoys the ride. The media blacks out Ron Paul and circulates the “unelectable”, and “nuts” propaganda, while going after Newt right before a primary. This serves to make Paul look bad, shoot down Newt, giving Santorum a boost against Paul, while Mittens enjoys the ride.

          The media is the establishment as well. They work in concert with the establishment Washington insiders. People sense this, and vote for Romney, and some for Paul. Those who vote for Paul know it, and are fully aware of it. Those who vote for Romney just don’t trust the others.

          The outcome is the same. Romney wins. In the mean time, I send money to Paul out of rebellion to the establishment.

          • Steve Young

            Paul is in it for the movement. Dear God we need more libertarianism in our party for sure. I disagree a bit with your assessment of Romney, I don’t believe that Romney is just the same agenda. I believe he will push back on much of what Obama has done, namely Obamacare and the opening up of the doors of America to hordes of illegal immigrants.

            Hate Romney for whatever reason, but controlling the borders, putting illegals at the back of the line (not Newt’s “oh if you’re here 25 years breaking the law, staying in our country illegally you get citizenship”) and taking out Obamacare are huge steps forward for liberty.

            • Anonymous

              I appreciate your input. I guess that where we differ is in our level of skepticism. I am a Christian, and believe that a man’s yes should be yes, and his no should be no. When someone turns the corner as much as Romney has, I write him off. He may be a decent guy, personally, I don’t know. Politically, he cannot, and will not change much of anything. As Paul said in the debate, the chances are not good concerning appealing Obama Care. This is because Paul knows the left, and he knows the right. He knows quite well how Washington works. Washington is a detriment to the country at this point.

              Paul battles the left and the right. This is because he is a strict constitutionalist. The reason he votes “no” most of the time is because both parties are not really that much different concerning the things that are taking down the country, and they care nothing about our supreme law.

              If Romney actually wins the general, you will see much the same as what you have seen with Boehner. Big talk, then big compromise. They have people convinced that this is the only way to get things done. We accept compromise, and now we are about to lose our currencies value, and ultimately our world reserve status. I hope that America figures out what this means before it happens, because if they don’t, they may never know why they have lost everything. The media certainly won’t tell them.

              http://www.federaltimes.com/article/20110516/BENEFITS03/105160302/

              This link talks about something that many people have known was coming for years. My sister and her husband both have federal pensions. Alex Jones and many of his experts have been saying that they were going do this. They knew because it is part of the plan. My sister told me about this today, and I about jumped out of my seat. Not because I never heard it before, but because I didn’t know how our government would do it. Now I know. They just take it. Eventually, they will take city and county pensions. They got rid of private pensions by forcing social security on people a long time ago. That fund has never had a real dollar in it.

              Obama is not the exception, he is just the democratic rule. The republican rule is to oppose the democrats, but ultimately change nothing. Their strong point is taking away our liberties for protection. When they do this, the democrats scream and yell. Then when a democrat gets in, they continue the same and add to it.

              Romney will be no different. His is a corporatist, and a big government guy who will continue the federal spending until the dollar crashes. For the establishment, this election could very well be to determine who presides over the collapse.

              I am giving political change one more chance. After that, will only seek to prepare and avoid what is coming. The outcome is as predictable as the sunrise.

    • Anonymous

      Good luck thinking that. Santorum is out after South carolina, unless he drinks Glenn Becks cool aid some more.

  • Anonymous

    I cannot believe everyone voting for Newt. You obviously are all new to politics. You obviously you don’t know who the hell Newt is and it just pisses me off to no end that this many people have forgotten or never knew the real Newt.

    Everyone always complains about corruption. Gee Newt “IS” a corrupt “POLITIAN” wake up people.

    Everyone always talks how they don’t want the same old, same old Politician in office. Guess what! Newt Is the same old, same old “LIFETIME” Politian, until he was kicked out of the house by his OWN party no less.

    Everyone always talks about how we need to vote people in with “MORALS”. Newt has a “BIG, BIG, BIG, BIG history with “NO” Self Morals.

    Not to mention he is a RIGHT wing “PROGRESSIVE”. Wake up people. Just because he spills the one liners in debates and says what we are all thinking. If he gets it he will be just like Obama “A ONE TEARM” president.

    Why ells do you think he has stayed out of politics for so long. Because everyone thought he had fried his egg. He in 2008 tested the waters to see if anyone would remember “ALL” the “BAD” stuff he did. Why ells do you think he stayed out of politics until now??? Idiots, I am sorry but that is the way I feel, and this is what I KNOW to be TRUE. If we as a “GROUP” vote for an individual such as NEWT, than we the people have not had enough corruption. If you don’t like ROMNEY, Than Vote for “SANTORUM” Newt is not an option. I just hope “YOU” don’t find out the hard way.
    PLEASE oh PLEASE it is not too late to change your vote. A wicked people will vote in a wicked Government. We obviously have not had enough. Everyone is looking for the best candidate; We are missing the FACTS people.

    GO SANTORUM.

    • Anonymous

      Glenn, is that you?

      • Anonymous

        You know I love you Nuke. But I do my OWN research. I “REMEMBER” who NEWT IS. I don’t have to listen to Beck to find out the Truth of what I already know. If you don’t believe me go back to the beginning of this cycle and read my threads. I have always been against Newt. The only; ONLY good think I can say for Newt is he says what we are all feeling which has given him the edge over his rivals. Reagan’s play book. By the way I DO MY OWN RESURCH, and have come to my OWN decisions. But I do listen to beck. I am not ashamed to say so, I know it almost seems like taboo now if you listen to beck.

        • Anonymous

          You forgot to mention progressive.

          You can back Romney, that’s your choice. But to be so vitriolic about Newt only smacks of Glenn Beck and his tirades. To not only rant against Newt, but also against anyone who backs Newt. Straight from the Man’s mouth himself. Sorry, it is what it is. You certainly didn’t convince me you’re not Glenn. But that’s okay.

          • Anonymous

            You OBVIOUSLY don’t like Glen Beck. I don’t care. Glenn’s ratings speak for themselves. If you did listen to Glenn Beck than you would also know that he “ALLWAYS” says “DO YOUR OWN RESURCH”. I grew up in a house where politics were very present. I did go thorough around a 5 year period I wanted nothing to do with politics and though they don’t affect me. I have been in politics ever sinse. I am still trying to convince my sister and one of my friends to run for office. I am hoping they will. If I am Beck than you must be Bill Maher, especially if you backing NEWT.

            We as a people want someone so bad we are willing to vote in a person like Newt. We as a “Group” of people would vote in Mickey Mouse over Obama. That is the only true reason why Newt even has an opportunity such as this. There is a sucker born every minute and this proves it.

            • Anonymous

              Ok, I’m done. It obviously would do no good to hash this over and over again with you. Either the rose colored glasses or the sweat in your eyes is blocking your vision. I am 60. I lived through the Newt years. I, too, know what went on back then, what Newt did, what the progressive GOP Rinos did, and are still doing, and what we got from those years, until the liberals were able to take over the Congress and it all fell apart.

              I do all my own research as well. To tell us that none of us does our own homework and research just because we come up with a different point of view than yours smacks of Glenn Beck. I’ve watched, listened and followed up on what Beck has said ever since he left CNN for Fox. In the beginning he saw things clearly, but there are times when he, like you, gets all pissed off because people don’t come to his conclusions. I still watch and listen to Beck, but I don’t have to Parrot him.

              Having said that, my fingers are tired from yelling. I like Perry from the moment he got into the race. He’s gone. Sad for me. Paul is not my cup of tea, because we don’t see eye to eye on foreign policy. Santorum has a lot of great ideas and beliefs, but has run out of steam already. Sad, as well. Cain is gone. Michele is gone. That leaves Romney and Gingrich.

              I don’t like Mitt because he is the Rino Establishment man and it’s the same establishment that was around when they ousted Newt for his attempts to accomplish things that weren’t in their gameplan. Newt has shown me that he has the fire and willpower to stand up to the LSM, the Rino republicans and a hollow CiC that we have now. I think he will make mince meat out of Obama, much like he is presently doing to the media. Which, by the way, nobody else has had the cajones to do.

              This is more than I have had to say since I was on the stand testifying to my good name against my ex-wife (which is another thing I understand about Newt). So. I will end now. I think I need to replenish the blood flow to my fingers. I hope you like Mitt. I like Newt.

              • Anonymous

                Wish I could give you 10 “likes” on that comment!

              • Anonymous

                LOL Nuke, You know I love Ya. Why can’t you think just like me??? (Kidding; kidding). You must have took my thread to hear lol. I didn’t address it to you, only to the ones who are willing to listen. A few things though.

                I don’t Parrot Glenn, He Parrot’s me! I was so happy, I found him in 2004. I wisent alone in the way I thought. I take it as an extreme compliment that you think I am Beck. It gives me hope for the future. I just reason and take what is best and leave the rest; just like your American salad bar (Movie Quote). I logic everything out, I get told I read too far in to things just as Beck. Yet look how many times Beck has been right. I don’t want to boast but…

                Also: Romney = Establishment. I don’t think so. Romney = Who the News corporations want in as president. I don’t think so. Again, who is the Establishment??? Show me where they want Romney and where they have endorsed Romney? Every time I turn on the news I see Romney being attacked not just by the left but by the right too. People (not you unparticular) think that Romney is walking on the red carpet all the way to the presidency. I look at it differently because (logic) tells me everyone is against Romney. Again. Romney is not a BAD pick for president. To “me” he is presidential material. He has enough in line with me for me to support and back him for president.

                That is why when I wrote that blog I kept it strictly about Newt. I didn’t want people twisting my words.

                • Trust1TG

                  “I don’t Parrot Glenn, He Parrot’s me!” What kind of stuff are you smokin?

                • Anonymous

                  It is called satire!

              • Anonymous

                I agree with your statement almost word for word . My favorites are gone , I dont think Santorum will pick up enough speed and I pray Paul doesn’t so
                we’re down to Newt or Mitt . I have my fingers crossed for Newt . I also like the statement Newt made about Palin being a part of his admin . I hope he sees her as Sec. Of Energy or Sec. Of State .

                • Anonymous

                  I think Bolton would make a good Sec of State, but yes, Palin running our drill, baby, drill campaign would be a great way to become energy independent. We have tremendous amounts of natural gas as well as oil in this country and it’s about time we tap these reserves.

          • http://no-apologies-round2.blogspot.com/ AmericanborninCanada

            NUkefriend, I hope you don’t get mad at me, and probably am glad I can’t vote- but I never listen to Glenn anymore, haven’t for about a year, and I can understand what lapitup is saying. I’ve been trying to say it for a while here- but I guess with all my sarcasm and silliness it hasn’t gotten through. I don’t base anything I have against Newt on his past, because Lord knows I have enough of my own, and I also know I’ve been forgiven much. But even though I am young and have only been here for 21 years, I remember a lot about Newt as well, and have seen him in person, speak. He’s a brilliant man, knows a lot about history, is a great orator- and he can rip strips off an idiot who asks stupid questions… but whenever I look at him, all I see is a career politician, yes he’s done some good things, but also knows how to play whichever side he needs to to get where he wants to be. I see another globalist, a one world type, and as far as my Christian beliefs go, I have to say Rick Santorum speaks more my language. Anyway- sorry :-) didn’t mean to interrupt yet again.

            • Anonymous

              No, I not only respect what you say. I respect the way you say it. It’s not a problem liking a different candidate. We all have our own reasons for voting for who we do.

              The problem I have is someone telling me, and everybody else that we are pretty much stupid for thinking the way we do. Honest and straightforward points of views on the candidates are fine and, indeed, good. I listen to Beck, but Beck tells me I must come to his conclusions or I’m just a brainwashed dum-dum dummy, as he says.

              Then he says do your own research. Well, if that research comes out differently, then he doesn’t like it. It sounds like, and I might be wrong, but it sounds like Lapitup is trying to say the same thing.

              I wish you could vote. Your voice means a lot. And it matters not to me that you don’t care for Newt. That’s what it’s all about. I wasn’t mad at Lap for liking Mitt or Santorum. It was his disdain for the rest of us on this site. That’s all.

              • http://no-apologies-round2.blogspot.com/ AmericanborninCanada

                I love you you nukeguy.

              • Anonymous

                I do come off Dogmatic sometimes, Find it in your heart to forgive me Nuke. I really do like you and have hope for you.

                P.s. I was looking for you while the last debate was on.

      • Trust1TG

        WE ALL KNOW that Glenn Beck backs Romney and why he does.

    • Anonymous

      That’s right. We’re all obviously “new to politics.” I suppose Rudy Guliani and Rick Perry’s endorsements reflect their newness to politics, too.

      Stick a fork in Santorum. He’s done.

      • Anonymous

        If that is the case than I hope Romney Eats him alive…

      • Anonymous

        What in my thread is un-true? Please enlighten me!. There are no untruths there for you have to bring up Rudy and Perry. I am glad to hear you think that Rudy and Ricks endorsement means something to you. They mean nothing to me.

        • Anonymous

          Everything in your first thread has a hint of truth, but it’s all slightly twisted, much like the LSM tries to do to Newt. There is more to each one of your points that actually makes Newt a better conservative than you let on.

          • Anonymous

            Nuky boy or should i say BILL? A hint of thruth? What is that really? It sounds like you don’t like to hear the truth. Take some time and surch the web. I know your at your computer. The “FACTS” are the “FACTS” the “TRUTH” is the “TRUTH”. Their is not a hint of truth it is the truth. The facts back it up. What did I TWIST???

      • Anonymous

        What the heck…when did Guiliani endorse him? How did I miss that?

        • Anonymous

          He has been expressing his belief that Newt is the best of the bunch for months.

    • Anonymous

      Newt can’t beat Obama. Newt gets almost no independents, and the Ron Paul guys would just stay home. Therefor, Obama wins. Newt is a huge turn off to anyone who remembers the nineties, and is disenfranchised because of the establishment. Newt is a globalist, and I will not cast a vote for him, because it is a vote to sell us out. I will not do it. McCain woke me up to the reality of the establishment. The establishment is bi-partisan, and may very well want Obama to stay in. Just in case, they have Romney, and Newt as a backup.

    • Anonymous

      Now, now…. calm down. No one on this website has EVER put down Sen. Santorum. I think he is very well informed and not afraid to talk about the topics. But, he doesn’t come off very well in the debates. And can he beat Obummer? I’m still keeping an open mind, as I think many people are.

    • Anonymous

      I like Santorum too, that is why I will take his word when he said he would choose Newt as his VP, or that Newt lead and guided him when in congress together, or that Newt was a big inspiration…if you support your guy, you should support what he says about Newt as he knows him the best.

    • Anonymous

      Isn’t that incredible–all these charges against Newt?

      Why it’s almost like Newt’s as bad as that Congressman from the CBC who had bundles of hundred-dollar bills in his freezer and Charlie Randall who forgot he owned a palace in the Bahamas and a little niki-naki (cash) in a black bag. I understand that Charlie received a really tough letter for that one and was overwhelmingly re-elected by a grateful, loving and patriotic constituency.

      Attack is good. It brings response. With response you can measure your enemy and plan his defeat.

      But Gingrich and Santorum and Romney and Paul are not the enemy. I don’t think any one of them can dance the tango on Moonlight Bay but I respect and admire them all for their willingness to come out and fight for this nomination.

    • Anonymous

      Glenn Beck is a lieing, 2 faced, fork toungued, snake oil salesman with an agenda. The truth has no agenda remember? Glenn forgot that. He is moving into the category of cult leader now.
      Go ask Glenn about JOHN HOLDREN. Ask him why it’s not important to mention Mitt Romney used Holdren as his advisor in PASSING a cap n trade bill into law in Mass. Just 1 little question. ask him ask him ask him. Glenn’s little world comes crashing down. John Hodren is Obama’s Science Czar now, go watch Glenn’s old Fox shows about what a spooky dude Holdren is. ‘put sterilants in the water suppy to control the population, de-devdelop American cities for the enviornment, cap and trade expert, THAT John Holdren is a ROMNEY guy. Not enough that Obama used ROMNEY advisors to write Obamacare??? Romney was as pro abortion os Obama until just recently, anti gun as most leftists.
      And Santorum, well he’s great, just boring as hell, uninspiring, akward debater with annoying traits. On politics? He’s good, why he’s almost identical to Newt’s positions, but with way less experience and accomplishments. weird huh?
      So Newt is divorced! Oh Heavens what a scandal, what a dirtbag!

      You know your dear leader is a DIVORCED DIRTBAG too right? You don’t think Pat and Glenn are a bit hypocritical attacking Newt about his divorces? Just a little bit? Don’t you wanna hear what Glenn’s 1st wife has to say?
      And did you know Glenn is a progressive racist!??? It’s true, he says nice things about George Washington. You did know Washinton was a SLAVE OWNER right? He *actually* OWNED other human beings, African Americans, and they would be WHIPPED if they got out of line, or KILLED if they tried to run away. Isn’t it shocking to learn that Glenn is so racist that he supports slavery and racism??? Just like Newt said nice things about FDR or Teddy roosevelt, except they didn’t own slaves at least. oh oh oh, did you also know Washington oppressed WOMEN?? He was a pure sexist DIRTBAG because he didn’t even let women vote!!! Glenn wants to take women’s voting rights away!!! Do YOU support that!?!? Washington was practically like the Taliban. And Thomas Jefferson??? He owned slaves too!!! And he had forced sex with a 15 YEAR OLD slave girl and got her pregneant!! Glenn supports raping black underage girls!!!!

      Don’t you just love Glenn’s tactics? So very Olinksy of him. For the record, sarcasm off, I admire Washington and Jefferson too, even though they had terrible flaws like most humans and I understand they lived in another time.

      • Anonymous

        Holly Cow. Tell me how you really feel… So it sounds to me like you are making your decision off personality more than anything. No wonder Newt is your man…

        • Anonymous

          posted twice.

          • Anonymous

            Oh and did you notice Glenn’s not at all bothered by virginia being rigged for Romney?
            Isn’t it weird Pat and Glenn are not at all concerned for the favorite candidate, Rick Santroum, being kept off the virginia ballot. Romney’ is buddies with the State Attorney general coincidentally by the way. Weird huh?

        • Anonymous

          You show me when Glenn ever offered such Venom against Romney as he has for the past 1+ month against Newt? You show me when Glenn insulted anyone to support or defend Romney? Racist? Liar? Progressive fascist??? No, only us Newt supporters are called those things by GB. Romney is a little angel and a ‘true’ conservative as far as GB is concerned Notice Glenn never minded all the time Romney was leading? He only freaks and rants when Newt leads. hmm… Glenn can’t find any embarressing quotes or clips of Romeny, it’s so hard to do because Romeny is so ‘clean’.
          If Santorum were threatening Romney’s lead, you’d see Beck smearing Santorum now. Newt and Santorum are near identical on the issues.

          Here’s your proof about Holdren btw, maybe you’d like to share this with the Blaze congregation? John Hodren, the man who thinks humans are a virus on the Earth, who wants sterilants in the water supply and likes forced abortions. He worked for Romeny on cap and trade before he was called to the W.H. to be a Czar.

          http://www.nationalreview.com/planet-gore/280238/romneys-john-holdren-problem-greg-pollowitz
          http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2011/10/14/oh-super-romney-consulted-with-obama-mass-sterilization-expert-and-science-czar-john-holdren/

      • Anonymous

        In your attack on Glenn you assume that he is a Romney supporter. He has attacked Romney as much as he has attacked Newt. Glenn supports Santorum above either of those two. You just assumed he supports Romney because it fits in with your preconceived notion that Glenn is a “cult leader now.” I guess lying is only OK if it further’s your cause, right?

        • Anonymous

          I guess you didn’t hear any of Glenn’s shows in the past month or so. Here I am watching all these debates and clips and interviews, and I think, well, Newt is the toughest and most persuasive of the bunch, and I know his record. I don’t need Professor Beck to tell me what I know or Know better than him. BTW I wished Palin would run before I ever settled on Newt.
          Newt EARNED a big lead being POSITIVE in Iowa, then I see Romney unload millions and millions in attacks on Newt in Iowa in a 2 week blitz. ok politics is dirty and Romney has that reputaion. Then I tune into Beck, suddenly he starts on a scorched Earth, smear campaign against Newt. It started with him saying you must be racist to vote for Newt. Now the past month, he won’t stop, he attacks Newt hr after hr on air, then defdends Romney point by point. Then as an after thought he pushes Sanitary Santorum. Santorum only won Iowa as the last man standing and with Glenn’s help smearing Newt.
          Santorum has only 1 purpose for Glenn, to split the conservative vote and allow Romney to slither into 1st place. Ask yourself why.
          Glenn is a PHONY, ask Andrew Breitbart. Why do you think Sarah palin and Rick Perry endorsed the ‘progressive devil’ Newt gingrich? Hmm? You wanna tell me Palin and Perry are in on the progressive conspiracy to make Glenn Beck look like an arrogant dishonest ass? He’s doing that himself.

          Mitt’s John Holdren connection destroys GB’s credibility. There is no excuse to not LEAD his shows with that information. (not to mention his Romneycare advisors are Obamacare advisors!)

          • Anonymous

            You’re right, I don’t listen to Glenn every day. But I’ve heard Glenn talk about all the points you make against Romney except the Holdren connection. I don’t see how that issue makes Glenn a liar any more than it makes you a liar for leaving out countless mistakes by Newt in your cheerleading efforts for him. At least Romney didn’t sit on a love seat with Holdren while doing a commercial for Al Gore. And Romney does not support a “federal” mandate on healthcare like Newt has done for 20 years.
            Newt is a good debater and I was beginning to like Newt again. But then, after Iowa, he gave into the hate and went over to the dark side. He was extremely quick to violate his pledge to wage a positive campaign, which reminded me of the many other flip-flops he has made over his political career. His support of Dede Scozzafava (pro gay marriage and pro abortion-on-demand) over conservative Doug Hoffman is another issue you don’t mention. That’s as bad as Santorum supporting Arlen Specter.
            I just want the real Newt to please stand up. Is he going to remain a small government conservative after the campaign, or go back to being the big government progressive he was just before the campaign? Are we going to get the Newt who supports tort reform, opposes card check, and balanced the budget when he was Speaker? Or are we going to get the Newt who consulted with Al Gore, backed ethanol subsidies, and supported budget busting Medicare drug entitlements and the Wall Street bailout?
            His temperament is also an issue. Will he turn on the Tea Party like a woman scorned if they ever oppose one of his wild ideas? He does seem to hold a grudge against anyone who doesn’t agree that he’s the smartest man in the room (which he often is, but he doesn’t always seem to know his limitations.) I will vote for the Republican candidate over Obama any day. But anyone who thinks their candidate in this race isn’t flawed is wearing blinders big time.

          • Anonymous

            I have a problem with Newt’s narcissism. He thinks that he’s the smartest person in the room, much like our present president and that to oppose him is to gain his animus until he can “get you back”. His attacks have become exactly what he accuses Romney of. He is, from his stand on immigration, healthcare and “green” energy, just another progressive.
            As for Beck’s anti-Gingrich stance…it’s because of Newt’s progressive positions on major issues. He has criticized Romney for his progressive stances too. Santorum has been his leaning lately. If not for Paul’s foreign policy positions, Beck, like many others, would support Paul. You need to listen before you criticize and all of us need to ponder much of what we can verify and prayerfully decide which of these men we will support. Four more years of Obama or anyone like him will ultimately destroy this Constitutional Republic.

      • Steve Young

        grimjesse, Santorum probably won the debate last night. He didn’t give a F about Gingrich or Romney, he just went after them on his conviction of conservatism and his vision for America. Santorum is not awkward or weak.

        And Glenn Beck is amazing. I didn’t read your entire hate filled paragraphs disparaging him, but if you knew anything about Glenn, you would know he only cares about America and saving it. You can feel that passion from Glenn, moreso than even Rush or Hannity.

    • StNikao

      Looking at RICK SANTORUM (from Trust1TG’s comment on another thread with my additions)

      POSITIVES:
      He is very aware of the real enemies of the US: A. our collective sin/moral collapse and corruption. B. Islam..
      He knows that the economy cannot be fixed without dealing with the first enemy (A. our moral collapse and corruption)
      He is completely dedicated to helping rectify our real problems.
      He has a Biblical worldview and holds to it (unlike Romney)
      He is competent, is an attorney, legislator, understands government
      He has strength of character, moral integrity, sincerity, earnestness.
      He has political integrity, consistency, experience.
      He has exposed corruption and gotten indictment of a legislator.
      He is a hard worker, gets in the trenches
      He studies issues and tries to do the right/best thing
      He is a no-nonsense personality, cuts to the chase, reads people well.
      He is mindful of the real needs of real people, small business, manufacturers, families, veterans.
      He is a faithful, true, good father and husband…Christ in his own home.
      He does not rely on charisma or externals, does not bow to criticism.
      He was willing to admit that he struggled in the area of sanctity of life dealing with his daughter’s illness.
      His wife is also an attorney, who stayed at home to be a mother, homeschooling their children and she is also a real, loving, humane human being.
      His main backer is a balanced, sincere, evangelical Christian.

      NEGATIVES:
      He comes across as sour, angry, sanctimonious at times
      He does not know how to present his arguments for conservative causes so that he will win his listeners,
      He said in an interview that he thought the government had a place in people’s bedrooms. He should have said that research has correlated abortion and homosexuality with the following negative outcomes, stated studies, the outcomes and statistics and let the evidence and numbers do the convincing. Maybe he did and the media source intentionally did not quote that. The media are masters of using selective bombshell soundbites to crucify candidates.

  • Anonymous

    OK folks…. I think everyone needs to calm down. It’s still early and ANYTHING can happen, as we’ve seen so far in this race. I think a few of the reasons there are conflicts right now are:

    Values vs. Who can beat Obummer? (This is the big one)
    Foreign, immigration and domestic policies. Will we gain back our sovereignty, security and free up business to create jobs?
    Debt and deficits that we are under. Who has the best plan?

    Frankly, I’m not sure any of us know who the best candidate will be in order to beat POTUS on ALL of the issues that we face today and into our future.

    This is the toughest election cycle in my long life. But please….. be civil about the discussions. We are all going to have tough decisions to make.

  • http://twitter.com/mdavis5 Megan Curtis

    Gingrich is not conservative, how is he winning SC? I’m so distressed! Why are people supporting him-he can’t win against BO with all the baggage he has. I just don’t get it! Duh he’s a good debater, but we need someone who can be a good President and Newt’s ego is one among many reasons he would not be good for the job.

    • Steve Young

      It was interesting when Newt lost his big frontrunner status in Iowa, to see what he did. Basically, he just promised to take out Romney, kamikaze style. Sheesh, we don’t need someone that erratic as President. No thank you.

      • Anonymous

        Cry me a river.
        Poor baby.
        Turnabout is fair play. Newt is in it to win it not capitulate to your demands.

      • http://hashmonean.com saus

        I for one was more interested to see how people reacted in general. Romney unleashed his bitter attack dogs to destroy Gingrich, so did Ron Paul. It worked very well for a time.

        The interesting thing is when someone dares to question Romney he stands there like a pinata, and his supporters who themselves are amongst the biggest bitter slingers fill up with self righteous rage and hipocrisy. How dare people question Romney who is you know, a serial flip flopper!!? How dare they!

        Romney is given a total pass on everything, his supporters flip reality itself to give him a pass. They learned from the master I guess. One excuse after another is touted for Romney, he was governor of MA, a liberal state and governed LIKE a liberal but he *wasn’t* a liberal, he didn’t change his lifelong views on abortion recently because he wanted to win elections, he’s too moral for that, he hasn’t been a career politician – Not because he hasn’t been running for the last 15 years.. But because he hasn’t been WINNING for the last 15 years. On an on in fantasyand. People like Romney? good for them! They should support him and vote for him!

        But his supporters are straining the laws of physics altering reality to justify this affection they have. He’s not particularly electable, not paticulalrly conservative and does not have a very winning record. People get a bad feeling about him because he’s untrustworthy, the non politician is the biggest politician of them all, he says whatever sounds good to whomever he is addressing at that exact moment. Everyone hears what they want to hear in that second, yay!! The problem is it doen’t match up to what he told someone else 25 seconds before.

        Newt has a similar problem, but he does it because he’s entertaining all kinds of creative ideas in his head, that’s very different from a guy who is doing it to tell you want you want to hear 24 hours a day. Romney is fake, if he wins all the power to him and let’s pray he goes all the way to the Presidency. But an amazing candidate he is not, far far from it. When Romney is questioned his composed varnish and veneer peels very quickly, you see it on his face and in his reactions. There’s noly so many fake laugh offs voters will take. He’s not nearly as polished as the media portrays. I guess under all that media handling and multi millions he’s human somewhere underneath after all.

        Why did Romney avoid the sunday shows for months on end. Why could he not sit down with Fox News in the center seat like every other candidate and take questions from a panel, why do his handlers try so hard to keep the real Mitt Romney covered up and give you the wax museum fascimile of him instead. These are very valid questions in a presidential election.

    • Anonymous

      What baggage? A divorce? An ethics investigation by his colleagues because he was making them run government like a business and not like their own personal gravy trains?

      Obama has accumulated more baggage in three years than Newt will take to his grave.

      Game on.

      • Anonymous

        Yes, but the incumbent has the advantage. The two, both being establishment candidates, will largely avoid the real bad things. Newt can’t go after many of Obama’s broken promises, because Newt doesn’t really oppose a lot of what he has done, and has done much of the same in is past. (patriot act, wars, debt ceilings, etc.)

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    I voted for Newt; if Santorum was leading in the polls, my vote would have went to him, I can’t stand Romney and I don’t want to see him be the nominee.

    • Anonymous

      Excellent Steven. I would have done exactly the same thing.

  • http://magnusorerar.blogspot.com Magnus A

    Newt 67%, santorum 25%, and Romney 8%, You’re obviously crazy; Romney is the only one who can beat Obama.

    /br, a Conservative from Sweden

    • Anonymous

      A conservative, from Sweden? Do they keep you in a museum? :-)

      Seriously, why is Romney the only one that can beat Obama? It sounds like a dubious cliche’ to me.

      • Anonymous

        Most of Sweden have been brainwashed and are used to the idea of bureaucrats controlling their lives from infancy to death. I will not be surprise to hear that the most conservative of them are not used to the idea of full freedom (with full responsibility) and is to the center left at best – thus Romney.

        • http://magnusorerar.blogspot.com Magnus A

          You’re right that most Swedes got left leaning opinions on economics. But also Swedes are often stuck to moral when it comes to deficit, and earn benefits by working hard. In the 1990s a strong leader of the social democrats did cut quite a few costs to curb deficit. Fortunately since 2006 a non-social democratic government has reduce taxes by say 10 units of percent. I think that’s a good start but far from enough. We should be a much more free country.

      • http://magnusorerar.blogspot.com Magnus A

        I do like Newt’s record on many issues (e.g. on his energy policy) but you got to stick to facts.

        • Anonymous

          Nice non-answer. When you are prepared to list those “facts”, let me know :-)

          • http://magnusorerar.blogspot.com Magnus A

            Why not unanimously results from all polls presented at realclearpolitics.com

    • Anonymous

      What an oxymoron!!! in the same phrase you just quoted Romney at 8% and you think he can beat Obama??

      • http://magnusorerar.blogspot.com Magnus A

        This site and its poll isn’t nation wide, but a quite small and narrow one. I just made a comment about like 500 “voters” in the poll here, supporting a candidate which vs. Obama is a loser due to all professional opinion polls out there.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Chris-Dias/1680711668 Chris Dias

    I don’t like Santorum’s attack on the Internet. This isn’t the best group to be asking me about. Give me another list: Palin, Cain, Bachmann, West, the guy from Florida – Rubio, Santorum

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_5L4RE3FBBG5SN3KXERKJZ53VLU Stormwalker

    IN Thurday Night’s Debate, after that rat bastard Jon King attempted to torpedo Newt Gingrich from the starting gate, I noticed that Romney did NOT lambast Jon King. I find it strange, that since the media is turning out Romney stuff, that he would be rather timid, when he could have had a moment to charge back. Rick Santorum was definitely “the different one”. So much so, I muted the TV when he spoke, or ‘tivo’d’ through his responses. “I’m all for ‘right to work’ laws, but not in Pensylvania” What a schizoid crock! I did the same thing with that now KKK-affiliated old geezer, Ron Paul. You would think by now, he would be able to afford a more fitting suit, instead of looking like he just got one off the rack at JCPenney, with all the money from his now infamous letters. Paul is a pacifist, in a time when every stinking Mohammedan in the world, wants to take the head of every American citizen, and override the U.S. Constitution, for thier theocratic Sharia Law.

  • Anonymous

    From a Canadian perspective, America’s liberty has been under attack by both Obama (his Administration + DNC), and the Media. To defeat Obama, Americans need to neutralize the toxicity of US Misinformation Stream Media, which serve as Democratic Super PAC day in and day out.

    One of many reasons why Mitt Romney is a failure as a candidate is he has not realized nor done anything to fight Obama’s Super PAC. Had Romney grown a pair of balls and leave his politically correct persona, his chances of defeating Obama, while energizing the conservatives around him, could have been exponential. Too bad the people advising and managing his campaign are still using the mentality and strategies of the past. They control the candidate too much, making Romney look like a puppet in a tight string. Haven’t they learned the lesson of McCain? Oh yeah, I forgot they wrongly blamed it on Palin not on themselves. An advice to Mitt, get rid of your handlers and advisers and show Americans what your really feel and believe in, push back those media, do not pander to their agenda, set your own. Own yourself before it is too late.

    As for Newt, I may not like his tainted past and have many questions on his viability as a candidate; I acknowledged he’s effectiveness in pushing back Obama’s media, which is the key in defeating Obama. I just hope that should he win the nomination, he has sharp acceptable answers on 1) house of ethics disciplinary episode; 2) Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae stints and other health care deal involvements. I also wish that he will be surrounded with gutsy and feisty people who will not be afraid to fight him when he gets off line. As for his personal missteps, that is between him and his family and no business of ours. Even Jesus would have looked like a cad and a wastrel, when faced with this kind of Media.

    As for Ron Paul, the conservatives need him still as a check and control against those who are pushing for big government ideas. He is also needed to energize and rally the youth around the GOP. One may not like his foreign and security policies but his input in small government, financial and economic policies will be much needed to rein in the future size and reach of government.

    I thought Rick Santorum has a chance, but his answer to Internet control is just so undemocratic and he still has this Big brother government control mentality which is so off putting. I expected that answer from a Democratic candidate not a conservative one. If he wishes to control this area, what other areas is he planning to control once he’s in office? This just proves to me that Santorum is for Big Government not a limited one.

    • StNikao

      This bears repeating:
      “To defeat Obama, Americans need to neutralize the toxicity of US Misinformation Stream Media, which serve as Democratic Super PAC day in and day out.”

      Thanks, Ariadnea!

    • Anonymous

      You give a fair assessment of the situations in the campaign. I would ask that people consider the consequences of underestimating the establishment parties, and media. The main stream media has its bias’, but its primary bias is not toward democrats. It is for the establishment in government, and this includes both parties. We need to consider that the parties and the media work together, and actually plant candidates who cannot win, but have another purpose in campaigns. McCain did not run to win. It is that simple. He runs much tougher in his state. Obama has pushed so much of the establishment agenda, that he has destroyed a lot of his political capital.

      The republicans have made the point in the debates that any of them can beat Obama. Even Ron Paul said it at one point. I don’t agree. Underestimating your enemy is a dangerous thing. Many people don’t seem to realize how much American’s opinions are based on propaganda and misinformation from the media. I would say that more than half of the country doesn’t actually pay much attention to the real issues, or search the facts of the issues. These people don’t have a core set of values that allows them to definitively choose a candidate based on convictions and philosophy. Philosophy has been largely lost in the political arena.

      The one thing that Ron Paul can offer against Obama is his wide spread appeal. He competes with Obama in the middle spectrum of politics. He literally pulls people over to his side. He is, by far, the most conservative person on the stage, and he pulls democrats in. He gets all the people who want to end the wars.

      We have a chance to change things in America, but it does not lie within the realm of the establishment. We will either have a revolution that produces a candidate that will cut down the establishment, or we will get the establishment candidate and continue to fall.

      Our currency will not survive ten more years. It may not last until 2016. I would bet some of my stored food that it will collapse earlier rather than later.

      • Anonymous

        I agree with you in some important points. From where I am, I noticed that the Democratic Party has been successfully overwhelmed by the communists or their current politically correct and trendy name – Progressives. As to those many disenfranchised democrats, they are currently migrating to the GOP, bringing with them exactly the same ideology, which helped the Progressives in infiltrating their previous party. You the Americans might not be aware yet of this, but the Commies/Progressives are currently undermining and working in infiltrating the GOP as well. We could smell and observe the lingos used by the pretend GOPs /Republicans as it had and has been used in Canada by those who belong in the same colored spectrum (red). As we have just booted most of them out of office for undermining Canada for the last 3 to 4 decades, we recognize their stench and some of their language. Be very wary for many of them are also active and undermining Ron Paul’s organization.

        I may agree with many of Ron Paul’s limited government, economic, and financial policies but I would say he is offering another kind of utopia with his 0 tax policy. This is the very reason why he attracts radical ideologues as well. I do agree with him that many military bases have to be closed, I do not agree with closing all of them. They have to be strategically placed in ensuring fast protection and safe passage of US goods/commodities as well as those of their important trading partners in many troubled areas. Imagine how much sea piracy will increase; blockade of oil and US/trading partners shipping will exponentially rise should pirates and other hostile countries know that the US military will have to travel a distance to save and clear shipping lanes from attack. It would be like traveling back in time on and way before early 19th century. It is even happening now with the Somali pirates as well as Iran trying to block Hormuz strait. There needs to be bases within easy and strategic places for fast deployment, in case troops are needed. You have to look back the reason why the US Navy was created in the first place; it was not out of whim but of necessity and safety (Protection of US Shipping/commerce). As for those countries who need US protection, they have to be made to pay for the services rendered, no pay – no military nor base.

        You should all be wary of promised utopia whatever sides should they be (left, right, top or bottom) – there are only heartaches, sufferings, and deaths at the end of that rainbow.

        • Anonymous

          I understand what you are saying, but I still don’t see the need for all the bases. Our allies need to develop their own defenses or contract them out. Paul has never had a problem with using force to stop those who would use force to deny free trade. He never said that he would shut down the air force, or navy. In fact denying free trade is what the US does all the time around the world. That is what sanctions are. Our trade treaties are not about free trade either. Paul would go after pirates as well as anyone.

          This has nothing to do with some fabled Libertarian utopia. No income tax is absolutely possible. Americans have been brainwashed into believing that we have to take people’s incomes to survive. It simply is not true. Look up how much we spend each year, and then how much they collect from our personal incomes. Corporations are not individuals, as Romney would have you think.

          You should look up Reagan’s Grace Commission Report and read it. Our tax dollars go to service the debt, and not to US infrastructure. So the private bank creates money from nothing, lends it to our government, then collects money directly from our incomes to pay it. That is why Paul calls for ending the fed, the IRS, and the income tax. Government has other sources of income, so if we don’t borrow money, we don’t need an income tax. It is as simple as that.

          Utopia is what you make of it. I say that the utopian concept in this country is the one that says we can keep the current system and make it work.

          Concerning Israel, I agree with this guy.

          • Anonymous

            Don’t get me wrong, I do agree with many of what Dr. Ron Paul is trying to preach, that is the very reason I said the GOP needs him for check and balance. Where he failed to communicate are the in between, the details, and the processes of how to get there. When there is a mammoth elephant in the room, a $ 15 Trillion debt and counting, yet a candidate makes a 0 tax policy promise, which is quite an unrealistic jump; you can’t blame people for being very skeptical. Ranting and complaining about problems (no matter how rightly so), and making promises are not enough anymore in this day and age, when many were burnt from politicians’ promises so many times, which resulted in the sinking of many economies, is not enough anymore. If Dr. Paul is really serious in winning this election, he needs to effectively communicate realistic steps and ideas on how to get there. Should he lessen the complaining and ranting and get on with ideas on how to do it exactly, then I believe he has a viable run for the nomination. Before one say there is another way of collecting money without taxing, no matter how one will term or name it, moneys collected for the functioning of the government, is still a tax.

            As for security and foreign policy, I do agree that being an interventionist will not help in the maturity of any nation where one intervenes, thus it should be avoided and only done as the very last resort. There is also a need for the US to close many of their military bases around the world. Having said that, the US has to be in strategic places where they can be easily deployed when extremely needed. You do not need to wage war to show strength, there are other ways like being conspicuously vigilant, prepared and ready at all times. A perception of strength is a great deterrent to war. And it would help Dr. Paul’s cause if he rephrases the perception of him blaming America. It may not be his intention and purpose to do so, but it is how he communicates the message which is highly lacking.

            As for corporations are not individuals, I can assure you we are individuals in real flesh and blood. I know many corporations whose gross income are less than $200,000 and the net are even way lesser when taking away all the operating expenses. Many of whom I know toiled away by waking up at 5 to 6 in the morning, going to bed at 2:00 in the morning and even lesser with worries for survival aplenty. We have to pay corporate taxes, sales taxes, employment / unemployment taxes (benefits/insurances/payroll taxes), provincial/state taxes, city/municipality and property taxes. On top and after paying all those taxes, we have to add and pay individual income taxes. I may not be a fan of Romney but the 15% tax rate which is shown in his tax return is only the Individual tax portion of his tax. Aside from that 15% he paid, he has already paid a 35% tax as well as other taxes mentioned above through his corporation which is a separate filing. There seems to be misconception and misperception of whom and what are corporations. There are many types of corporation and many of them are small indeed. A good example of a small run corporation is a mom and pop run small store, or a janitorial run service, or a street food vendor). Anyone who has retirement savings or investment is a member of a corporation, that includes every teacher, police officer, soldier, government worker, labor union members/officers, health worker, and many, many more.

            As for servicing the debt, I do not need to read Reagan commission report to know the humungous amount needed in servicing the interest of your ever increasing debt alone – that is not even mentioning the unfunded liabilities yet, which dwarf even those mentioned debt. It is beyond stupid and idiotic thing to do in increasing the debt ceiling time and time again, but complaining about is not and never will be enough. Dr. Paul needs to communicate effectively on how to deal with that in realities and realistic numbers – not through generalities and complaining alone. What Dr. Paul lacks is effective communication. If from now to the culmination he improves in this, I believe he will have a run to the nomination. If he does not, then I hope Rand Paul will learn how to do it better in his future run.

            • Anonymous

              I agree with most of what you are saying. We do need to have a presence around the world, but I would like to see it as more of a diplomatic presence, and only an invited one that cannot be perceived as an influential one. Where people need our military for assistance and invite us to help, they should simply foot the bill entirely. If there is a small indefensible nation who is under imminent threat, and is a philosophical ally, then I would say that we could rush to their aid if approved by congress. Otherwise we should seek to build blocks off allies who can help their neighbors so that the US is not solely having to maintain a high level of military might around the world. It would be better to work with and support other nations to help their neighbors, I believe.

              When corporations are referred to as individuals, it detracts from the personal liberties aspect of the legal definitions that affect individuals vs corporations. Here in the US, a business becomes a corporation because of its increased income level. The tax burden on a sole proprietorship or partnership becomes great enough that becoming a corporation is necessary and profitable. The legal difference is that a corporation is not owned by a single person who takes on all liabilities as does a sole proprietor. The corporation transforms, legally, from an individual to a different animal. The previous owner now becomes an employee, and takes on the title of president, or board member. If the corporation becomes big enough, it might enter the arena of publicly traded companies, giving up further rights to be controlled solely by one person. The further along they get, the more political they get. They become a different animal. They should not be considered to be an individual. This was the sole issue when the personal income tax in America was enacted as lawful. Corporations were not individuals in the law, and therefor could be taxed on capital gains.

              The federal income tax was put in place the same year as the Fed Res Act. This was set up for the purpose of getting money from the public to service the new counterfeiting bank debt that was loaning money printed from nothing to the people’s government. This took away the check and balance on government to get approval from the people to spend. It took away the government’s ability to only tax with representation. This goes against our supreme law that requires taxation only with representation.

              The Grace commission report simply revealed that our tax money did not go to fund government. This is a lie propagated by the media, and the system. The IRS exists solely for the purpose of collecting money for the counterfeiters. The citizens pay for the whole thing, and even go into further debt to be robbed. This set up is no different than a mobster that sends goons to use force to collect “security” money from people or businesses.

              All of our financial problems exist because of the private central bank, who prints money from nothing and gives it to government who makes laws to steal from the people and then sends the goons to collect, or send you to prison. It is a scam, and a lie that it is necessary. If you take away the central bank, and make government live within its means, you don’t need an income tax. It is that simple. Instead of central banks sending our money overseas to bail out other economies, it would stay here in the US and promote growth. That is a lot of money. Our currency has to be controlled, and the best way is to open up competing currencies. The feds are cracking down on them now, and prosecuting them for counterfeiting, when their notes look nothing like the Fed Res Note. It is the government gangsters working for the banksters.

              I know what you are saying about Paul not being specific enough. None of them are for me. This is why I would like to see real debates. There have been some forums that allow for more complete explanations of these specifics, but they are not publicized well. Paul does much better when he isn’t competing for time. He admits that his delivery is lacking.

              The thing about the presidency is that nobody goes in there knowing how to do everything. Doing anything in the federal government is complicated. The most important tool that he would have would be veto power. Second would be control over regulatory agencies. He would be able to call out the house and the senate on their political fear mongering. He would be able to guarantee that social security checks went out, and force congress and the senate to create budgets that included cutting funding for unconstitutional government. He would have the political capital to get the house and senate to create bills that would curtail federal programs. He would have the power to bring the troops home, and build up national defense, which would save hundreds of billions.

              I don’t expect this to happen, but I must support it.

  • Anonymous

    I say Newt by at least 5 points based on the Palin/Perry/debate bounce.

    • Mary Beth House

      That’s my sense too.

      Of course if he wins by 1 point, it’s still a win. But I personally predict, FWIW, a 5 point or more win.

    • StNikao

      Haley and Christie may well regret losing their conservative creds by endorsing Romney.

      • Anonymous

        Christie has no conservative creds.

      • Anonymous

        Haley is a sellout to Romney PAC money. Lots of it. Perhaps he promised her a position in his administration so she didn’t care. If I lived there I’d POed and be heading up a recall and definitely would have a memory like an elephant when it comes to her reelection.

  • s.hayward2

    I haven’t seen this mentioned yet. Chuck Norris has endorsed Newt!

    http://www.mediaite.com/online/chuck-norris-endorses-newt-gingrich-saves-democracy-with-his-gaze/

    Now I normally don’t care what actors think, but apparently norris’s endorsement of huckerby helped him gain some votes. It is quite coveted by republicans apparently.

    What also amuses me is all the ronulans going beserk because he apparently said some nice things about Paul and they thought he would endorse him. On Norris’s facebook page the ronulans are excelling themselves by hoping he gets ‘choked out” and screaming abuse.

    I actually like some of Pauls policy positions, I even think he should be in government (well away from foreign policy), but he seems to attract every nut and krank on the planet.

    • Anonymous

      Chuck Norris is a joke, but he could kick my a@$.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1396855720 Brian Jones

      —When Chuck Norris does pushups, he doesn’t push himself up…he pushes the Earth down.
      —Chuck Norris clogs the toilet when he pees
      —Chuck Norris doesn’t call the wrong number…you answer the wrong phone.
      —Chuck Norris won American Idol using sign language
      —Chuck Norris won the World Series of Poker using Pokemon cards
      —Some magicians can walk on water…Chuck Norris swims through land
      —Chuck Norris once urinated in a Semi-Trucks gas tank…it is now known as Optimus Prime!
      —Chuck Norris counted to infinity…twice!
      —Chuck Norris can slam a revolving door!

      Well, that’s all the plagiarizing I can do for now! I love Chuck Norris jokes!!! LMAO!

      EDIT: The least I can do is provide my source! http://www.chucknorrisfacts.com/chuck-norris-top-50-facts

      These are hilarious!

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

        Chuck doesn’t flush the toilet… he scares the sh!t out of it!

        Chuck Norris makes onions cry.

        • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1396855720 Brian Jones

          I love the first one you posted!!! LOL!

  • Anonymous

    Although I support Rick I would enjoy watching Newt debate Obama.

  • Anonymous

    Mitty, that naughty kitty, has lost his mitten,
    and he shall have no pie!

    Go Newtie!

    • Anonymous

      Didn’t you say this already? I do like it though. I literally “liked” it the first time.

      mew, mew, mew…:-)

      • Anonymous

        Yeah, I said it at both RS posts about the election. Tweeted it too. Guess I was laughing too hard and got carried away with it. Mew, mew, mew! Thanks!

        • Anonymous

          Laughter is da’ best!

  • Anonymous

    Dang it! How can Santorum be polling second? He is the most conservative out of the three.

  • Trust1TG

    Hot Air – “OH, My, Gingrich’s Lead Increasing in the Final Hours.”

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/01/20/oh-my-gingrichs-lead-increasing-in-final-hours-before-south-carolina-vote/

    • Anonymous

      They have Gingrich by 14 right now. :)

      • Anonymous

        People are saying 9% now early in the day. Originally 6%. Romney out trying to set lower expectations. You may very well be correct. I’m sure Roney’s internal polling is showing that SC is lost. Will love to watch Newt tonight.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V2DBN3EEUPJPKG3ZYM6YSQGRIM John Bohler

          yeah while i prefer a Santorum win, i’ll take a newt one and knock Romney off his high horse.

        • Anonymous

          As the day goes on my sense of excitement is rising. I’m glad this is an east coast race so we’ll find out the results sooner.

          I’m looking forward to Newt’s speech too.

  • Is_Sense_Common

    If anyone would have told me 6 months ago that these were going to be our choices, I would have called them crazy. I am going to buy stock in noseplugs before November…

    • Is_Sense_Common

      That being said – I voted for Newt because I think, to date, he’s been the most effective at articulating Conservative ideas and principles; he’s been the most willing and capable of cramming the false arguments of the media and Barry back in their own faces; and he’s laid a pretty specific plan for the “great turnaround.” I know RS has been a solid social conservative forever & I respect him on that, but I just don’t think he’s got the aggressive nature to take down Barry. I, for one, am sick of meek Republicans. He can quote Ronald Reagan well, but can he come up with it on his own & articulate it? I’m not sure.

  • Anonymous

    really people, gingrich?! the man can’t stay faithful to his wife, how the hell do you expect he’d be faithful to the American people or the Constitution?

    • Mary Beth House

      False dichotomy.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

        Succinct!

        • Mary Beth House

          I try. :)

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

            !!

      • Anonymous

        Congratulations on your Board Member status at American Grizzlies United, Mary Beth! Keep moving onward and upward, milady.

        • Mary Beth House

          Thank you kind sir!

    • Anonymous

      Simple, those things you mentioned are not wives. It’s kinda’ like saying, how can you eat peas if you don’t like carrots?

    • StNikao

      We believe that a repentant Newt is better than an unrepentant Obama or Romney liberal.

      Romney has not been honest or repentant about some of his business dealings.
      Romney has not said he would repeal Obama-care and he defends Romney-care which pays for abortion.

    • Anonymous

      If Newt wins, and the Democrats can’t dredge up a better argument against him than that, the general election won’t even be close.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

    I voted for Newt. The reason is simple: Newt said by the time ex-president Obama’s plane touched down in Chicago, he (Newt) will have dismantled 40% of Obama’s government.
    Now that might sound like hyperbole, but if he can reduce the top-heavy government by 20% he gets my vote.
    The strengths of the candidates are the most important. I don’t look for their weaknesses (the liberals will do that for me). Which leads me to another point: It seems as though not all of you are Reagan republicans. What happened to the 11th commandment?

  • Anonymous

    I voted for Newt. So there!

    It would be sweet to have a guy who can tell O’ “how the cow ate the cabbage”.
    Someone who can take O’ to the woodshed, to school, and back again, right before escorting him out of town.

    A few days ago we were watching the debate with our sonny boy and he said, about Newt: “He’s cute, right? He looks like a bg baby.” My wife then said she’d “like to see him in a bonnet”.

    All funnin’ aside…we’d all like to see him in the White House :-)

    Good morning everbody! Toooooot, tooooooot…for Nooooooot!

  • Anonymous

    Newt all the way. I heard an old lady this morning on a local news story about the SC primary say “Newt’s the only one who can throw the bum out.” That about sums it up.

  • Anonymous

    It is good for the people (I mean us) to seem to have a voice. Newt is saying all the things that conservatives feel, after years of being battered by the left. In other words, he is saying what I would like to say the way I wish I could say it. That, my friends, is what it is all about.

    1v

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

      Amen.

  • Anonymous

    Folks, something tells me we’re making a very big mistake here. Got a real bad gut feeling about all this. Real bad…

    • Anonymous

      Why do you say that? What is your gut telling you?

    • StNikao

      PLEASE elaborate.

      • Anonymous

        TRS’ poll says:

        Newt Gingrich 66.43% (378 votes)

        Rick Santorum 24.96% (142 votes)

        Should be the other way around.

        Gingrich just strikes me to be something of the American Right’s equivalent to Tony Bliair, who was a disaster for us in the UK.

        Both are extraordinarily eloquent (Newt much more than Blair tbh); Both knew how to deal with the media (ie great PR handlers/negotiators); Both knew how to capture a fickle electorate; Both were “grandiose” in their views about government; and Both (as Santorum noted the other night) have way too many ideas floating about in their heads to be able to EXCECUTE anything effectively.

        I just fear that because Santorum is not as suave and sophisticated as Gingrich is when the cameras are on, we are all being conned into believing that the latter is the better man to face Obama.

        Just a feeling…

        (PS I know, overall, that one cannot compare Gingrich to Blair, as Gingrich is by far a better human being than Blair ever was; has a far better worldview imo; and understanding of principle. My point is merely that on some issues the similarities are slightly frightening. Like Levin, if it was down to Newt, Romeny or Paul, I’d go Newt without a thought. But it isn’t down to those three and yet people are going for the less conservative candidate in Newt, when Santorum’s hands are wide open. *SMH*)

        • Anonymous

          Keeps gnawing at the back of my neck too. I hope he is shown to be a better human being once he has the opportunity to exercise it should he become a world leader.

          • Anonymous

            Newt has been a leader in transferring America into a subordinate world power for a long time. Maybe he will get in and finish us off. I am starting to think that this is what a lot of people want. Maybe it isn’t such a bad idea. It will happen, so it may as well happen quickly.

        • StNikao

          TONY BLAIR converted to Catholicism, but immediately began to lecture the Pope in favor of abortion, gay rights/marriage, greenism, etc. He is a true liberal, social, globalist, etc.

          GINGRICH converted to Catholicism, but was evidently, according to his statements in the debates, converted to a socially conservative and Biblical world view: pro-life, traditional marriage, etc.

          Hopefully, he is also a political conservative as well. What he says in the debates and has written at his website, would certainly lead one to think his conservative views are social, economic and political.

          He is talking about hard gold-backed currency, firing Bernanke, auditing the FED annually.

          • Anonymous

            Ron Paul has been waking a lot of people up, and gets a lot of applause on those issues. I guess Newt has decided that his big government spending wouldn’t require the private central bank funding anymore. Even as he was “balancing” budgets, we went into debt, so I guess he has a new plan to fund big government without the printing press.

            I am glad to hear it.:)

          • Anonymous

            Fair enough mate. Though, to be fair to me, I did say there were similarities, not that they were both identical. But again, “fair enough”.

        • StNikao

          SANTORUM – is a great human, father, husband, legislator.

          He is honest, hard-working, sincere, enthusiastic…on fire for Jesus Christ.

          His problem is how he communicates his views.

          He comes across as judgmental, sour, angry, sanctimonious.

          If he would present the facts and evidence as he did in one debate and let those speak and keep on the side of science, statistics – he would win arguments without losing voters. For example, it is not love to let gays teach homosexual acts (as Kevin Jennings Obama’s safe school czar has done) because the latest CDC report says m/m sex results in 44 times the incidence of AIDS and highest incidence of all other STDs, depression and suicide. Facts and statistics will win arguments without making the candidate seem judgmental.

          • Anonymous

            I understand this very well. And I hinted at it in my post, the one yours is a reply to. However, my point is I’d rather have someone whose main/only problem is how he communicates his principles as oppose to one who can communicate his ideas and principles, yet I fundamentally disagree with them. Remember, GWBush was hardly someone who could communicate anything, let alone in comparison with Santorum. Yet he was president for two whole terms!

    • Anonymous

      Perhaps it is telling you this:

      http://www.notonewt.com/

      • Anonymous

        Not exactly. See above.

      • Anonymous

        That stuff doesn’t matter anymore. Newt is disavowing the last thirty five years of his record, and is now a new man. We need to truuuuust him.

  • http://profiles.google.com/ajtelles Art Telles

    The good son…

    Michael, the “good” son, is a “Reagan” conservative.
    Ron, the “other” son, is a “Wilson” progressive.

    Oh well.

    The”good” son…
    … is NOT taking into consideration the “Teddy Roosevelt – Woodrow Wilson – Franklin D. Roosevelt progressive” side of “realpolitik Wilsonian” Gingrich while he IS appropriately acknowledging the “post-Reagan Conservative” side of “Contract With America” Gingrich.

    The “other” son…
    … is ALSO not taking into consideration the “TR – WW – FDR progressive” side of “realpolitik Wilsonian” Gingrich while he IS against the “post-Reagan Conservative” side of “Contract With America” Gingrich.

    Does this mean that the “other” son is more politically consistent than the “good” son, or does this mean that the “good” son is more politically consistent than the “other” son?

    Hmm…
    …politics, ya just never know what’s what, or why, sometimes.

    As “they” say, sometimes politics makes strange bed fellows.

    However.

    In the case of the “good” son and the “other” son, it has driven them apart.

    The “good” son…
    …is consistently supporting the vision of his adoptive father, Ronald Reagan and his daughter, the late Maureen Reagan, but not his daughter Patty Reagan and his wife Nancy Reagan

    The “other” son…
    …is consistently against the vision of the only man who fathered him into existence, Ronald Reagan and his daughter Maureen Reagan, and is supported politically by his sister Patty Reagan and his mother Nancy Reagan.

    Ronald Reagan was at political peace with it, so, RIP Pres. Reagan.

    Art

    • StNikao

      Nancy is in her dotage and her heart is divided between her birth son and step-son.

      Obviously Ronnie is not a social or political conservative or a Biblical Christian like his father.

      • Anonymous

        Not he believes in magical tablets and secret bible translators.

  • StNikao

    I LIKE/LOVE NEWT TOO – but in the interest of balance and sobriety (remembering that JESUS is the only Savior, Redeemer and Hope of the world) here’s Newt’s past voting record and quotes that show where he’s been.

    http://1787network.com/never-again-list/newt-gingrich

    We only hope he has repented of his political sins (Internationalism/globalism, etc and other liberal positions, just as he has repented of his personal sins.

    My hope is that Newt has been born-again and truly has spiritual eyes, ears, heart now and that he is trying to undo and make up for his sins and to cement the good that he and Ronald Reagan have done.

    It is apparent that Newt also knows that our enemy is within the gates and he’s probably the only one with God’s help who is cunning enough to beat them at their own game.

    • Anonymous

      I just hope that as an avid historian, Newt is and will be constantly aware that this will be his last chance to change what will be written in the last chapter of his political life. Hopefully, he will work hard in making sure that what will be written is something he and his family can be proud as well as successfully neutralize his chequered past.

    • Anonymous

      He has a good looking, presidential wife now. It took a while, but I am sure he will stick it out with her.

      It is good to forgive, but not smart to put the snake back in the house after pulling it from the babies crib.

  • Anonymous

    It would be an interesting quandry if the G-man won the vote in S.C. That would mean that the top three contenders won at least one Primary. Might be a 1976 De Ja Vu again. That nomination went right up to the convention and Reagan started getting momentum for his campaign after N.C. It was at the convention that the Repubiks sealed the deal and nominated Ford. Then after Reagan’s speech, everyone in the room, and watching at home on TV, knew that the Repubiks just made a huge mistake. Lets hope that the Party doesn’t make a similar one in 2012.

    • StNikao

      IT IS BEGINNING TO LOOK LIKE ALL THE GOP CANDIDATES NEED TO COME CLEAN ABOUT THEIR PAST AND CLARIFY THEIR PRESENT POSITIONS AND INTENTIONS AT THE NEXT DEBATE AND IN WRITING.

      At my age (65+), and after many disappointments and trusting too much, I like to get everything with specific details in writing.

      • Anonymous

        …and none of them more than the democratic candidate!

      • Anonymous

        Agree, but looks like Romney will duck the next debate in Tampa. If he debates he loses; if he ducks the debate he loses.

      • Anonymous

        I agree. I would say that it needs to be a literal contract, and with the penalty of death for treason if they break it. Ron Paul wouldn’t have a problem signing that. The others probably wouldn’t want the job if they had to.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V2DBN3EEUPJPKG3ZYM6YSQGRIM John Bohler

    WHO ARE TE 51 IDIOTS WHO VOTED ROMNEY?!?!?!

    • Anonymous

      Probably 51 people who saw this:

      http://www.notonewt.com/

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V2DBN3EEUPJPKG3ZYM6YSQGRIM John Bohler

        then why not vote Santorum?

        • Anonymous

          Maybe because he voted to double the size of the Department of Education and to create the largest unfunded entitlement since LBJ? In other words, because he is not a conservative?

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V2DBN3EEUPJPKG3ZYM6YSQGRIM John Bohler

            and you think Romney is? Santorum is the only one (other than Ron) to have a debt plan to cut five trillion over 5 years, he has his Made in America to target bring back manufacturing jobs, cut over all taxes and and cut burdensome regulation. and what does does Romney have? 59 points? how many people even know whats in there? What are sure things in number that Romney IS GOING TO DO? All we get from him is talking points, no numbers at all.

            • Anonymous

              Ron’s cuts more, because it balances the budget, meaning no debt spending, in three years. Our yearly debt spending is now pushing $2T. People actually believe Paul when he says it. Rick was, and will be, a go along to get along guy.

              • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V2DBN3EEUPJPKG3ZYM6YSQGRIM John Bohler

                i rule off Ron along time ago over his foreign policy. The world would go to hell in a hand-basket under Paul.

    • Anonymous

      Paulbots, Obamabots, and family members.

  • StNikao

    By far the biggest ROMNEY RED FLAG – beside his support for abortion/gay/marriage and socialist health care – is that he consulted John Holdren one of Obama’s Czars:

    “…Holdren has also spoken in favor of forced abortions, confiscation of babies, targeted as well as mass involuntary sterilization, bureaucratic regulation of family size, and global authoritarian government. If there is a line between ultra-left ideologue and evil maniac, Holdren clearly crosses it. No one to the right of Pol Pot would want John Holdren advising our leaders.”

    http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2011/10/14/oh-super-romney-consulted-with-obama-mass-sterilization-expert-and-science-czar-john-holdren/

  • Anonymous

    People forget that the G-man shepherded the first Repubic takeover of the House and Senate that hadn’t happened for 40 yeas. And that economic success that Billy the Lech likes to take credit for was ldue to the G-man and his Contract with America. Billybob taking credit for the ecomomic success of the 1990’s is a little like Obama taking credit for killing OBL. or Nixon taking credit for landing men on the moon. Oh wait one did and one didn’t. My bad.

    • Anonymous

      We didn’t have the internet back then, so the media didn’t control the “facts” as much. We now understand that there were other factors involved in getting a republican majority. We also know who was to blame for losing it, which was people like Santorum and Gingrich.

      • Anonymous

        “We didn’t have the internet back then, so the media didn’t control the “facts” as much. “

        WTF ?

        • Anonymous

          The internet was just getting going. Most people didnt’ have it for at least a couple more years.

      • Anonymous

        Horsepucky. The loss of the Republican majority had everything to do with the enemedia’s meme of “its GW’s fault”. That mantra was pushed just like the media pushed that same kind of meme to oust his old man. Its what got their two Dhimirat boys Klinton and Obama elected. Tell a lie long enough and eventually people buy into it. Like the Nazis blaming their problems on the Jews or the Soviets blaming rtheir problems on the kulaks. Same kind of insidious lie.

        Santorum – you must be talking about his religious view of politics huh…as being some sort of liability? You still haven’t learned that Conservatives win when they present a contrast to libsticks; when they stick to their conservative principals. And Gingrich got railroaded by that same press, who gives a pass to their own, but holds Republicans to a double standard.

        But that’s OK. You’re entitled to your opinion. And my guy won. I’ll think I’ll have some fun with that for awhile.

        • Anonymous

          I agree with most of what you are saying. The problem is that the independents are growing because both of the parties are being exposed for being pretty much the same in their policies. While democrats can push for certain bad things, republicans can push for other bad things. In the end, neither one repeals the other, and often times continues what the other created.

          This is a different environment than the nineties. Guys like Newt and Santorum really ticked off a lot of republicans. I was one of them. I quit paying close attention to elections and just checked off republicans for a while. Then I realized that there is very little difference, and primarily due to the internet and having much more access to the facts.

          The country is still pretty fickle, and the wind could blow just about any direction.

          There is nothing wrong with reveling in a win for your guy. I do it, when I can. It is fun.

  • Anonymous

    Newt is like a Machine Gun with a hair trigger mounted on a Merry-go-Round. You never know where the next bullet will fly.

  • Anonymous

    For all you people who are voting for Newt just because you want to see him take down Obama remember after the election Obama will be gone and Newt Gingrich will have to serve as President. DO you really think you can trust him more than Rick Santorum? Rick Santorum has problems, but at least with him you know what you’re getting. I have no idea what Newt will be. Just like Romney Newt changes his views for political expediency. Unlike Romney, though, Newt is the master of BS and can make everybody think that he had a genuine change of heart or was just misunderstood the first time.

  • Anonymous

    Mitt Romney: the man who’s religion teaches polygamy. Newt Gingrich: the man who actually practices polygamy. Rick Santorum: The man conservatives should rally behind.

    • Anonymous

      I agree. From his vote to double the size of the Department of Education to his vote to create the biggest unfunded entitlement since LBJ, Santorum’s got conservative written all over him.

    • Mary Beth House

      Oh for crying out loud. Newt never practiced polygamy.

      You’d do better to make your case sans hyperbole.

      • Anonymous

        Agreed. He switches them out. You have to have them all at the same time to be a polygamist.

  • Anonymous

    Can someone please explain to me how Newt Gingrich is a conservative? I’ll even put 20 seconds on the confused conservative clock. GO!

    • Anonymous

      NONE of them are 100% conservative. None.

      • Anonymous

        Wow, it’s just like when Mark Levin asks a liberal a question and they dance around it instead of answering the question. Let’s try again…how is Gingrich conservative…20 seconds…GO!

        • Anonymous

          My point is, why does it matter how he’s conservative if none would survive the conservative litmus test anyway? It’s a moot point, in other words, so why ask?

          20 seconds….GO!

          • Anonymous

            So you are not voting on his (or any of their) conservative credentials…what are you voting on then? Their looks? How much money they have?

            • Anonymous

              No…I think Newt is a conservative. It’s you who apparently doesn’t. And you are free to vote for whoever you want to. Just keep in mind, none of them would pass the conservative litmus test in one way or another, whether it’s legalizing marijuana or voting for the medicare prescription plan. If you’re voting on how pure a conservative each candidate is, that’s your choice. I think they are all conservative enough. I’m not a pure 100% conservative, why should the guy I choose be?

              • Anonymous

                So if the effect of a policy is to reduce crime, cut down on drug use, take away the government subsidies on drugs, and let people make their own choices while saving many billions of dollars, then this person is not considered to be a conservative for supporting this policy?

                On the other hand, maintaining subsidies for drug users, giving the drug dealers and cartels a black market through abolition, spending many billions per year on enforcement while drug use grows, and taking the lives and rights of American citizens in the process is conservative?

                Your view of conservatism is a bit different than mine. You may very well be in the majority concerning people who call themselves conservatives. They actually do believe in the use of force to control people on moral issues. Regardless of whether it has ever worked or not. At least they stick to their guns.

                • Anonymous

                  I’m actually FOR the legalization of marijuana and other drugs and agree with Ron Paul on that issue. It was a Ron Paul supporter who asked the rest of us to list the ways we feel Gingrich qualifies as a conservative, but I think you just proved the point that ‘conservative’ means something different to each of us, so why ask the question in the first place? And that was my entire point — it’s a moot point.

        • Anonymous

          Let’s see, 11 time member of GOP congress. First GOP speaker in 40 years. Contract with American – welfare reform, term limits, tougher crime laws, and a balanced budget law, to more specialized legislation such as restrictions on American military participation in United Nations missions. That is his record, Mitt’s record is a just a bit more moderate… LOL

        • Anonymous

          Oh yeah, he accomplished all that with Clinton in office.

    • Anonymous

      What makes you think Ron Paul is conservative? Obviously you are rooting for him! What happens if he polls behind the others grizzlybear71? Who is your option B?

      • Trust1TG

        Ron Paul is carrying the druggie vote. And there are a lot of them according to statistical studies.

        Watch his earlier videos – they are eye-opening. He’s a theorist, an academic and has never governed which is where the rubber hits the road.

        • Anonymous

          We all know that the druggies are big voters, and very politically active. Especially the pot heads. Pot does motivate you to be active in your community for the sake of changing politics in the country.

  • Anonymous

    Is this an un-doctored clip? Santorum on the Tea-Party…

    Rick Santorum on small government

    We just have to hope in the end we make the best choice.

    • Trust1TG

      Santorum’s biggest flaw is that he either does not explain adequately what he means or the media cherry-picks and takes his sound bites out of context in order to vilify him. Then they can call him names: ‘big government’ ‘sanctimonious’ etc.

      Santorum is best when he quotes the evidence (statistics, science, facts) and lets that be the basis of his argument.

      For example:
      Abortion – has been linked to very high risk of breast cancer and mental health issues.
      Homosexuality – M/M sex 44 TIMES increased incidence of HIV, highest incidence of all other STDs, depression, and suicide.

      Santorum (and other social Conservatives) should just say that the State should make decisions on basis of evidence in research, science and statistics for the benefit and safety of society, rather than cultural bias and agenda groups pressures.

    • Anonymous

      Strange that Glenn Beck and his “crack research staff” can’t find those clips.

      Thanks for posting those links.

  • Anonymous

    Have a number of questions and would like some input????
    1. Does Santorum have a minimum percentage threshold in order to stay in the race?
    2. IF Newt wins SC, is margin of victory tied to contributions going forward? 2%, 5%, 10%?
    3. Florida is a very diverse state. Southeast Florida mainly liberal with the exception of the Cuban community in Miami. The Southwest has a real Midwestern appearance and I believe is conservative to Moderate (relos from MN, IL etc). The northern part of the state becomes more southern in flavor and is culturally more like GA, AL, MS. Does anyone have an opinion in terms of where each candidate would fare best and the impact on votes? Is Newt good from Orlando/Tampa north or Gainsville north?
    3. Does funding for Rick Santorum completely dry up with a loss in SC?
    4. Do large donors like Charles Koch start backing Newt in FL to counter Romney’s substantial advantage in funding?
    5. Regardles of Gingrich surge, is it a bridge too far for Newt to win FL if Rick Santorum stays in the race?
    6. Is Newt winning FL a requirement in order to derail the Romnet candidacy?

    Thanks in advance for your opinions.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

      Santorum is in serious trouble if he loses to Paul SC. And He’s running out of money.

      And in Florida at one time Gingrich was leading in the polls by 25-30 points ahead of Romney. So it’s very possible that Gingrich could very well close the gap and take over the top spot held by Romney as it looks like he’s done to him in SC.

      Gingrich winning Florida would be HUGE!

    • Trust1TG

      Florida was for Newt a while back, but went for Romney for a while too because of Bush I’s endorsement (remember Jeb was a popular Gov. there). We will know more after SC.

  • BeenSoup

    Newt is sure feisty and I love it. He is thriving on it and using it because it’s working. But I still smell a politician that will lead us down the same old road to big government destruction. Abolitionism is what we need and the fear of it is going to keep us from saving ourselves. Santorum just plain ol’ don’t get freedom. HE is confused, and thinks that government provides freedom. and Romney is a plastic corporately funded Ken Doll inside and out. I’m hoping that no matter who it is, that the spirit of liberty that RP is promoting will resonate. Yes I’m wearing a tin foil hat.

    • Anonymous

      It will resonate in the people, because tyranny pushes people toward liberty. All we are in for is more of the same.

  • StNikao

    Newt is winning the SC poll at the Drudgereport too.

    This is a surprise considering Matt Drudges overt vilification of Newt and rumored paid support of Romney (is there any other kind, beside his family, the Mormons and the RINOs?)

  • StNikao

    FLORIDA has gone conservative – there are a lot of retirees. We have Senator Marco Rubio, Rep. West and a Republican Governor Scott.

    However, shudder, we also have creepy Wasserman-Schultz and Romney was ahead in the last FL poll. I’m already getting Romney robo-calls and mail, but nothing yet from Newt or Santorum.

  • Anonymous

    Well I guess Romney wouldn’t have a chance in Right Scoop County!

  • Anonymous

    I’m on the edge of my seat – why time do returns start coming in? I hope RS keeps us in the loop!!!

  • Anonymous

    Lots of folks ripping on Gingrich on government spending. Let’s place it in context: As far as goverment spending; debt and deficit as a percentage of GDP was substantially lower/manageable when Newt was in office and he had balanced budgets. The big deficits and debt piling up really came under the GOP establishment Prez Bush (when Santorum was serving in the senate (RS really never struck me as a deficit hawk during 2001-2007) Medicaid PDP busted the budget. The wars really made our deficit/debt really bad. The tipping point came with the debt crisis but it really was building for 8 years under Bush when Santorum was in the Senate. Rick, where were you when this was happening?

  • Anonymous
    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OQI5D66OXO7X2FE4NVCZC7BAMA Joe

      Thanks I’ll keep the photo —

      Someone in this community said he was separated from Mickey at birth

      This might be funny after he leaves office

      BUT there is NOTHING FUNNY about this POS while in the WH

  • Anonymous

    Interesting. Gingrich leading Romney among woman voters.

    Among women, Gingrich leads Romney 42% to 26%.
    http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/2012/01/21/check-this-out-does-this-surprise-you/

    • Anonymous

      Because women love men with spine (gumption, cojones…), and women can spot a fake from a mile away.

      In the words of my 80-year-old mother “Ew, I don’t like that Romney…I don’t trust him.”

    • Anonymous

      What women would want to be friends with Marianne – b/c Democrats and Liberals!

  • Anonymous

    I think I figured out who Pete is. Romney’s politics are always from the perspective of running for office for Pete’s sake. I think Pete is the voice inside his head. LOLz!

  • Anonymous

    Romney says he’s neck and neck with Gingrich. Seems like it’s Newt’s boot on Romney’s neck!!!

    • Anonymous

      That is another reason not to vote Romney, he can’t tell the difference in a neck and a boot.

      • Anonymous

        Or the fact that his people wouldn’t give Santorum a certified win in Iowa, but a tie – LIARS AND CHEATS!

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OQI5D66OXO7X2FE4NVCZC7BAMA Joe

        This is a great name >>> FreeManWalking

  • Anonymous

    Well, since my first pick Bachman is out I went to Cain and Perry…so I just voted for Newt. Hopefully he has matured! After watching the last 2 debates I realized he has quit trying to appease the political pundits and is just saying what he really means. He has the will and intellect to beat the Annointed One…even if he doesn’t have the cash yet.

    Can’t vote for Santorum due to 5 debt ceiling votes and supporting Arlen Spector. Rick and George W spent my daughter’s money and that is not forgivable. Speaking of George W, he had 2 years of Rs in House and Senate and we got no border fence, no balanced budget, and expanded entitlements. For shame!

    Couldn’t vote for Paul due to Iran and Isreal. As for Romney…flip flop.

    Still, I’d take any of them over that socialist Barry O.

    • Anonymous

      Do you realize that Ron Paul would allow Israel to act as a sovereign nation in their own defense against Iran (or anybody else for that matter)?

  • Anonymous

    WSJ Report on Fox now ripping Gingrich with exception of Rabinowintz.
    They hate Newt as he’s not part of their establisment group.

    • Anonymous

      That’s why us country class Republicans love Newt b/c he’s hated by the right people!

    • Ron Kramig

      What planet are you on?

      • Anonymous

        WTF?? PTSD??

  • Anonymous

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/stephen-colbert-herman-cain-to-hold-joint-event-in-south-carolina-today/2012/01/20/gIQAFMheDQ_blog.html

    Herman Cain doing this pathetic stunt with that clown Colbert is disgusting.

    Much worse than any of the allegations that took him down (for which I defended him).

    WTF is wrong with him?? Making a mockery of this process and joining forces with this waste of space!!

    You disgust me Herman.

    • Anonymous

      Please, the GOP establishment fixing the Iowa Caucus is what’s disgusting! This election has really opened my eyes to see that Progressive Republicans (Moderates who are trying to call themselves Conservatives) are no better than Progressive Democrats and Liberals! Its time for another Conservative that has the vision and the brains to rip Obama and the Liberals a new one and that ain’t Mittens!

      • Anonymous

        I agree.

        That being said Colbert is a liberal douche.

        Cain should know better than to associate with that waste of space.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Fred-Lee/100000182470888 Fred Lee

      Think please . Just maybe Herman is trying to win young voters over to our side .
      It is possible

    • Anonymous

      Bravo…..there’s a reason otherwise successful non politicians often flame out. It’s a game of protocol, unless you’re appealing to those frozen heads in Minnesota.
      The POTUS is a clown but he pretends to be otherwise. Ellen Show…thanks for the precedent, master of dumbing down. Cain is not, so I wonder if he’s lost it.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Fred-Lee/100000182470888 Fred Lee

      Stop being shallow . Anyone can beat Obama . Study the results from 2008 compared to 2010 . We have enough electorial votes to easily beat Obama . It doesn’t matter who our nominee is .

      • Anonymous

        It doens’t matter?

        So having a big gov’t liberal in Mittens doesn’t matter?

        You do know that before Maobama no President in history spent more than W right?

    • Trust1TG

      I do not miss Herman Cain in the debates. 999 over and over was beginning to get old. It was basically unfair to lower and middle class taxpayers.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

      Cain’s unconventional endorsement was really lame and waste of time too. Were any Cain supporters energized by it?

      • Anonymous

        No, but I wish he would have shrugged off those ho’s and stayed in it.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OQI5D66OXO7X2FE4NVCZC7BAMA Joe

    I am writing in Bill Whittle

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_OQI5D66OXO7X2FE4NVCZC7BAMA Joe

    Thanks I’ll keep the photo —

    Someone in this community said he was separated from Mickey at birth

    This might be funny after he leaves office

    BUT there is NOTHING FUNNY about this POS while in the WH

    • Trust1TG

      “The same logic that made Barack Obama the Nobel Prize winner with no credentials, made him the President of the United States with no credentials.”

      Newt Gingrich

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    ((((Modern American Currency))))
    One dollar bill: George Washington
    Five dollar bill: Abraham Lincoln
    Ten dollar bill: Alexander Hamilton
    Twenty dollar bill: Andrew Jackson
    Fifty dollar bill: Ulysses S. Grant
    One hundred dollar bill: Benjamin Franklin
    Food Stamps: Barack Obama

    • Anonymous

      Dude, you’ve been keepin it gangster lately! You on fire!

    • Trust1TG

      It would be more dramatic to run it backwards counting down from $100:

      ((((Presidential Portraits on Modern American Currency))))

      One hundred dollar bill: Benjamin Franklin
      Fifty dollar bill: Ulysses S. Grant
      Twenty dollar bill: Andrew Jackson
      Ten dollar bill: Alexander Hamilton
      Five dollar bill: Abraham Lincoln
      One dollar bill: George Washington
      So it’s only right and fitting to put Zero’s Portrait on the Zero dollar bill,
      Food Stamps: Barack Obama

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

        hummm, i kind of agree, feel free to share it however you choose :)

      • Anonymous

        I vote for Obama to be on the trillion dollar bill. That is what it will cost to buy bread.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

        I wouldn’t want his name on an I.O.U.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/AXDIBPAGNSND626O2T4TWXYTIU Jeffrey

    Why Ron Paul left off this poll?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Fred-Lee/100000182470888 Fred Lee

      Scoop has determined that the Ron Paul fanatics cheat by using multiple screen names . I know this hurts the normal Ron Paul supporter . Please blame the people responsible ( the ones wearing the tin foil hats ).

  • Ron Kramig

    I am a former US Army Military Analyst and now contributor to Veterans Today and we are conducting a focused investigation into your your blog.
    Many veterans are outraged by your blatant censorship of Ron Paul!
    We are encouraging many of our veterans to blog this page, record their posts and post them on YouTube and will have many of our media contacts informed of your malfeasance. So I am hopeful you will exposed and discredited by our passionate efforts to expose you and who you represent!

    • KenInMontana

      Good for you, although you should realize that blogs are recognized as primarily opinion sites. I find it laughable that you would open with “I am a former US Army Military Intelligence Analyst”, then ID yourself as a blogger then threaten the site’s publisher. Support rights much or did you forget your oath? As a Veteran I find your accusations and implications beneath contempt and dishonorable. Particularly to make a statement so heinous to equate the support or non support of YOUR candidate to whether or not this site supports the troops. You “sir”, are an affront to the honor and sacred trust that all Veterans stood and stand for.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

        Well said, Ken.

      • Anonymous

        Aw, come on. Now I found Ron funny. You gotta give the Paulbots some credit. Some are really trying to get creative. It’s a new concept for them.

    • Trust1TG

      See my warning to you above.

  • Ron Kramig

    I am a former US Army Military Analyst and now contributor to Veterans Today and we are conducting a focused investigation into your your blog.
    Many veterans are outraged by your blatant censorship of Ron Paul!
    We are encouraging many of our veterans to blog this page, record their posts and post them on YouTube and will have many of our media contacts informed of your malfeasance. So I am hopeful you will be exposed and discredited through our passionate efforts. This to expose you to all the cyber world that you DO NOT SUPPORT THE TROOPS!

    • http://twitter.com/cfallon57 Cheryl Fallon

      I understand your feelings. Sarah Palin has a better chance of being on the list than Ron Paul. The owner of the blog is free to do whatever he/she wants. That is how blogs operate. It isn’t about fairness. It is about personal opinions. Like talk radio. They are the same way!

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Fred-Lee/100000182470888 Fred Lee

      Funny . I like sarcasm .

    • Anonymous

      RS is an excellent conservative blog, fact is that most conservatives just can’t stomach Ron Paul’s foreign policy stance and do not take him seriously as a candidate. Maybe RS can accomodate you folks by running some stories that elaborate on some of Paul’s excellent economic ideas.

    • Anonymous

      No. A vast majority here just don’t support Ron Paul. He takes libertarianism a bit too far (hence his numerous supporters among the very young, and among the ‘legalize marijuana’ crowd), and while the criticism of ‘American adventurism around the world’ is valid up to a point, again, he goes to far. I belive a majority of conservatives see the need for and the benefit of the worldwide projection of American military might whenever strategically necessary.

      But on the other hand, it is true that Dr. Paul’s supporters have such noble and endearing habits in public discourse that his support is sure to grow…………

    • Trust1TG

      Mr. Kramig – Ron Paul is not on the Right Scoop poll because Paul-ites always flood and skew any poll with his name on it.

      I am FBI and CPW. Be warned and stand down.

      If you mess with this blog, I will personally come and mess with you.

      Capiche?

      • Anonymous

        Wow Trust, IMHO RS doesn’t need these type of threats against someone who contributes opinions on this site. Hope your supervisor at the “FBI and CPW” view this type of threat and intimidation by one of their employees favorably.

      • Anonymous

        Trust, what is CPW? I’m sure that once you tell me you’ll hear me as I slap my forehead and hollar, ” I shoulda known that!!!”

    • Anonymous

      You would be wrong to assume that this site doesn’t support the troops, Ron. A very large number of commenters here are active duty, retired, and former military and enjoy this site.
      Oddly enough, you are showing the same sort of hardnose and rude attitude and behavior we’ve come to expect from some of Mr. Pauls ‘hardline’ supporters.
      Some of Pauls supporters visit here and express their views in a friendly manner and contribute to the discussion. You seek to bully instead. Why is that?
      Army Intelligence Analyst are you? When we check your profile, you have at this writing 3 entries, with one being a duplicate. No other disqus comments are shown.

  • Anonymous

    Where is Ron Paul? Newt and Santorum are not even on some Primary Ballots and Paul is overall 2nd in this race… Whats going on?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

      what are you talking about, ron paul is 3rd in the polls and 3rd in SC, which means he’s 2nd to last in the polls.

      • Anonymous

        Paul is also bagging the FL primary. If his base is so terribly strong, why is he skipping one of the largest primaries (even with delegates being cut in half)? Paul is just a fringe candidate…a gadfly

        • Anonymous

          Its is Winner Take all.

      • Anonymous

        BTW, Good post

      • Anonymous

        He May be 3rd after today.. But before this Paul was second place with Delegates.
        Newt finally won something but it was Romney, Paul, Santorum, then Newt.. Now Paul should be in 3rd after SC.

      • Anonymous

        Before today he was second with Delegates and that is what matters the most. It was Romney, Paul, Santorum then Newt.. Now it may be Newt, Romney, Paul

  • Anonymous

    Why doesn’t Ron Paul make his concession speech now?

    • Trust1TG

      Ron Paul has been valuable, if not essential to ‘the conversation’ about failed policies. I’m very grateful for his insistence on talking about US economic and even foreign policies. We had better re-think the FED, currency and foreign policy. We need principles and policies that no corruption can alter.

      Our foreign policy has been the equivalent of a person with BPD, if you know what I mean. It can change radically with the change of administrations and the pressures of various special interest groups. That is not right. We have done some dastardly things overseas.

      Where I VERY STRONGLY DISAGREE with Paul is on his idea of legalizing and ending the war on drugs and sex trafficking. That is horribly dangerous with half of this country addicted to a substance or behavior and the rabid ruthless Islamic-infected drug-sex-porn-trafficking cartels infiltrating our country and government. These people have no notion of the Geneva conventions.

      We must fight the drug cartels and Islam now – fast and furiously – until they are out of our country, hemisphere and world…let them all retreat to Mecca and Medina and stay there….until Jesus comes and deals with them.

      • Anonymous

        Agree that Paul has been additive to the economic discussion. As far as foreign policy, I disagree vehemently. Taking the isolationist point of view has left us with a legacy of two World Wars that we were unprepared for. I am for shrinking our presence in some portion of the world; mainy Europe.
        In terms of domestic policy, sans economics, I also very much disagree with Dr. Paul’s ideas. For instance, his view that Social Security is unconstitutional. Dr. Paul doesn’t understand that it already a matter of settled law from the Supreme Court. I have never been a proponent of libertarian thought as I find them thoroughly absurd in most cases. There is a role for LIMITED government.

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul = The Lyndon LaRouche of the 21st Century

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    Romney aides tell Fox News they expect a second place finish based on exit polls. https://twitter.com/#!/michellemalkin/status/160859463434240001

  • Anonymous

    It took a bit of twisting, turning, squeezing, and stretching, but I’ve come up with an analogy:

    Patriots = Romney
    Ravens = Gingrich
    49ers = Paul
    Giants = Santorum

    How would you put them?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

      I don’t think I could change them:

      I wanna see a Ravens vs 49ers superbowl.
      I wouldn’t mind seeing a Patriots vs Giants or Ravens vs Giants.
      I would NOT want to WATCH a 49ers vs Patriots.

  • Anonymous

    WHERE IS RON PAUL

    • Anonymous

      Kind of like Where is Waldo, the sport is in finding him.

    • KenInMontana

      Likely in South Carolina. Where else should he be?

    • Anonymous

      Real question tbh is: Who cares?

  • sams88Menk

    There are only 3 people on the Ballot ?

    I know the whole ”Ron Paul people stack online pools” thing, but ignoring the old feed just feed the narrative that He being sabotaged by the media.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    Mitt Romney campaign and superpac spent 2.6 million in tv ads in SC and it looks like he’s going to lose still! HA

  • Anonymous

    FOX projecting win for Gingrich already!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    CNN exit poll
    Gingrich 38%
    Romney 29%
    Santorum 17%
    Paul 15%

    • Anonymous

      FOX reporting Gingrich won all categories over Romney many by double digits. Newt won married women, independents, you name it. Romney is toast when Santorum drops and the choice is between Conservative, libertarian, and progressive moderate going forward.

      • Anonymous

        I love the smack in the face for all the doubters regarding the woman vote!

        • Anonymous

          Agreed. One has to be proud of the SC voters, not letting the ‘ex-factor’ get in the way of voting. It’s nice that we start spitting in the faces of the LSM.

    • KenInMontana

      NBC called it for Gingrich, 2 hours ago. My question is, didn’t the polls close less than 1 hour ago?

      http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/21/10207281-gingrich-wins-sc-gop-primary-beating-romney

  • Trust1TG

    THE RIGHT SCOOP IS THE COOLEST SITE OF ALL. LOVE IT. THANKS SO MUCH.

  • GiantM

    You know…I wonder. How many people in here are planted from the Left to direct our candidates their way? I’m just surprised that Newt is at 66% when in fact he is not a true conservative. Yah okay he did put John King in his place the other night, and that may have helped him a bit, but the only one left with solid Conservative views is Santorum.

    I realize there will never be the perfect candidate, but really folks. Gingrich!!?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

      The economy and who can beat Obama were the two most important issues and the people of South Carolina chose Gingrich… Being a true conservative isn’t a main factor and a lot of Perry supporters were saying Santorum was not as conservative as he looks. I like Santorum but his message is lacks fire.

    • Amy

      Santorum’s voting record is spotty as well. In reality, we are left with center right candidates and now it’s just a matter of personality. All three leave me disappointed.

  • Anonymous

    Fox called it for newt at 7:01. Gee, I think that’s a record.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

      they just went off an exit poll?

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul 2012!! I am tired of scoop leaving out the true consistant conservative!!!

    • KenInMontana

      You can always go to Liberty Tree Forums.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

        Now Ken, be nice and say ‘please’.

        • KenInMontana

          I try to be, but I am trying to keep my inner R. Lee Ermey under control at the same time. ;)

          • Anonymous

            What would have been sweet was if Fox decided to leave off Paul from the list. I can hear them now. ‘Paul came in fourth, but we left his name off due to his fans skewing the numbers. He would have normally been 22nd.’

  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous

    0-3 for Paul. Time to step aside

    • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie

      I have to disagree. The longer he stays in the better. Many Paul supporters are anarchist, take-no-prisoner types that would vote for Romney just so that conservatives get a kick to the face for not accepting Ron Paul as their lord and saviour. Keep them distracted with the light while the rest of us select our nominee.

      • Anonymous

        Doubt it. The Paulies see all the other candidates as neocons and will write Paul in if he’s not on the ballot.

      • Anonymous

        Its quite frightening a statement, but you’re correct Ozzie. Those Paul fans are illogical and bitter people… from my experience anyway.

        • http://twitter.com/cfallon57 Cheryl Fallon

          That is such an exaggeration! Any one of those candidates would be head and shoulders above Obama and his gang!

      • Anonymous

        You don’t know much about why people support Paul, if you are serious about your comments.

        • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie

          I know why people support Paul- I would vote for Paul over Romney, but I also know that there is a huge fraction of Paul’s base that are petulant. If you think I am wrong, why don’t you take ask around the Paul supporters and see who they would vote for if Paul was eliminated.

          • Anonymous

            I know what I would do, and I mostly see people saying the same thing. They will call for a third party run from Paul, or someone close, and if that didn’t happen, they would be done with it. I have voted for the other evil before. No longer will I give them my permission. We don’t have ten years slowly try to recover. It won’t matter who else gets in. Not to me. Romney, Newt, and Santorum would continue to debt spend while putting up a show for the public. They would cut here and there and the media would appose them as if they were their polar opposite. These are the roles that the establishment plays. In the end, our currency is done for, we end up with chaos and government clamping down with the police state.

            Why would I vote for this?

            • Anonymous

              Why don’t you just vote for Gary Johnson then? I don’t understand why you Paul pods are so fixated on RP when you already have a libertarian candidate running 3rd party. As policy goes, he’s practically a clone of Paul, just not so kooky.

              • Anonymous

                How much exposure does Gary Johnson get? When was the last time a Libertarian party candidate competed with the corrupt two party system? Gary Johnson’s policies don’t line up as well as Ron Paul’s. Paul has proved his commitment to the constitution for a much longer period of time.

              • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie

                Gary Johnson is similar to a Santorum- He doesn’t mind government when it doesn’t offend him.

            • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie

              The difference is that you put Newt and Romney in the same category….I don’t.

              I think Newt wants to be a Reagan (or better)- his ego demands it. He wants to be the best POTUS in history without an ideology. Romney wants to be everything to everybody, and Santorum wants to be a social conservative warrior.

              The “establishment” wants Romney, which is why I refuse to vote for him, but the other guys don’t have to be Ron Paul to force a 180.

              • Anonymous

                If these guys make it in, the first time they compromise on their campaign promises, they will shift the political momentum back to the liberals, and we will lose our majority in the house. Just as Obama did. This is the way it always works. It is rare that republicans get both the white house and congress, and when they did, they blew it big time.

                I just choose not to trust the guys from the past that let down their conservative base, and do not give them a pass for their new rhetoric. I do see slight differences between Newt and Romney, but they don’t really differ all that much on the spending, or the foreign policy. They just have different ideas of how to manage our failed system and policies.

                I don’t expect Paul to win, and Paul won’t change the minds of the establishment politicians. When the establishment crushes the people and goes against their promises, Paul’s message will get even bigger. If we still have elections, the public will turn to a Paul type for help. As it becomes more and more obvious that the establishment is cheating and using fraud to keep establishment politicians in office, these rising crowds of libertarians, constitutionalists, and anti-government groups will turn into violent protesters. The government will clamp down on it, and perpetuate the cycle until we have a total police state. This is if the dollar collapse does not cause the total police state.

                This is the historical, and perpetual cycle of the loss of liberty, rebellion, and government tyranny. We are repeating it, and the whole world is going to be involved.

                • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie

                  I disagree-

                  I think Newt wants greatness; and you can’t be great if you don’t listen to the new conservative movement.

                • Anonymous

                  Even though the new conservative movement involves preemptive war, I might be able to cast a vote for one if its candidates if I actually trusted them. (maybe) As it is, the movement is not producing viable candidates that I can trust. I would be more likely to vote for a completely unknown guy, or a Joe the plumber type. The reality is that we are only going to get recycled ex-politicians that I won’t likely be able to trust. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

                • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie

                  I will simply say that I hope I’m right, because if I’m right, then there is a chance. If you’re right, then there is little that can be done….I’m taking that chance rather than giving up.

                • Anonymous

                  Guys like Jim Rogers, Peter Schiff, Bob Chapman, Gerald Celente, and many more have predicted the bubbles and the collapses of the past. Their financial advice is sound, and is based on the same Austrian Economics that Paul speaks of. The Federal Reserve Note is done for. It is just a matter of what we replace it with, and when we do it. If we allow competing currencies now, we might have a chance to recover. If we wait until it all goes down, we will be tied to the Fed Res Note and kept in poverty while the new world reserve takes over.

                  This is why we have little time to screw around. I don’t hold out too much hope, but I can make one last effort to solve this problem through peaceful efforts, then I will be running for the hills to avoid the chaos.

                  I wish us all good luck, and Gods mercy.

              • Anonymous

                Newt and Romney won’t change this:

    • Anonymous

      Paul made the comment tonight that only 2% of the delegates have been accounted for in the primary. Not exactly time to quit.

  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous

    For the last 10 years, Marianne Gingrich has claimed that she could end his career…

    Payback is Hell, eh Marianne?

  • Anonymous

    I would have liked to have known if Sarah Palin influenced any of the results in South Carolina.

    • http://twitter.com/cfallon57 Cheryl Fallon

      I think she is only relevant now to her fans!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    Foxnews said Santorum is going get 3rd

  • Anonymous

    For the last 10 years, Marianne Gingrich has claimed that she could end his career… Payback is Hell, eh Marianne?

    ABC Please bring on the ex-associate of Newt’s from Congress to help prove that he is not an insider. I think that the more institutionalized Republican whipping boys come out against Newt, the stronger the support for Gingrich will increase. The Republican party needs to shut up and listen for a change.

    • Trust1TG

      Just shows how Southerners have a good long memories.

      They hate the images that names like Hyannisport, Chappaquiddick, Kennebunkport, New Hampshire, bring to mind.

      They hated the Wall Street bailouts and other power-brokers getting taxpayer money while their factories and business closed and they were laid off.

      Those PAC ads of Newt’s reminded South Carolinians how it feels to be pushed around by the big shot money and political 1%.

      Newt’s debates reminded them of how the media, Obama, and liberals have bullied Southerners, Christians and conservatives.

      Nikki Haley could’nt convince them when their friends were jobless and Obama has been a 4+ a$$h-le liar and thief.

  • KenInMontana

    Love the ACDC playing in the background on the feed from Newt’s HQ. LOL

    • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie

      Sounds like party music….I feel like I should be walking around in the dark with a red Solo cup and some home-made overly alcoholic beverage.

  • Anonymous

    Mitt’s still ahead.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ricardo-Galvan/100001729378103 Ricardo Galvan

      With 1 percent of precincts reporting.

      • Anonymous

        Yeah. I didn’t notice until later. I thought it would come up faster.

    • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie

      Why have so many news outlets declared Newt the winner? That makes no sense…..are the polls closed?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ricardo-Galvan/100001729378103 Ricardo Galvan

        Exit polls indicate huge win for Newt, so they are calling it now. The updated report of actual votes shows 2 percent reported, now Newt is tied with Romney. It’ll probably go higher and higher.

        • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie

          I see….can’t say that I agree that they are doing it that way.

          • GiantM

            Well Ozzie, the way I see it with the LEFT… every action has a maniacal motive to it. With them you never want to react with what’s on the surface, because that’s exactly what they want from the unknowing.

            We always have to look deeper into what their true motive is for making such a rash and hasty announcement.

            Somethings up.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    Welp Gingrich wins SC. So now on to Florida, I just heard on CNN that 30% of absentee ballots have already been cast for a candidate so I guess we’ll see how things turn out there…

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VVZODHFH7JZH7YGYOHGY6P7DY4 JR Dogman

      FWIW, I’m in FL visiting my parents, and my mother, a Democrat-leaning independent (she voted for Reagan once, GHWB once, Clinton twice, Algore, Kerry, and, most recently, supported Hillary; she voted for Obama for the most part due to profoundly deranged, serious cases of BDS and, subsequently, PDS, but will vote against Zero this time around unless the GOP nominates Santorum) who still thinks the Democrats are the party of JFK, registered Republican and voted for Newt.

      • Anonymous

        Glad your Mom is voting against Obama this time around, but you know she’s gonna beat you good if she reads your post don’tcha?

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VVZODHFH7JZH7YGYOHGY6P7DY4 JR Dogman

          Nah — this is nothing; my description of her is polite. The fact is, year after year, election after election, she votes for people she mostly disagrees with over individuals whom she mostly agrees with. This applies to court appointees, too: she’ll carry on about what a moron Justice Thomas is and what a soooper-Genius Justice Ginsberg is, only in case after case, practically down the line, she agrees with Thomas and (sometimes, as in the case of Kelo, vehemently) disagrees with her heroine Ginsberg. When I tell her that much of the Democrat Party’s core support comes from hard-core socialists and communists, people who want to give the soviet experiment another try, she doesn’t believe me. “How could anyone with half a brain believe in such nonsense?” she says and shakes her head. I tell her the Motor-Voter ID law was passed to abet voter fraud, and she says that’s crazy. I point out Cloward and Piven at the signing ceremony — invitees of then President Clinton — but then I’ve got to go back and confirm she’s read C&P (she hasn’t), and in any event she isn’t paying attention. She doesn’t want to know this stuff. That tape the LA Times has been hiding for 3-4 years now, the one with all the Palestinian radicals and the kids’ theater group staging beheadings of Jews as party entertainment — until it appears reported on CNN and 60 Minutes, and is covered extensively by the New York Times, it cannot exist as even a possibility in her mind.

          So she has no idea who ACORN are, doesn’t know anything about Saul Alinsky, and has no inclination to look behind the magic curtain to find out what she doesn’t know.

          I try to explain this to those conservatives who don’t know many Democrats personally: a fair amount of them hold pretty conservative views. I think a lot of them are essentially single-issue voters, even if they’d deny that characterization: they don’t understand that you can be pro-abortion (as I am) but anti-Roe v. Wade, and the very idea that some women, somewhere, in a post-Roe USA might have to go from Utah to Colorado for an abortion presents such a horrible, coathangery image of the bad ‘ol days when the knuckledragger religious right had their way, it obliterates consideration of any other issue or question, no matter how basic or commonsense (e.g., “How the hell are, we going to pay for all of this?”).

          The plus side with regard to them, however, is that, with the exception of a serious social con like Sen. Sentorum, they’re listening to what the GOP contenders have to say. (My mom said what a lot of us here on these threads say: “I love his domestic ideas, but his foreign policy…”) A GOP nominee that comes across as smart (Newt), who can clearly articulate (Newt) the commonsense reforms and steps the something like 75-80% of the country knows we should be taking, who focuses on economic issues and leaves the cultural issues to be dealt with by the states (where I think they belong, anyhow), will get their vote. Obama has a record now, and it’s a disaster. Even for those who won’t yet call it a disaster will come around to using that proper descriptor of what Obama has wrought, *provided* that the GOP nominee gives it to them couched in intelligent, precise, unhesitating terms explaining why it is dead-on the money.

          People are scared as can be when it comes to the debt, to the jobs market, to the deficit, and they don’t believe Obama’s the man to handle these problems. They are waiting for an alternative that they can recognize as plainly intelligent and competent.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VVZODHFH7JZH7YGYOHGY6P7DY4 JR Dogman

            Whoops — forgot to put in that it’s RP’s domestic policy she likes.

            • Anonymous

              Like so many of our older citizens, JR, the democratic party she remembers is nothing remotely like the dems of today. I’ll go a step further and say that the Gop of today is more like the old dems. While there are some true conservatives in the GOP, I don’t see the party itself as conservative. Good luck with your Mom!!

    • Anonymous

      Depends on when they were cast. There was a time when Gingrich was blowing out Romney there but after the Iowa debacle Romney caught up and took the lead. If those people polled abandoned Newt because only because they thought he was finished they’ll be back after tonight.

  • Anonymous

    Charles Krauthammer eating crow. LMAO!

    • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie

      Wrong! Cyborgs don’t eat.

  • Anonymous

    I hope the SC Tea Party citizens never forget who their Governor endorsed in this.

    • http://punditpawn.wordpress.com PunditPawn

      yes, sad should couldn’t make to his concession speech. Hey, where’s McCain?

  • Anonymous

    I know! Did you notice Hume is still not ready to fully give Newt his due? I usually like Hume, but he has really turned me off. Same with Steyn, he is acting like a big baby. Deal with it people, Romney couldn’t pull it off!

    • Anonymous

      Couldn’t they figure that out when he lost to lame McCain?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    We already have a Campaigner in Chief in the White House.. We don’t need a Campaigner for GOP Nominee in Romney.

    • http://twitter.com/cfallon57 Cheryl Fallon

      Romney is NOT Obama-the exaggeration shows a poor understanding of what Obama is doing to this country!

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

        All Romney does is campaign stop after campaign stop, campaign speech after campaign speech, campaign townhall after campaign townhall, Romney barely does interviews and is afraid of tough questions, if Romney didn’t need to do debates he wouldn’t… Get my point?

        • Anonymous

          Romney has a nixonian type paranoia and it showed with that interview with Brett Baeir. Romney is a timid milquetoast glassjaw.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jake-Bourgeois/100001271321958 Jake Bourgeois

    if you vote 4 somebody who’s not in the race anymore, what’s the point of taking the time to vote?

    • Trust1TG

      Yes, Bachmann, Cain and Perry all got some votes.

    • Anonymous

      Shouldn’t we all vote or beliefs, our principles? If a candidate is on the ballot and gets sufficient votes (or write-ins) to hold a delegate, that delegate could possibly break a tie a brokered convention. Who knows?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    Now that Romney is going to go nuclear negative at Gingrich in Florida are they going to start calling him Angry Mittens?

    • Anonymous

    • Anonymous

      when romney goes nuclear it’s ok. if newt goes nuclear, he’s nasty, angry and vindictive. if you remember only a week ago, brit hume said that the only reason Newt was in the race was to hurt romney. wrong again britt. Fox continues to schill for romney. it just sucks.

      • StNikao

        BUT – We the people ARE. VERY. ANGRY. – and the angrier Newt gets (if it’s at Obama or the liberals or the media) the more everyone likes him.

        The night he said, referring to Pakistan harboring OBL, ‘I’d be furious with Pakistan,’ it brought down the house.

        As long as Newt stays angry with the right people, he will surge.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

    Romney hdqtrs feed is down. I wonder why?

    • http://twitter.com/cfallon57 Cheryl Fallon

      He just gave a great speech!

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

        Concession?

        • Anonymous

          Hard to tell. His speeches run in a loop, like an old player piano.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

            I literally did LOL.

  • Anonymous

    Looks like a landslide for the Newtster!

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

      Mitt got his ass whipped like a rented mule.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V2DBN3EEUPJPKG3ZYM6YSQGRIM John Bohler

    Right Romney got his @$$ kicked and can’t win SC anymore, how but we start cheering Santorum getting second? if that happens then MAYBE Romney will drop

  • Anonymous

    Newt is positively trouncing Romney.

  • Anonymous

    Why is Ron Paul acting like he is relevant to the Republican Primary in his “concession” speech? Shouldn’t he be in a commercial for thorazine or librium instead?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

      it’s a campaign speech for the future, Rand Paul

    • Anonymous

      If Paul supporters keep their momentum and turnout going, he and his delegates will not be an insignificant block in the convention.

      “The GOP Better Not Marginalize Ron Paul and His Supporters “

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

        Too late.

      • KenInMontana

        They have marginalized themselves for the most part, in all honesty. By threats, hyperbole and vitriol.

      • Anonymous

        There is no viable path for Ron paul to ever become the nominee.

        • Anonymous

          I did not say there was. He has delegates and will gain more. Those delegates will go to someone. In a brokered or otherwise split convention his delegates could potentially be the last round in the chamber against Romney.

          • Anonymous

            Ron Paul is making a mockery of the political process.

            • Anonymous

              How so? At least he is on the ballot in all 50 states. Newt isn’t even on the ballot in states including Virginia and Missouri. The GOP decided to award delegates proportionally, not Ron Paul.

              Like it or not, Ron Paul doubled his support in Iowa, and tripled his support in New Hampshire and South Carolina. He’ll be around in the summer.

            • Anonymous

              Romeny, the RNC, John Boehner, Mitch McConnell and the rest of the Republican establishment are making a mockery of the Constitution, Conservatism, the nomination process, limited government principles, and the rule of law.

              Your animosity would be far better directed there, as it they who will deliver fatal blow to the Republic, not Ron Paul.

      • Anonymous

        That is why Ron Paul is in this race delegates. He wants to have leverage going into the convention. He said it tonight.

  • Anonymous

    Now, folks, let’s gauge and monitor how much money from the sheep-in-wolves’-clothing [Romney] campaign will begin to experience real trickle-out effects after the people have spoken in SC, who are sure to voice a similar outcry in Florida, as well. You can run, but you certainly cannot hide from the facts of your point of view and expect suffering taxpayers to HOPE (there’s that damn “hope and change” term that makes me want to regurgitate in my mouth) that you are consistent enough to stand by basic fundamental principles that will be in the BEST INTEREST (and that includes Benjamins as well) of the average hard-working (and not HARDLY-working) American person. Folks, you know what is needed for our great country to get back on task, so get out there and make this thing happen before we begin driving around in electric cars on cobblestone streets, not by choice but rather by dictatorship, the Ameritopia way, of course. Good evening, have an excellent remainder of the weekend, and GO SAN FRANCISCO FORTY-NINERS!!!!!!

  • Anonymous

    Primary voters don’t love Newt – they fear Chuck Norris.

    • Anonymous

      And they laugh at Ron Paul

    • StNikao

      They sure don’t fear Chris Christie… as much as Norris.

  • http://twitter.com/politiJim PolitiJim

    How is this even a contest? Look at the HISTORICAL FACTS behind Gingrich, compared to SANTORUM and GINGRICH. Seriously – Someone Give Me A Factual Reason NOT to Vote for Newt | PolitiJim’s Rants for Reasonable People bit.ly/yMEc7V

    • Anonymous

      maybe this one and few dozen other big government grand ideas he championed?
      http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2012/01/in-gingrich-backed-censoring-the-web-111756.html

      I am greatly relieved that Newt won SC. Romney will choke of the Republic’s life saving breaths, with a great big grin on his face.

      If a to-the-core limited government conservative like Bachmann or Palin was in the race, there would be no reason to vote for him.

      Now however, the best reason to vote for him is the that the media, the Republican Establishment and our Democratic marxist coalition are all aligned against him. That is one helluva resume.
      .

  • Anonymous

    Santorum sounds like he is about to end his campaign.

    Or not.

    • Anonymous

      agree,
      looks rather desperate

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

        Not too soon I hope. When, not if, he drops out he will throw his support to Romney. I saw it at the last debate. He was radiating disdain for Newt.

        • Anonymous

          would he be that big an sob and hurt the conservatives?

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

            Not a doubt in my military mind.

  • Anonymous

    Watching Santorum’s speech. He looks really stung, but trying to sound inspiring and not deflated.

  • Guest

    His daughter looks like an attractive Rick, in drag.

  • Anonymous

    Given his voting record in the Senate, it is not possible for me to take Mr. Santorum seriously when he says he is most concerned with the government taking our freedom.

  • Anonymous

    does santorum look teary eyed?

  • Anonymous

    …Watching Santy’s speech and almost tearing with affection…

  • Anonymous

    Numbers show that Newt got 47% of older folks (65 and older). That bodes well for Florida. They do have lots of absentee ballots already mailed there, but so did South Carolina :-)

  • Anonymous

    looks like 3rd is pretty tight. not resounding

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    UNLEASH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE to
    REBUILD THE AMERICA WE LOVE!

    I like that slogan from Newt

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

      RELEASE THE KRAKEN!

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

        Lol

  • http://twitter.com/mddunyansr Michaelsr

    All i want to know is, Is this the best we have ? This is the Best of the Best?

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VVZODHFH7JZH7YGYOHGY6P7DY4 JR Dogman

      No. But they’ll have to do.

  • Anonymous

    The Newt supporters must be happy tonight. It looks like he will win in S.C. This could be a long primary. I had to say none of the above since the only candidate that I could respect and support was Governor Perry.

    Since none of these wins are winner take all for delegates the race is still wide open. If neither of the two candidates can get a majority, we could end up with a brokered convention.

    Newt will have the momentum going into to Florida but Romney is polling high in that state.

    There are rumours that another candidate may jump into the race. The GOP establishment is getting uneasy about the situation and fear neither of the top tier candidates will be able to defeat Obama. I have some concern about electability also.
    But, I am afraid we will just get another establishment Republican in the race.

    This primary has been disheartening and it will be tough to vote this year. I am focusing on the congressional races. I can only add, my frequent lament is that this Presidential primary, appears to be from my perspective, a missed opportunity.

    • Anonymous

      to hell with the establishment. They’re the problem

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

      This from Hot Air: “Team Mitt would have preferred to roll out the Jeb Bush endorsement closer to the Florida vote, but I guess they’re panicky about a “sinking Romney ship” narrative tomorrow. Three sources are telling CNN tonight that Jeb will in fact endorse Mitt sometime soon. Will that be enough, though, if Santorum drops out? Says PPP, “Florida Santorum voters prefer Newt over Mitt 58-32…his decision whether to stay in or not will have major implications”.”

      Yeah, that’s 58 to 32. Shocker.

      • StNikao

        Jeb has decided to stay neutral.

    • StNikao

      Newt called Rick Perry tonight and they talked about Rick’s concerns…the 10th amendment, etc.

      I think this is going to be a good race.

  • Anonymous

    “Veni, vidi, vici”
    Julius Caeser, Newt Gingrich

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

      We came, we saw, we did a little shopping.
      –Mitt Romney–

      • Anonymous

        HAH!!!!

  • Anonymous

    Love the Toby Keith music in the background at Newt’s HQ.

  • Anonymous

    Where is Newt?!

    • Anonymous

      Does Newt take it to Romney tonight?

  • StNikao

    Santorum’s ‘concession’ speech and interview were really impressive. I look for him to continue to improve his ‘game.’

    He may be more of a contender than anyone expected.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

      I wonder how much $$$ is in Santorum campaign bank, I think that’s the main factor for him moving forward.

      • Anonymous

        can’t believe it’s much. he can’t possibly do well in FL without some substantial money in the coffers. think he’s toast after next primary.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    “Mr. Speaker you just won the South Carolina primary what are you going to do now?” — “I’m going to DISNEY WORLD!”

  • Anonymous

    would someone shut up rove?

    • Anonymous

      Is that even possible? lol

    • Linky1

      Let Newt at him when he wins a few more primaries. Rove and his whiteboard will go skulking back to the elite’s corner to whimper and cry.

  • StNikao

    He got a Christian billionaire backer a few days ago. He’s a low-budget, in the trenches guy anyway. He spent lots of time and few $$$ in Iowa and got results.

    I’m encouraged with both Santorum and Newt doing so well.

    • Anonymous

      RS doesn’t have the time to do retail politics in FL as he did in IA. i see that as the big difference.

      • StNikao

        Probably so…I am in FL, but I don’t have cable (boycott) so I watch online and don’t get the ads. I’m getting calls from Romney, but not Newt, Santorum or Paul…yet.

        • Anonymous

          It sounds like Paul is moving on past Florida. He is focusing his efforts in Nevada pretty heavy right now. I don’t know what the others are doing. I do know people in California that are going to Nevada to help. It should be an interesting one, as Romney is supposed to dominate there.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

            is Ron Paul going to skip the Florida debates then?

            • StNikao

              They don’t have the participants listed yet.

              Rumors are out that Romney will skip the FL debates.

              • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

                that will hurt romney with undecided voters if skips the florida debate…

            • Anonymous

              I doubt that, but he won’t spend a bunch of money on ads and the like. Their resources are being focused on other states that they figure they will do better in. Apparently, Obama used the same strategy.

              • Anonymous

                RP got 3% in Florida in 2008. Florida lost half of their 99 delegates for moving their primary up against GOP rules.

                RP is focusing on Nevada (28 delegates, got 14% of vote in 2008), Maine (24 delegates, got 18% in 2008) and Minnesota (40 delegates, got 16% in 2008). RP has doubled and tripled his 2008 numbers in IA, NH and SC so far, so producing similar results in NV, ME and MN would be big.

                Super Tuesday is March 6 (and has 437 delegates up for grabs on a proportional basis).

                • Anonymous

                  Sounds smart to me. My sister is a democrat, just turned republican, lives in California, and is going to Nevada to campaign for Paul.

                  You wouldn’t hear about this type of thing in the past.

                  I will say that she isn’t liberal turned conservative, she is liberal turned Libertarian. I say, this is a good thing.

            • Anonymous

              Wolfie interviewed and he said he’s going to the debates.

          • Linky1

            Romney was supposed to dominate in SC. HE was supposed to dominate in Iowa. Fasten your seatbelts, people, it’s going to be a bumpy ride……

            • StNikao

              GOOD!

  • Anonymous

    Bye Santorum. Too bad you wasted peoples money and time. If you can’t get the vote from your own folks for a Senate seat then why the hell would you run for President? It’s like Gore when he ran. The guy couldn’t even win his own state. That says all I need to know about Santorum.

    • Anonymous

      I wonder how Texas and Massachusetts will vote?

  • Anonymous

    “Who’s your daddy”?
    -Newt Gingrich, SC 2012

  • David Boyes

    look OBAMA ….MA ma …. NO TELEPROMPTER !!!!!!!!!

  • poljunkie

    Newts speech is very gracious. He’s passing around the compliments.

    • Anonymous

      I’ve noticed that about him. He give credit where credit is due.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    LOL I like how Newt can slam Obama without even saying his name

  • Anonymous

    The man inspires!

  • Anonymous

    Quite a spanking administered tonight to Romney. He goes in a 20 point fav and loses by 23! Dang, but that hurts! lol. Kudo’s to Sarah Palin, Todd Palin and Chuck Norris for lending some weight.
    Three states and three different winners. Brokered convention in our future? Let’s see what happens in the couple of primaries.
    This cycle is finally getting interesting!
    Mrs. Palin? You keeping an eye on this? Can’t wait to see what your next ploy is! Who’s next?

    • StNikao

      The folks in SC are spanking the RINOs and the media as well.

      Folks in SC are angry – especially the middle income and Christians (the majority of SC)
      They are:
      – angry with Obama the overtly corrupt Crook in Chief and his pridefulness, appointments, actions, lavish vacations, etc.
      – angry with his usurpation of power, ignoring our great Constitution and the law.
      – angry with his foreign policy and buddying up with Islam
      – angry with his domestic policy
      – angry about the Keystone Pipeline
      – angry about OWS
      – angry about the unions
      – angry with the courts (the courts are causing much anger and pain for Christians in the US, while Obama’s Islamist buds are causing more pain for Christians world-wide)
      – angry with the Media trying to push them around and shove liberalism down their throats
      – angry with the RINOs, particularly those in DC who are not standing up to Obama
      – angry about gas prices, food prices, lay offs, joblessness, etc.

      • Anonymous

        Gosh, St. Nic, you didn’t give me one thing to argue with you about! lol !
        Listen, since you are St. Nic, can I ask you for a Sarah Palin Victory under my tree for next Christmas? Please? Promise I’ll be good, honest! Cross my heart!

        • StNikao

          Sorry – Nikao is Greek for ‘overcomer’… (what I’m desperately trying to do, be.)

          In other words, I ain’t Santy Clause.

          • Anonymous

            Drat!!!!

  • StNikao

    Drudge: GINGRICH SET FOR 3 SUNDAY SHOWS [SNUBS ABC]…

    Whaha!

  • Anonymous

    You know what is truly sickening…having to actually watch CNN to get a more unbaised look at Newt. Hume was a debbie downer, always making sure people knew that it would be terrifying for people to elect Newt because he has such high unfavorbility blah, blah, go home and cry yourself to sleep Hume, and come back without a crush on Romney.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

      I can’t watch the foxnews election coverage because of those talking heads, i don’t need their opinions.

      • Amy

        I went for my twitter feed and the local news at 10. I’ve pretty much had it with all tv media.

    • Anonymous

      the top four stories right now on ‘the Blaze’ is 1) Santorum’s speech, 2) Romney’s speech, 3) Paul’s speech, and 4) An article about Romney sending Newt an anniversary cake for his House reprimand. Real fair and balanced there.

      • StNikao

        DID Romney really do that? If so, that is one a$$y thing to do.

      • Anonymous

        Beck can’t stand Newt, but he has to at least give him his due.

    • Anonymous

      Some people are looking at this, which shows Newts loss to Obama numbers pretty high compared to Romney and Paul. Santorum is better as well.

      http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html

      • Linky1

        Look at where the polls were done – NY Times, Washington Post, ABC and think how biased they are.

        • Anonymous

          Yes, but they also include Rasmussen, Fox, PPP, Reuters, and others. Fox actually gives Obama the biggest upper hand, while CNN gives republicans better numbers.

          • StNikao

            The game is just beginning.

          • Linky1

            FOX NEWS??

            The all Romney station?

            The one with the new “Contributor” http://www.aim.org/aim-column/fox-news-hires-soros-funded-activist/ from the George Soros school of fair and balanced?

            Fox, CNN, ABC, Rasmussen-doesn’t matter which one you look at. They’re all skewed. Too much is decided by polls these days. Look to who is conducting the poll and what their biases are.

            Mittens is the “Thomas Dewey” of our times, the one that was predicted to win over Truman. We all know what happened there, right? Mittens has won in NH, that’s it, in spite of the predictions that he would sweep the caucuses and primaries.

            Same thing here in Canada when we had our election last spring. Every slimy, sleazy newspaper, magazine and TV pundit called the Liberals to win by a landslide. All the polls said so.They even saw a surge in our socialist party the NDP. They kind of forgot to tell Canadians that these pollsters are all connected to the liberal parties.

            They also forgot one important thing-we were sick and tired of the liberal elitist types that governed us. We didn’t behave like sheep and vote the “usual.” Instead, we ended up with a conservative majority that smacked the liberals into obscurity. The shock waves are still reverberating with the media talking heads.

            Polls? They’re only useful for dogs and we all know what dogs do to polls.

            • Anonymous

              I don’t watch a lot of Fox News. I have noticed that Napolitano has been pushing Paul pretty hard, while cutting down the others, though. You may very well be right about the polls. I have never really followed them until this election. Nor have I studied their bias’. The networks are definitely corporately controlled government cronies, so why would their polls reflect anything else?

              I like that last sentence.

              • Linky1

                Napolitano is an avowed Libertarian (hence the Paul support) and 9/11 truther. I stopped “liking” him on Facebook as his updates were turning into Ron Paul primers.

                I started looking closer at polls during our elections in Canada and when you actually see who pulls the strings, what the questions asked are, the sampling of people who were asked the questions-it’s all another spin tactic.

                That’s why I detest “exit polls”-my stock answer would be when asked who and why I voted for who I did would be “none of your damned business.” Looks at what they did wqth the exit polls in 2004-they had Kerry winning by a landslide-we all know what happened there……

                • Anonymous

                  My biggest complaint is the media circus debates. No educated intellectual would say that this was a good debate forum. I think that C-SPAN should do all the debates, give questions based on the most popular public interest questions, give equal time and lots of it, and cut the mic off when the time expires.

                • Linky1

                  Other than the FOX debates where the questions dealt with real issues, the network ones are gong shows, designed to produce “gotcha” moments.

                  That kind of backfired on John King as Newt handed him his testicles on a silver platter.

                  Newt has let the media know that they are in his crosshairs so I’m sure that they will be after him with a vengeance.

      • Anonymous

        I think that changes with this win. Newt won with both women and and the youth..both he was polling low before SC.

        • Anonymous

          All in all, American voters are pretty fickle. Independents are growing in numbers, and I think that they outnumber republicans and democrats. Americans move with the winds much of the time, and the winds are hard to predict sometimes. It is true that winning one state will give one candidate a boost, but it is sad because this means that people are not well informed and are not using logic and conviction to vote.

          • Anonymous

            Or they’re VERY well informed, are using logic and conviction to vote, which is why Newt won, instead of the only electable candidate who was destined to sweep the first four primaries. Ever consider that?

            • Anonymous

              Not really, because Americans elected Obama, and Clinton, and almost elected Kerry, and Gore. Half of the people going into caucus’ say that they are undecided at the last minute. One person winning, often gets them more support. Many get their information from their TVs, especially most of the older voters. The republicans put up McCain to go against Obama, and now it looks like the establishment is pushing Romney.

              No, I don’t have any faith in the convictions or logic of the American voters on the whole. We seem to like being suckers who perpetually believe their rhetoric, then turn to the next establishment liar, I mean politician, to fix things.

      • Anonymous

        Feb 1980: Reagan 32% – Carter 64%
        http://tinyurl.com/3h2jllk

        • Anonymous

          I hear ya.

    • Anonymous

      Calling the FCC to see if they can ram through a rule which makes the networks show at the bottom of the screen which candidate they support. Maybe with colors for how in the tank they are?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000364792093 Marlene Klein

    One of them is going down….

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000364792093 Marlene Klein

      The odds are pretty good.

  • Linky1

    Kudos to Newt for a decisive win. He has the gift of oratory sans teleprompter and speaks from the heart, a trait Romney lacks.

    As a Canadian, I loved that he gave a shout out to our Prime Minister for standing up to the Organizer-in-Chief over the Keystone deal.

    What will be wonderful to see is Newt debate Obama mano-a mano + teleprompter and see who comes out the winner there.

    • Anonymous

      I’m afraid the teleprompter may well be smoking a tad at the end.

      • Linky1

        NEver mind the teleprompter-Obama may be smoking by the end of the first debate.

    • Anonymous

      As a fellow Canadian I echo you on the mention of Harper. He hailed Harper the other day as a conservative doing big things here. I think both of them would do North America proud.

  • PFFV

    Wow! 12% margin over Romney, that’s huge! Go Newt Go! Things are looking brighter already, all smiles here :D

  • Anonymous

    Ron Paul did come in second, in one county.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7YZKRU6ALJJRZNT7FAR6UU6FGI Tim N

      What a victory for Ron Paul! haha Although, I shouldn’t mock him because he does have great ideas when it comes to the finances of our government.

  • StNikao

    I would love to see Michele Bachmann replace Boehner as speaker. I know she doesn’t have seniority, but she would FIGHT Obama tooth and toenail…she’s got more guts and integrity than Boehner by a long shot.

    • Anonymous

      I agree, I am at the point where I am pulling for ABB for Speaker he looks weak, he speaks weak, and he is Weak.

  • Anonymous

    Newt Gingrich is in the race to ensure Barack Obama gets a second term. Just like John McCain ensured Barack Obama got a first term.

    Hello?,… Losers!?

    Just wait ’til Obama starts turning up the ole charm and flashing his pearly whites; he’ll have old Newtie even cooing,… “Oh, Barack, stop.”

    • Dan

      just not that bright are ya…go back to the paulbott station and wait for your marching orders from your paulbott leader….some day you will get off the drugs and look in the mirror and say “were the hell did the last 20 years go”??????

  • Anonymous

    Things are looking up.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steven-Valdez/1806887704 Steven Valdez

    Wow look at all that red for Newt Gingrich in that map Scoop posted… MSNBC must really think SC is racist lol…

    • http://twitter.com/ozziecastillo Ozzie

      Serious question:

      Why aren’t Dems known as the “reds”?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Mike-Florey/100002838321254 Mike Florey

      Steven, I think the impressive thing is voters who stood in line in the rain to vote for Newt. What does that tell you?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=594162904 Cheryl Pryor

    How about Gingrich/West

  • Anonymous

    Newt… The MOST Unethical person ever in Washington and Thats on record. and I guess at home too

    • Anonymous

      I think the people who voted for him would say that there are more than just ‘one’.

      • Anonymous

        None that had to pay over $300,000 for it…. Did he release his Taxes the years he got 1.6 Million from Fannie Mae?

        • Anonymous

          Actually, the $1.6 million was over an 8+ year period and it was paid to his consulting company, not to him specifically. And it was Freddie Mac, anyway.

    • Anonymous

      Aww, go on, spit those sour grapes out, you can do it! :-D

  • Anonymous

    Does Mitt Romney, with his strategy and presentation, reminds you of Tim Hudak?

    • Linky1

      Mitt Romney reminds me of a well-gelled Ken doll.

  • Anonymous

    Does Mitt Romney, with his strategy and presentation, remind you of Tim Hudak?

    • Linky1

      HUH????? How can you compare Tim Hudak (leader of the Conservative party opposition in Ontario, Canada) to Mitt Romney?????????? Who on this board knows Tim or cares about the comparison?

      How do I know who Tim Hudak is? I’m a Canadian, originally from S. Ontario, and he represented me in the provincial legislature.

      Triple Face Palm at this one…….

      • Anonymous

        I was trying to post this in reply on someone’s posting in this board but somehow it got here instead.

        Tim Hudak is a conservative candidate who was polling quite in the poll and was expected to win against a very unpopular sitting liberal Premier. He ended up losing his lead and the election by campaigning as moderate instead of as conservative , just like what Romney is doing right now.

        • Linky1

          Why bring up Hudak here? Other than the few Canadians here, no one knows who he is. There are many more examples that Americans here can relate to.

          Bad example anyway, as aside from Hudak’s bland personality, the Ontario Conservatives haven’t had a decent candidate since Mike Harris was premier and Hudak was just the latest sacrificial leader thrown at the Liberals. But, I’m not here to discuss Ontario provincial politics, neither is anyone else.

          • Anonymous

            I was trying to point out that in this time of financial crisis, if they elect a conservative, they better elect someone who can communicate what conservative values mean and is willing to fight for them, not someone who will placate the moderates in hoping to get their votes. I am afraid that Mitt is using the same Hudak strategy, being careful not to upset the moderates by not embracing conservatism fully. Romney’s camp is underestimating the intelligence of the voters in their awareness on the severity of the financial crisis US is facing. By campaigning safely and moderately, he will only manage to frustrate the electorates further… a recipe for disaster.

            • Linky1

              And my point is, no one here, save for a few Canadians like myself, would know who you are talking about, hence the lack of response from anyone else but me, a Canadian.

  • Anonymous

    Do not underestimate the importance of Ron Paul in controlling the over reaching government. He may not become the nominee, but he sure has important role to play in making sure that the future government will limit its size, reach, and be made damn sure that those debts, deficits, and unfunded liabilities will get paid and reduced sizably. No President can do it on his own, whoever will be nominated and elected as President need reliable and knowledgeable people around him, think on that before you marginalize every needed people in the conservative ranks. Be appreciative of everybody’s contribution and sacrifices; volunteers, staff, the politicians, and their families for participating in this democratic process. That is the best way how to entice good and decent people to run for office, otherwise there will come a time (if it has not happened already – doubtful!) when only those who have bad intentions can afford to run.

  • Anonymous

    When taxation is more than onerous, that toiling for hours with little gain becomes pointless, single proprietors/small businesses are forced to apply as corporation to survive. Many do not necessarily have high income (subjective) as many perceived. Not all corporations are in the high step, many belong in the lower income and benefit threshold than that of government employees, when all expenses and taxes are put into consideration. Behind those corporations are real toiling people who worries and work for the survival of their companies. Not all corporations belong to the Apple, Google, GE, and etc. category, even that I do not begrudge them their success.

    Everybody should work hard in curtailing federal programs; it could dry the resources for those who need it most and will lead to total collapse of the system. I believe Dr. Paul is not alone with his awareness and concerns in this matter. This has been driven home to many around the world in lieu of many politicians’ profligacy which leads to global systemic malaise. Just one need to see what happens in Europe and bankruptcies in cities closer to home to drive this point.

    To this day, I can’t believe and am still shaking my head as to Barak Obama, his administration, the Democratic Party, and Media’s continued profligacy and blindness to this matter. Are they willful, irresponsible, stupid/idiotic, purposely undermining the US, or all of the above? And to those who still think to vote for him and his party, what the hel* are they thinking or are they even thinking all?

  • Anonymous

    When taxation is more than onerous, that toiling for hours with little gain becomes pointless, single proprietors/small businesses are forced to apply as corporation to survive. Many do not necessarily have high income (subjective) as many perceived. Not all corporations are in the high step, many belong in the lower income and benefit threshold than that of government employees, when all expenses and taxes are put into consideration. Behind those corporations are real toiling people who worries and work for the survival of their companies. Not all corporations belong to the Apple, Google, GE, and etc. category, even that I do not grudge their success.

    Everybody should work hard in curtailing federal programs; it could dry the resources for those who need it most and will lead to total collapse of the system. I believe Dr. Paul is not alone with his awareness and concerns in this matter. This has been driven home to many around the world in lieu of many politicians’ profligacy which leads to global systemic malaise. Just one need to see what happens in Europe and bankruptcies in cities closer to home to drive this point.
    To this day, I can’t believe and am still shaking my head as to Barak Obama, his administration, the Democratic Party, and Media’s continued profligacy and blindness to this matter. Are they willful, irresponsible, stupid/idiotic, purposely undermining the US, or all of the above? And to those who still think to vote for him and his party, what the hel* are they thinking or are they even thinking all?

  • Anonymous

    Thank you, John King, ABC, and Juan Williams.

    • Anonymous

      That’s ‘Hu-Wan’ Williams to us racists.

  • Anonymous

    Man oh man. Every where I go, there are some sad Ronulan Moonbats.

    Is it too much to hope that RP will drop out so that we don’t have to deal with these druggies EVER again!?

    Go Newt!

    • Anonymous

      Yes, it is. Paul is in it till the end, I’m afraid. He knows he’s not gonna win. Just making his statement. After the nominee is chosen, he will go to 3rd party.

      • Anonymous

        I think most of RP’s demographic is composed of Democrats any way. He’ll siphon votes away from O’Blamer IMO.

      • Amy

        I appreciate the conversation RP brings to the primaries. I’m also one of those rare one’s who likes the fact that a lot of RP’s base is young. These are, after all, the ones who will ultimately pay for the screw up going on now. If we can get them looking & talking about what principles should govern us, that’s a good thing.

        • Anonymous

          Good point. If we could syphon as many as possible from those ranks, it would be great. I’m afraid, however, that there is about 7-12% of the voting populous that will be lost to the cause. Hopefully, as many ex-leftie voters will go as there will be ex-rightie, in the general election.

    • Anonymous

      You have to admire the passion of the RonPaul supporters. But it was clear from his speech last night he is not running for president, he knows he can’t win, he is running for delegates to have a say at the convention.

      If the RP supporters truly want to help their man, then they need to get behind whoever the nominee is this fall so RP may have a chance to be part of the administration. We all know where he would do the most good.

  • Anonymous

    “Also, Santorum came in third and beat out Ron Paul. You don’t know how happy I am that Ron Paul finished last. Ecstatic, really.”

    Dittos! Everywhere I’ve gone to on the net today, there are moonbats with long faces.

  • http://www.facebook.com/david.masiwchuk David Scott Masiwchuk

    Let Ron Paul stay in.It gives the Cheetos eating living in their mommas basement stoners something to look at while we take this country back for the rest of the honest Americans.

  • imsteph

    believe the primary result was more of a rejection of the msm than it was really for newt.
    the American people are tired of the games the media plays and they were telling them to shove it.
    however-the liberals got what they wanted anyway–the republican party looking like they can’t get their ducks in a row and back one candidate….they would like to see this thing go down all the way to the convention with animosity, vitriol, and venom until the ‘last man standing’ is so abused, beaten, and the party fragmented that it would look obvious that the ‘boy who would be king’ would be re-elected.
    of course they already have their pollsters in place to make that happen one way or the other.
    isn’t it fun being pawns in someone else’s childish, evil, game?

  • Anonymous

    The media says this shellacking was because of Romney’s taxes! LOL