***UPDATED – Mark Levin almost ready to say Gingrich and Perry should drop out

***UPDATED***

Mark Levin said he was prepared to come on the show and call for Gingrich and Perry to step out of the race so that we can all get behind Santorum. However, because Gingrich backed off today from his populist attack on capitalism, Levin now says let’s wait and see what happens in South Carolina:



***

UPDATE: Levin added this a little later to clarify his actual problem with Newt and Perry’s attacks:

I thought about coming on this program and saying that Perry and Gingrich need to get out because their comments were not just an attack on Bain Capital, which I don’t really care about. It was an assault on the capitalist system – not on crony capitalism, not on something else, but on capitalism. And I just felt that was beyond the pale and I couldn’t stomach it any more, and that we’re going to have to get behind one conservative to defeat Romney and Ron Paul. That’s my attitude. But let’s see what happens in South Carolina now.

Comment Policy: Please read our 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.

279 thoughts on “***UPDATED – Mark Levin almost ready to say Gingrich and Perry should drop out

  1. I generally like Levin’s observations but he has gone full retard on this. Bain Capital is not capitalism! Capitalism is amoral and capitalist can, within a capitalist system, do things which are moral, immoral, or neutral. Under capitalism one can enrich themselves at the expense of others in an immoral or unethical manner. This can happen under any economic system and to equate an attack on the choices of a person or company acting within the capitalist system as an attack on capitalism is simply idiotic! Sorry, Mark but it’s true. If I condemn a pimp for pimping or a numbers runner for running numbers, I am not attacking capitalism. Newt’s criticism of Bain Capital should stand or fall on it’s merits and not this red herring of being an attack on capitalism.

  2. MR.LEVIN, I agree let’s wait until after S.C primaries first before they throw in the towel,after all Newt has thrown a lot of work in there and if doesn’t pay off there,well “forgatabout” it. Now on this whole “BAIN CAPITAL”thing, RUSH started the panicing about it as left wing tactics and an attack on Capitalism and such, I’m all for Capitalism but none of this will be remembered down the road,Newt hasn’t made any permanent detours from Conservatism here, it’s all just POLITICS! Heck ,next week he could be attacking Romney for not being a good CAPITALIST,politicians will use whatever works,it’s like Newt said to Romney last debate” Can we cut the sanctimonious crap”.

  3. Can’t believe someone like Levin would suggest throwing in the towel and letting RINO Romney walk away w the nomination after only 3 states. The first two don’t count-both liberal leaning and both open primaries. You think Democrats didn’t have a heyday there?

    Gingrich was not attacking capitalism! He doesn’t like corporate raiders scooping out profits workers helped the company earned, then laying them all off and chopping up their pension and severance packages. It may be legal but it’s unethical as hell. But then Levin, is just another radio jock with an opinion like everyone else. Just because he makes a bunch of money doesn’t make him smarter than the voters. Next.

  4. I agree with Mark on everything he said except supporting Rick Santorum. No way. He has no chance in the general because of his Right Wing Christian crap, and he has proven by his own words that he’s all for more regulation. This moron wants to regulate the internet in the guise of protecting children. He’s inarticulate to the point of being incoherent with his constant stuttering and stammering and uh’s and ah’s and has no ability to communicate his ideas in a compelling way. His speech Tuesday night sucked.

    Rick Santorum is the only candidate aside from Ron Paul who actually makes me angry. He’s just another Herman Cain that conservatives have latched onto without any deep thought at all apart from opposing Mitt Romney. Santorum would be a disaster in the general election. He is the epitome of why liberals hate conservatives and that sick story about bringing the dead baby home to show to his other little kids is just one example of what a horrible piece of work this guy is.

    1. “Right Wing Christian crap”…now we know what you are. I do not like him because he is a big government statist. But your statement about Christian crap is sad.

      1. Santorum is NOT a big government statist. That’s a lie from a Perry supporter.

        Santorum’s record overall is one of smaller government, lower taxes, fewer regulations.

        Santorum’s voting record and record on policy have all received high scores from virtually every major conservative think-tank.

        1. Sorry to disagree…but anyone who voted for “No Child Left Behind” and “Medicare Part D” and supported Arlen “I needed up a democrat” Specter over a true conservative Pat Toomey is not a movement conservative. He/Santorum was a big supporter of Pres. Baby Bush who spent more than republicans should.

          Again he is a Pro-Life (good) big government statist (bad)…and these are my words…you may have heard them elsewhere…but they are mine.

  5. Yep. As always, Levin nails it. He’s the ONLY one who has picked a candidate and stood by them, and I respect him for it. I respect him for his honesty to conservatives. He never ever minces words. I know I’m hearing the truth.

    1. The sad part about Levin is he correctly speaks about small constitutional government (which I like) then in the same breath says is he likes Santorum. Santorum is a BIG GOVERNMENT republican. Take a look at all the wild spending he supported in 2005…and Levin supports him????

      Mark is talking out of both sides of his mouth on this.

  6. These candidates have to concentrate on Obama’s failures and not criticize each other. They are making the republican party look bad. This is really getting out of hand and we will lose the republican party’s chances of winning the White House if they continue slamming each other. WHY DON’T THEY WAKE UP?!?!?!?!

        1. Paul has said he will defend America and will defeat the enemy QUICKLY. He said he will not get us involved in the 6, 8 and 10 year wars.

          I like that…you should also.

            1. Are you being a silly rabbit…Paul has said ObamaCare…if thats what you are refering to…is unconstitutional and he will work to repeal it. Mark my word…none of the other repubicans will repeal, they will roll over first. Bachmann would have tried…but she’s gone.

              And Paul has NEVER said he would fire all the troops…he has said he will look at defense spending and cut the fat. Don’t put words in his mouth.

  7. What a mess this has become. Is there just a straight shooter anywhere? Just one honest guy who’ll state his mind and then do whatever it takes to defeat Obama and put us back on course?

    They’re all either trying to defeat the other one or prove that they are the next water walking politician.

    It gets more disgusting all the time. Is there really that much money in being President? Don’t these guys together see what needs to be done?

  8. I’m 100% with Levin on this. Like I have been saying, all except Santorum and Bachmann, they are all socialists (a.k.a. the politically correct word for Communists).

    1. Santorum (and Bachmann) are far more socialist and fascist than Ron Paul. One only needs to look at their records to confirm this.

    2. Your kidding right…close examination of his voting record…he is a big government repubican…a statist. Voted to double Dept. of Education spending…I could go on but, it’s embarrassing.

  9. Mark, I think you had a bad night. There are 50 primaries. they are to be judged seperately and collectively. Like Yogi said, “it aint over, till it’s over”. We have had two primaries, it not time to stop anything. both were northern states. What about Texas, and California, both large delegate states? 4% is the decision point? Unless, I am crazy, this is still a majority Union. The most votes wins. Let us count them all, okay?

  10. Good grief. What is wrong with you guys? You are blowing a golden opportunity to boot Obama out after one disasterous term. Instead of rallying behind the one guy who can actually win the independent vote and even steal substantial Democratic votes away from Obama, you are desperately grasping for that “anyone but Romney” candidate. Well…he’s right in front of you.

    Let’s see…

    a guy who has never voted for an unbalanced budget,

    a guy who is proposing actual budget cuts instead of just decreases in the rate of increased spending like all the others,

    a guy who proposes to balance the federal budget in his first term,

    a guy who will veto every single piece of statist crap legislation that comes to his desk (remember, Harry Reid is in there until 2016!),

    a guy who makes every single decision based on the United States Constitution,

    a guy who embraces the foreign policies of George Washington and Robert Taft (Mr. Republican),

    a guy who knows free market economics better than all the other candidates combined,

    a guy who gets more donations from active duty military personnel than all the other candidates combined,

    a guy who attracts young voters as well as Obama,

    a guy who understands the Federal Reserve and the perils of unsound monetary policies,

    a guy who understands the importance of property rights, contract rights, and the rule of law,

    a guy who saw the financial bubbles and collapses of the last decade coming,

    a guy who saw the attacks of 9/11 coming,

    a guy who got more votes in New Hampshire yesterday than Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, and Rick Santorum combined…

    Let’s get Obama out of there. It’s time to make America strong again. It’s time to vote for liberty.

    1. a guy who thinks radical islam is our fault and would go away if we just left and didn’t bother them anymore.

      a guy who thinks Iran getting nukes so we can respect them would be a good thing.

      a guy who is viewed unacceptable by republicans and conservatives = impossible to win the nomination

      a guy who admitted he doesn’t think he will be president.

      Ron Paul or Bust? You’re gonna Bust on this bet.

      1. “Unacceptable to republicans and conservatives” just proves my point that neither really want small government after all.

        Remember…it is the republicans and conservatives that gave us Big Government Bob Dole, Baby Bush the big spender and John “a will make a deal with the demo’s” McShame.

        Now snap out of it:-)

  11. Mary Beth, I too, would give you 10 likes if I could.
    That was short, but sweet and exactly accurate.

    I want to say this clearly, and once. sorry it is long.

    NEWT has his baggage, and he knows it. BUT it is exagerated.
    I know it, we all know it, and get it.

    I have watched all of them for years, but NEWT enemies act like he is still in office spending TRILLIONS like OBAMA and stepping on people like some mobster.

    When he was in office,, he has a lot of accomplisments, and most people now (his enemies and MSM) act and lie like he never did anyhing but cause trouble.

    I admit, I watched him for years on FOX spout off about a lot of things, and never knew he was KING PROGRESSIVE as GLENN BECK and his turds spout EVERY DAY !!!!!

    NEWT is 10 times the man GB is, in my opinion, and I am an analyst of data.

    This is just too personal for me to see him attacked and attempting to destroy him, and spending 17 million to destroy a grandfather who has asked for GRACE? HE has been out of office for 12 years, and some people when they serve, make enemies. Hard to make 435 people happy, just ask John Bainer
    or who ever is speaker. THEY all want to be top dog and get bitter when they don’t get it and NEWT organized the takeover and got all the GLORY (man, that ticked some off).

    YOU ARE NOT KNOWN BY WHO YOUR ENEMY IS, you are known by who your friends are.

    JOHN BOLTON, Art Laffer, even Todd Palin (real man) and many more.

    Michele Bachman wanted to be speaker in her 2nd term, but was nor allowed (no seniority) so she decided to skip SENATOR run and run for PREZ. See waht I mean about the EGOs.
    Maybe she will go after being Senator now.

    Those 2 affairs, I don’t care. he repented, I was not there, and I have heard so many lies about that, I could scream !
    I don’t care he made money being a consultant to Govt. Good for him, he started some companies and had employees and made HISTORIC films, wrote 24 books.

    THERE is no ONE as smart as NEWT, he knows it and most OF US do to.
    Sorry if it hurts anyones feelings or disparages your candidate.
    The fact of his family (miliary father) world travel, natural smarts, History professor, long time Congressman and 4 year speaker with Clinton as PREZ.
    AND ideas, no one can come up with ideas and solutions as this man can.

    PEOPLE, this is very important, but all his ideas will not fly, some are too wacky, we know. BUT we have to have an IDEAS guy to rebuild and restore us NOW.
    NOT TOMORROW.

    Balanced budget, unemployment under 5%, Millions of jobs during Reagan and his watch as speaker.

    THERE is ono one with that record running, including OBAME (opposite).
    Romney is a VULTURE CAPITALIST, and we would have known it when OBAME threw his Billion at him. ALL going to come out, might as well be now while we can change course.

    Newt going after Mitt’s record, for 2-3 companies he raided. One he took out 118 million dollars, then threw everone out on the street. NOT AMERICAN, this is not OCCUPY stuff, this is real mean greedy stuff, not trying to help companies with capital or break them up so some can stand and survive. Ever see PRETTY WOMAN the movie? The lead learned that lesson of humanity, bought a big company, did not tear it apart, built something back up instead of tearing things down.

    I just don’t see Mitt standing toe to Toe with OBAME, do YOU?

    I think NEWT can take MITT then OBAME, and all of us want to see it, even if we have pay for view it?

    Maybe it takes a tough Level 1 PROGRESSIVE to take on a Level 9 PROGRESSIVE (lefty, socialist, semi-commie, whatever)

    Rick S probably can’t do it (gets tongue tied too easy), and Rick P would scare independents, cause he is not fooling around. He is pro military and if he takes over as commander, the world would tremble, like they did with Reagan, because they would not want to mess with him.

    John H and Polly are just too liberal for me, but it is OK to pull troops out of AFGHANISTAN when things get stable.

    Newt is big talker, big reformer, older and wiser and CAN work with everybody (he has already done it !).

    WE only have one chance here, and the one with the most money is not the answer.

    Once someone is in there, he has to have the RIGHT STUFF, and I just don’t see snyone out there, even on the sideline. I like PAUL RYAN as VP (PREZ some day after training, NOT ready now unfortuantely for USA), he is sharp cookie, but still young, but he knows the numbers as a conservative.

    Is NEWT too MEAN, I don’t know? But soon we will see him fight for his candidacy, then for us.

    Please consider him again, and forget all the lies you have heard, PROGRESSIVE or not. I mean he is not a PROGRESSIVE like Pelosi or Rachael MADCOW !!!!!!

    Let him progress to the presidency, and then hope he won’t become the MOSTER everone lies about to describe.

    If SC lets us down, then NEWT will drop out for RICK S or RICK P to give it a try.

  12. I like Mark and I listen to Rush and usually agree but sometimes I think they’re working too hard. It’s fine to bash the Dems but don’t get into the primary fight; let the candidates sort it out.

    1. What an absolute hoot! I’m glad to see that Newt and Rick Perry are sticking to this. I hope Rick Santorum wakes up and realizes the best thing he could do for the conservative movement right now would be to help kick Romney’s phony a** out of this primary race.

      No more phony establishment RINOs, like Romney!

      I know a lot of people followed the leftist media types into an obsession with televised debates, in the contemporary/bubble-gum style, and thus Rick Perry made an unfortunate first impression, but looking at his record, his straightforward committment to conservative values, and his character–Rick Perry would very likely be an excellent president.

        1. Nah, StNikao,

          if you pay attention closely. Santorum is really just in it, to try and win it…His Iowa strategy, and campaign targeting of the early states. It does not seem he is coordinating with anyone. No different than Gingrich, or Perry’s reasons to be in.

          Problem is he gave an honest answer on the Bain stuff itself and the issue of “firing people”

          It was a bit simplistic..but he wasn’t being a Romney tool.

          Santorum’s campaign has been too invested. His interviews, he isn’t just there to play spoiler.

          –Unlike MB (backed by a Romney pac )
          — And Herman Cain who wasn’t taking the campaign trail seriously…. until he shot up in polls after Palin said, “pass”

          — Ron Paul has been coordinating with Romney for the time being.

          If Romney were to win I doubt he’d pick Santorum as VP.

  13. Right Scoop, just saw a tweet saying Sarah Palin on Hannity was defending Perry for just speaking the truth. Could you get the clip and post it? TY!

    1. Would love to see it also. Looks like some of the REAL conservatives are coming up to the surface and getting their act together. No way Romney takes SC!!

      Romney is sellin but they ain’t buyin!

    2. If you’re right about Sarah, there will be all out war in the ranks. I just watched the movie about Mitt and if it is true it is beyond the pale because Romney makes Gordon Gecco look like Prince Charming.

          1. Just watched “King of Bain” and it can best be characterized as DEVASTATING. Clearly, this will lose him SC and a large number of states going forward.

            He can’t lie anymore about a businessman that has been creating jobs. He’s a financial engineer who levers and then wrecks companies.

    3. Here are the tweets….

      Palin giving Perry major credit on job creation and attacks on Romney on Hannity #PerryPosse. Sean looks pissed

      RT @TriciaNC1 RT @Visigoth5157: Hannity tried trashing @GovernorPerry to @SarahPalinUSA but she’d have none of it! #PerryPosse #Perry2012

      TY @SarahPalinUSA for defending @GovernorPerry – he is only speaking the truth. What’s with Hannity lately? #PerryPosse #RickPerry2012

      1. Lately, remember last time around he said we all had to come together with the S&L scandal senator from AZ to beat Obama??

  14. Mark’s right. If Flip is elected prez, he will rape the conservative base with everything he’s got. It’s going to be payback for the tea party not supporting him.

    Rominee’s going to give you David Souter Jr. for the court. Probably a ton of other librul judges.

    How much does anyone want to bet me that Flip’s going to raise taxes?

    Rominee and his consultants will work against every conservative running for office in statewide races.

    I guaran-frikin-tee, A Flip rominee presidency will make you wish for the days of GW.

    1. In Massachusetts, Romney’s judicial appointments were 75% liberal, and most were Democrats, including several activist judges for abortion rights and same-sex marriage.

      1. Yeah, but the spin on that one is:

        Governors in mass have no ability to pick judges directly. They are given a list to choose from, by the democrat legislature. Flip had his hands tied.

        But don’t worry though. Flip is a Tea-party consurvative now. He’s practically Jim demint with black hair. He’ll appoint Bork/alito/roberts/thomas type judges now. *wink wink*

        So, just sit back and relax.

        1. Simply not true. Another Romney lie.

          In fact, Governors in Massachusetts do have their own pick of judges. They are not given some list by the legislature. Read the following Boston Globe article from 7/25/2005 (archives). Here’s an excerpt:

          Romney Jurist Picks Not Tilted to the GOP

          “Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents — including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights, a Globe review of the nominations has found. Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats.”

          http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/07/25/romney_jurist_picks_not_tilted_to_gop/

          1. I’m not religious at all. But why is God (assuming he/she exists) punishing us. What the hell did we do wrong to deserve Rominee and Obama?

            I hate you God!

            1. BLOOD-GUILT IS WHY.

              Throughout Scripture we read that GOD takes the killing of human beings very seriously – especially the shedding of innocent blood. GOD is very fond of us unworthy people made in HIS image. Even more so, little children.

              The Western world has become as inhumane and blood-guilty as the most barbaric Sharia Islamists and Nazis. Go to a pro-life site and watch the abortion meeter…it’s chilling how fast we are exterminating our young. We value them less than a 40 inch LED TV or a new bass boat, trip to Vegas or a b–b job.

              Throughout Scripture when God’s people rebelled, He let the Babylonians or Assyria (ARABS) rise up as His rod of discipline.

              We have the Assyrians at our gates, within our gates, in our army and in the throne room.

              Only repentance will get us new leaders and deliver us from captivity…unless it’s already too late.

    2. You won’t have time to wish for Bush because you will be trying to figure out where to hide so you can survive.

  15. Interesting perspective, from RiehlWorldView.com:

    Romney is not simply a capitalist, what he is is a corporatist. And it’s that insulation that would allow him to bankrupt a steel mill, walk away from its pension obligations, pocketing millions and leaving taxpayers on the hook to bail it out. And that’s the bullsh*t he and much of the GOP is selling as capitalism today in defending Romney.

    (Source: “Conservatives Are Being Played, Perry And Gingrich Are Right”)

    I really like Governor Rick Perry’s statement on this with Hannity, along the lines that its no use papering this over, the people in those SC towns (among others) understand what happened to them when Bain/Romney bought their company, dropped them in the dirt, and walked away with millions. This isn’t going to go away–Romney’s going to have to explain it.

    1. Watch the movie everyone is talking about; I just did and it is brutal. Talk about a hit piece. If true may God forgive Mitt for the lives left behind.

      ps. I read the article this morning; really good explanation.

    2. Great. “Corporatist” is a term of the left. And where in the scale of things do we stop if we start disallowing the purchase and dismantling of companies? People buy companies just to get the patents and key technology personnel all the time. That’s what keeps some technology companies alive today.

      Further, if you prevent buyout ventures from overtly selling off the parts, it’ll just get buried in the usual Mergers and Acquisitions game, where it always used to be. Just ask Dec Computers and Compac Computers.

      This is an avenue that conservatives walk down at their peril.

    3. “It was a gamble. The old mill, renamed GS Technologies, needed expensive updating, and demand for its products was susceptible to cycles in the mining industry and commodities markets.

      Less than a decade later, the mill was padlocked and some 750 people lost their jobs. Workers were denied the severance pay and health insurance they’d been promised, and their pension benefits were cut by as much as US$400 a month.

      What’s more, a federal government insurance agency had to pony up $44-million to bail out the company’s underfunded pension plan. Nevertheless, Bain profited on the deal, receiving $12-million on its $8-million initial investment and at least $4.5-million in consulting fees.”

      The bolded part is the aspect of this deal that really burns my bacon.

      For those who’d like to read the rest of the story on this steel mill, here’s the link: http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/01/06/romney-company-profited-as-steel-mill-it-owned-closed-government-bailed-out-pension-plan/

      1. There should also be an ad that focuses on Romney’s anti-businesses policies as governor, especially his 20% increase in business taxes which came out to a $309 million dollar hike.

      2. Got those too, but the media didn’t care much about those. They set the topic of the day, and we sheepishly follow.

  16. There was a time when we feared communist as a country, because we saw what it did to people’s souls and spirits and countries, we saw how it imprisoned people in hopelessness. We saw the looks on the peoples faces who escaped the brutality of that Godless Tyranny…They told stories of shattered lives living only to die. Food lines, gas lines (if you could afford a car), no doctors to treat you, no medicine only Vodka to drown out the emptiness and misery of life with out hope and freedom…. But that was yesterday……..
    Today it looks like we are embracing the very Tyranny we in years gone by so hated .We now have a President expounding the Marxist ideology in all his speeches, listen to him…Class warfare…envoy…evil rich… individual achievement is evil

    Read the first paragraph to see were he is leading us…… RINO Republicans are taking us on the same road…only slower……

  17. Polly want a cracker?

    Levin: ABO! ABO! ABO! ABO! ABO! ABO! ABO! ABO! ABO! ABO! ABO! ABO!

    Establishment: They’ll get behind our guy Romney so we’ll force him whether they like or not because they’ll vote ABO.

    Levin: I don’t like the establishment forcing Romney. ABO! ABO! ABO! ABO!

    Sorry but Levin is a nincompoop of late.

    Please tell us again how its bad strategy for Obama to advertise our intentions to our adversaries in Afghanistan and Iraq when that’s all you do is advertise your intentions to your adversaries in the establishment with the ABO meme they actually use to justify forcing Romney.

    1. Well, he has gone juuuust a bit outside. It was a tactical error. Now he’s stuck with it, so he probably feels he has to double down on the “Orange Juice Can” nonsense. His instincts were mostly correct, but the tactic was totally wrong.

      Obviously the smart move would have been to tell the “establishment” that conservatives will not vote for a moderate/RINO under any circumstances, and let them puzzle out what would actually happen. Make them do the hard work of winning over conservatives. We could always choose to get behind the nominee later if we want.

      Your scenario is what actually happened, and it’s too bad.

      (Ya can’t win a price negotiation when you tell the salesman you will eventually pay full price, “if that’s what it takes.”)

  18. Just from reading all the comments here, I conclude that the Republican party is made up of a bunch of fickle people. Just watching a candidates poll numbers go up and down…

    1. The swings are very pronounced this season. It is because the right is desperate to defeat O. As soon as a candidate is perceived as a potential loser, many abandon ship and seek out a new “winner.” This has made the race volatile.

      1. It’s also a major fight between the “anything for the win” faction and the “we need an end to this nightmare” faction. That’s caused a lot of whipsawing on the right.

  19. Many have cautioned that Gingrich is his own worst enemy. He tends to shoot himself in the foot with his mouth. I was hoping for the best in spite of these concerns. But, alas, the concerns are true. Mark and Rush have been fair to Newt, but they both call it as they see it, and these arguments shouldn’t be tolerated. Perry, too, looks like a desperate man who will say anything to win.

  20. Gingrich stepped in it, for sure. Even so, I would never join the Ron Paul call to ask him to step down. There’s a lot of rumbling over Todd Palin’s “endorsement” of ol’ Newt, and some folks think a Newt/Sarah ticket could emerge from all of this nastiness.

    I could vote for that ticket. I’d prefer Santorum or Perry over Newt, but that ticket would kick hiney in several ways.

    I would crawl over broken glass to get Perry or Santorum as the nominee, but I just don’t see it happening. I’ll defend those guys to the end, too (even though I have my issues with both of them).

      1. You know, Sarah might be the energizing factor we need. But I’d hate to see her hamstrung the way McCain’s handlers did.

        1. K. I was just wondering if the conservatism counters the milquetoast of Romney, equalizing the scales of conservatism.

          1. VP couldn’t do it. We still have to survive the POTUS’s term. I like Newt less than Perry or Santorum, but I think we’d survive his term of office. IF he repeals obamacare.

    1. Yeah, I could see a Newt/Sarah ticket too,… as in fourth wife.

      I mean, why stop at only 3?

      How could America trust Newt alone in a room with any woman?

  21. Newt’s going after Mitt was about Mitt and his behavior and decisions, not capitalism.

    I’m tired of the demagoguery.

    1. Newt is attacking Mitt for creating jobs and earning 900% returns at Bain Capital. That is attacking Mitt for capitalism. He said that Mitt was making too much money and that capitalism hurts workers, a classic liberal/socialist argument.

      Newt could attack Romney over Obamacare or abortion, two things that aren’t capitalism, but he has chosen to attack Romney over capitalism–raising class envy against Mitt just cuz he and his company were successful.

      1. No that’s not what he was saying. But you know, I guess facts really don’t matter when you have a narrative to push, huh…

      2. I haven’t followed Newt that closely, could you provide some citations backing this?
        “He said that Mitt was making too much money and that capitalism hurts workers, a classic liberal/socialist argument.”

  22. Mark needs a straight jacket.

    He just said Santorum is the most conservative, and he is not big government. Mark, has George Santorum ever seen a spending bill he didn’t like? Have you reviewed his voting record closely Mark?

    1. ummm you’ll also note that he was a main author in the welfare reform act, pushed big BIG time for a balance budget amendment while in the senate, (and when it failed to pass he had a good part in forcing the RINO that voted the other way to step down) He’s the only one other than Ron that actually has a plan that would cut 5 trillion over five years.

      1. He also fought George Bush on cutting Amtrak funding by $1.4 billion, gave us Medicare Part D, voted for Department of Homeland Security (TSA is my favorite part of it.), voted to raise the spending limit 6 times (Didn’t we just hassle dems about this?), voted to raise the minimum wage, No Child Left Behind, Sarbanes-Oxley, and on and on.
        http://www.clubforgrowth.org/news/?subsec=7&id=1007&v=pr
        http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/santorum-statist-claiming-be-conservative/301396

        Voting Rick Santorum will give you 4 more years of compassionate conservatism. Was 8 years not enough?

          1. I don’t disagree. I am not voting for BHO or vetting him in a nomination process. We’re talking about Santorum.

            1. I’m talking Santorum or Romney.

              And every conservative alive has to go with Santorum, lest one believes “our liberal (Romney) is better than your liberal (Obama)” is the best approach in the general.

              I dislike liberals, hate pathological liars and especially hate deceivers… and Romney is all three.

              1. Why not Perry? His record actually backs up his rhetoric, unlike Santorum’s. I don’t get why conservatives insist on picking mediocre candidates. We have a good thing with Cain, but none of the so called “conservatives” gave him the support he needed to weather the storm. If not for that fiasco, we wouldn’t be sitting here picking our candidates at random. Santorum is a bottom feeder and will always remain a bottom feeder. His record IS big government, and he is conservative only when it comes to the social issues that EACH AND EVERY CANDIDATE SHARES, AND REPEATS, EVERY 4 YEARS WHEN THEY RUN FOR PRESIDENT OR SOME OTHER OFFICE. WTH, I want someone who can actually fight and make a change in thsi country. Not some fool politician who just wants to become President.

                Since Cain is gone, the only conservative left standing is Perry. The rest are either progressives or weaklings or moderates. At least, Perry also has a personality, unlike the other Ken-dolls.

        1. Voted NO on the Clinton tax hike in 1993
          Voted YES on the capital gains tax cut in 1997
          Voted NO on a cigarette tax hike in 1998
          Voted YES on repeal of the Alternative Minimum Tax in 1999
          Voted YES on the 2001 Bush tax cuts
          Voted YES to repeal the Death Tax in 2002
          Voted YES to the 2003 Bush tax cuts
          Voted YES to extend the Bush tax cuts in 2006

          American Conservative Union — 88%
          National Right to Life Committee — 100%
          Americans for Tax Reform — 95%
          National Tax Limitation Committee — 92%
          U.S. Chamber of Commerce — 88%
          League of Private Property Voters — 94%

          2005 Republican Liberty Caucus – Economic Liberties Score 90%
          2004 Republican Liberty Caucus – Positions 87%
          2003-2004 Campaign for Working Families – Positions 100%
          2003-2004 Concerned Women for America – Positions 100%
          2005 American Conservative Union – Positions 92%
          2003 Concerned Women for America – Positions 100%
          2003 Eagle Forum – Positions 87%
          2003 National Journal – Conservative on Economic Policy Score 82%
          2003 American Conservative Union – Positions 90%

          Santorum is a solid mainstream conservative on fiscal and social issues who definitely leans towards smaller government and less spending. He consistently voted to reduce taxes and regulations, opposed Tarp, opposed Fannie/Freddy bailout, opposed RomneyCare/ObamaCare.

        2. Like I said, virtually every conservative think-tank rates Santorum’s actual voting and public policy record very highly overall 80-100%.

          It’s Santorum or Romney. Between the two, only Santorum is a true conservative.

          Please profess your love for Mitt so I can nail you with his radical Leftist track record on social AND fiscal policy in Massachusetts.

        1. That’s a lie.

          Santorum’s voting record on conservative fiscal policy is rated very highly by most every major conservative think-tank.

            1. He is still bragging about it. Gotta make you wonder when a “conservative” defends earmarks. Oink, oink!

          1. Could you be more specific than “That’s a lie?”

            All of the points reference the actual senate.gov site and the role call. Is the senate.gov incorrect?

            1. I posted Santorum’s excellent overall ratings by the conservative think-tanks, but my post got deleted.

              He is rated very highly overall by most every conservative group that rates candidate performance on conservative ideological adherence.

              1. Show me records, not ratings. I bet I kind find some of those same organizations giving McCain high marks in 2008.

        1. … according to a few Perry and Romney supporters.

          No credibility there.

          Overall, the facts don’t support their claims, but support Santorum as a small government fiscal and social conservative.

          Remember, all of the conservative think-tanks support smaller government and conservative fiscal policies that involve reductions in spending, taxes and regulations.

    1. Romney is a liberal progressive.

      Santorum is a conservative

      If you want to know what Santorum offers, go to his website and look at the issues section. Brilliant ideas there.

    2. Willard the RINO and his friend McCain were for tarp and Santorum voted against it.
      Willard left MA with many problems. MA rated 47th out of 50 states. Let us not forget he gave the state romneycare which was the model for Obamacare it was one of his staff who helped with Obamacare. Willard will be more of the same if elected. If he does win the primary he will lose to BHO, it will be repeat of 2008.

      1. Santorum opposed TARP.
        Santorum opposed the Obama stimulus.
        Santorum opposed the Fannie/Freddy bailout.
        Santorum opposed the auto industry bailout.

        When it mattered, Romney supported all of them… including the Obama stimulas…. then later flipped and flopped when he discovered “Uh oh” most Republicans don’t like those things.

        1. Easy to oppose so many things when you’re not in office. All of those issues came up after he was voted out of the senate. Just review Santorum’s actual voting record. Doesn’t match what he advertises.

  23. Does Levin realize that Newt’s Super PAC is running “King of Bain” ads against Romney in SC tomorrow? Does this smack of trying to have your cake and eat it too? Or is this normal procedure in the duplicitous lives of all politicians. Just asking?

    Disclaimer : I do not support Romney in any form,shape or fashion.

  24. at the end , Beck tell the true when he says Gingrich is a progressive , and the cowboy now work for Romney .

    1. Newt is not a progressive. He had a 98% conservative rating.

      Bachmann praised him as a conservative in this video:

      1. Yes please resort to name-calling. It really tells us about your character. I don’t hold unwavering support of Ron Paul. But, it is easier for me to get past his foreign policy than the socialist/liberal/fascist core idealogies of the remaining candidates. We need major healing in this nation and “your” candidate would definately not bring it, think of it as Bush 3.0.

  25. Wait… Mark is singing the same tune Rush singing the same tune as Hannity. No way!

    Poor Mark. He believes unethical business decisions are like believing in the tooth fairy.

    Let’s go back to examining Newt’s marriages. That’s fair game.

    Funny, Mark mentions Santorum is his guy and then goes on to mention two items where his guy, George Santorum, takes the opposite position: flat, fair tax and government non-intervention of the Internet.

    I think that crazy bug is going around. Seems to be affecting conservatives these days.

  26. The delegates are alloted proportionately this year, so that no state can declare the winner. I think this is better than it used to be. Now we have to wait until at least mid or late April for the GOP nominee.
    Last time Mitt ended it the day after super Tuesday. I hold grudges and am still PO’d at Charlie Crist for endorsing McCain the weekend before it, and then Colin Powell endorsing Obama!
    Let us decide our nominee, and ignore the GOP establishment.
    Mark is right about not trusting Romney.

    1. Mark is right about not trusting Romney is quite the understatement.

      Here are some of Romney’s actions (and a few of his words) in the recent post-911 era in Massachusetts:

      1. Pro-abortion with taxpayer funding (included in 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 before it was legal to so so, then called opponents of his actions “right-wing”).

      5. Pro-transgender lifestyle education to children in public schools (promoted by Governor Romney’s administration, read Amy Contrada’s 660 page book: “Mitt Romney’s Deception” which covers Mr. Romney’s support for gay marriage and his transgender lifestyle advocacy).

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

      14. Romney 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, even to the Left of Obama.

      What Mr. Romney wants….. is power.

      1. I heard parts of Romney’s speech last night. He spoke proudly of capitalism. Therefore, he has the bona fides to stay in the race and stand for conservatism!

        Romney/McCain 2012!

        1. Romney is a liberal and a pathological liar.

          Nothing he says lines up with his far Left track record.

          Romney is saying what he knows he must say in order to secure the nomination.

          He’s an actor and an extremely dangerous one at that.

        2. Yeah!! Let’s choose TWO losers!! I can almost hear the convention delegates raising the roof with this cheer:

          “We’ve got Losers,
          Yes, we do!
          We’ve got Losers,
          How about YOU!”

      2. Even the establishment National Review had this insightful article recently:

        In fact, Romney increased taxes by $309 million, mainly on corporations. These tax hikes, described by Romney apologists as “loophole closures,” totaled $128 million in 2003, $95.5 million in 2004, and $85 million in 2005. That final year, Romney proposed $170 million in higher business taxes, the Boston Globe reports. However, the Bay State’s liberal, Democratic legislature balked and approved only the less onerous $85 million increase.

        “Tax rates on many corporations almost doubled because of legislation supported by Romney,” Peter Nicholas, chairman of Boston Science Corporation, explained in the Jan. 6, 2008, Boston Herald. “His portrayal of himself as a reliable tax cutter,” Nicholas added, “is undercut by the facts.” Also, Romney raised the tax — from 5.3 to 9.8 percent — on subchapter S corporations owned by business trusts. Nicholas called this 85 percent tax hike “an important disincentive to investment, growth, and job creation.” Joseph Crosby of the Council on State Taxation observed, “Romney went further than any other governor in trying to wring money out of corporations.”

        Romney also imposed an additional $432 million in fees for state services by creating new fees or increasing existing ones. He was not dragooned into this by greedy Democratic lawmakers; Romney himself proposed these items.

        In 2003 alone, Romney concocted or boosted 88 such fees. He charged more money for marriage licenses (from $6 to $12), gun registrations (from $25 to $75), gasoline deliveries ($60 million), real-estate transfers ($175 million), and lots more.

        Particularly obnoxious was Romney’s $10 fee per Certificate of Blindness. Romney also billed blind people $15 each for discount-travel ID cards.

        http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/287415/romney-s-tax-hikes-deroy-murdock

      3. I know he’s not conservative. I live in MA and was embarrassed when we became the first state to legalize gay marriage. I know that he increased fees, but they do not cound as taxes, but they do.
        Mitt did one thing on his way out because he could, he has state troopers work with ICE but that was in his last month of being governor, it does not count.

  27. …there is still lots of time left for SARAH PALIN to step up to the plate and hit it out of DA PARK . All we need now is for RUSH,LEVIN,HANNITY and BECK to throw out the first pitch and ENDORSE SARAH PALIN and RICK SANTORUM for V.P.”

    1. I saw your Palin remark yesterday, too. With every passing day, she casts a longer shadow over our anemic bunch of GOP hopefuls.

    2. Palin isn’t getting into the race. Stop with the fantasies! Not gonna happen! More likely she’ll be somebody’s token conservative VP choice. Bolton turned his back on us. Coulter went nuts. Why not Palin?

  28. So, Newt says something, (which I didn’t agree with) and backs off “mea culpa” when he gets smacked down by the Conservative media. I didn’t know Levin and Limbaugh had taken over as his campaign managers. Interesting…..

    1. He should be as he’s the spoiler. Paul represents the dope smoking antiwar libertarian wing of the party. Unfortunately, there are way too many of these young misguided people.

      BTW Ron, should we let the Iranians complete their development of their nuclear bomb at he TVA? They aren’t really our enemies are they?

      I live near Bragg in NC and can tell you that active and retired military are sick to their stomachs.

      1. All the military guys I know despise Paul’s foreign policy (except for one Vietnam vet I know who loves Obama, so he “approves” of Paul, to an extent). Yet the Ronulans keep claiming massive support for Paul among the active duty military.

        (It’s based on a distortion about political contributions. Most of the milbloggers I’ve seen think he’s nuts.)

    2. Did you ever wonder why at these debates Paul went after the other candidates but he
      NEVER took on Willard! Mark said that a lot of the people who voted for Paul are votes against Willard. Willard would like nothing more to have Paul as the last 1 standing out of rest of the candidates. The fact that Paul never laid a glove on Willard makes me wonder if they are working together!!

  29. i think mark, rush, sean, et al are wrong on this subject. there is something perverse going on here. i don’t like it. i am not buying anymore tea from rush for a while, may cancel my decades old website of rush. don’t like sean anyway. like mark, but may not buy his new book. they have wee-weed all over themselves about this bain stuff.

    reality: bain is a vulture capitalist company. check it out.

    1. That wasn’t Rush’s point and you know it. You don’t attack another conservative on conservative principles! NEVER!

      1. Examining a conservative’s private sector experience is not attacking conservative principles.

        Geez. We’ve moved from attacking capitalism to attacking conservatism. What next? Anti-Semitism?

        1. Going out of your way to act like the left and demonize a man for business practices you don’t like is not a conservative action. A small number of social conservatives have no problem using statist tactics to enforce their personal views of morality. Those folks have to be watched, just like we have to watch the progressives.

          Individual Liberty and Capitalism come with some negatives. It’s the price you pay for that Liberty. Even so, it’s far superior to the totalitarian urges the statists have to control everyone.

          1. He is questioning whether those were the right business decisions. Do they reflect the pro-growth attitude we want from a president? Or, do they reflect the decisions of an impulsive opportunistic who will put principle behind profit? Doesn’t that behavior pattern appear to be what motivates weathervane Romney? This is a check on character, not capitalism.

            I’ve asked this on other threads, and now I ask you.

            Anyone else find it ironic that the governor of the state with the best economy and one of the most business friendly environments is being accused of being anti-capitalistic?

            1. That argument is the same argument people use to ask lawyers why they would ever defend “bad” people. Bain was in business to do a particular thing that made money legally. Does that mean every employee was evil? Are all bank foreclosures evil? Howbout when you have to get a collection agency on some poor, single mother’s case, or place a lien on some struggling young plumber for not finishing the job properly? There are tons of legal, regular, and widespread business practices that are demonized constantly by the left, but are simply part of doing business.

              If Conservatives are going to go down that road, then Conservatives are doomed.

              1. Legality is not the issue.

                Do unethical business practices exist anywhere?

                To borrower Santorum speak… “Just because you have a right doesn’t make it right.”

                1. The problem is, who gets to decide? If I’m a builder and I can’t put liens on subcontractors, then I’m screwed. If I’m a mortgage loan company and can’t bundle loans for sale as “junk” then I can’t make as many loans. If I’m a Hollywood producer making anti-Reagan documentaries full of lies, will I be run out of business? Where does it end?

                  The more sharklike operators have a function in the economy. They eliminate the weak. It’s sad to see the weak taken down, but it’s worse to watch the weak suck up resources and capital that would be better spent elsewhere.

                  I’m not saying this is nice, friendly, or even “good.” It’s just part of reality, and messing with it will have major, unintended consequences (like, say eliminating all mosquitoes would).

                  It’s not a conservative value–as I understand it–to demonize people for financial operations. If it does become part of the “platform,” especially the demonizing of “greedy bankers” and Wall Street Fatcats, then I’m done caucusing with them.

                2. You present many scenarios, but they don’t answer the question. Is there such a thing as unethical business practices? Is there ever an occasion where you look at a business deal and say “Man, that was sleezy. That’s just not right?”

                  Or, is all business good business so long as it’s legal?

                  BTW, Newt was just on Greta and gave a very good rationale behind his line of attack if you happen to catch on an RS replay.

                3. Of course they answer that question, which is obvious. You don’t think all liens are ethical, right? You don’t think all deals leading to collection agencies coming after unwed mothers are strictly aboveboard, I assume. You are undoubtedly aware that the job of “sales” includes many practices you would never use against loved ones. So why would that question need to be asked at all?

                  This question of “good business” smells awfully close to the notion of “the common good.” I want no part of it, because I know exactly where that leads.

                4. You really need to rethink this. Seriously. You are already making your own implicit exceptions regarding the limits of capitalism. And your argument is not a principled one. Of course there are limits because, although capitalism is the best economic system the world has ever known, it is not perfect.

                  Business decisions have consequences. If a company decides to lower its quality-level to take advantage of short-term income effects at the expense of damaged reputation, it can certainly do so.

                  Bain made many decisions that would result in large short-term dividends. Now they are experiencing the long-term expenses of those decisions. Bain and its current and former executives may have made a trade-off with their reputations. Those in the anti-capitalism business are trying to make profits for their businesses by exposing the past decisions of Bain. They gain if the market demands their product. Apparently it does. Bain & Co. may lose some reputation as a result, but they can invest in defending their reputation, etc., if they want to. It’s business.

                  You just don’t like the anti-capitalism advertising business. That is very anti-capitalist of you. It’s just business, right? The market will decide.

                  To say that Romney’s business decisions are off-limits for consideration is an attempt to control the market. If people care about the decisions he made as a signal of his value as president, then there is a market for that information. We like free markets right? Why do you want to thwart that market activity then?

                  You really need to rethink this. Seriously.

                5. I’m sure as heck not going to distort it like you just did. You missed my caveats, obviously, and filled in your own assumptions.

                  Yes, business decisions have consequences. So does government interference. And I call BS on your other assumption about saying Romney’s business decisions are off-limits. You need to re-read what I wrote and not arguing words of your own invention if you want me to “re-think” something.

                  I could care less about “criticism.” I’m warning that this is an avenue that heads sharply left. The more you head down it, the closer to Obama and totalitarian thinking you get.

                  This is exactly how classical Liberalism got co-opted in the 1800’s. It starts out with people thinking about rents, and ends up with rent control. I suggest reading some John Stuart Mill to see how this transpired.

                  Anyone wanting to jump on that bus to leftist land is welcome, but don’t say you weren’t warned.

                6. Folks need to understand this isn’t about Newt or Romney. I’ve seen a lot of anti-Romney posts and comments from all around the right-side blogosphere with cheers for this tactic of Newt’s. It might work to put Newt ahead in South Carolina (for example, The InsiderAdvantage poll of South Carolina likely Republican primary voters shows Newt Gingrich surging, coming within a statistical tie of Mitt Romney.)

                  So if it takes down Romney, I’m willing to accept the outcome.

                  But seriously, the comments I’ve seen by many on the right are totally counter to the philosophy that the founders employed in coming up with the American system. They expressly did not want government getting in the way of the actions of men unless there was absolutely no other recourse to those harmed, AND the victim in question didn’t put themselves into trouble by engaging in risky activity. They wanted no attempt by government to prop up weak businesses or punish businessmen for taking advantage of market weaknesses. They knew from history that this sort of intervention was far worse than the problems it purported to fix.

    2. Look, it’s legal to sell pr0n in most states. If the Governor of that state upholds the law, does that mean he supports pr0n?

      No.

      Capitalism includes actions you will not like, will not think are moral, and will not support. But they are legal, and considered to be legitimate business by every state in which it’s allowed. You don’t slam “capitalism” for that. You try to get some laws protecting people harmed by it.

      I want a President who will stop all this stupid demonizing of Wall Street, and get back to removing the obstacles to prosperity. I sure as hell won’t vote for somebody who plans to start a campaign to “reign in the evil corporatists and bankers.” We already have one nutball wanting to do that, and a bunch of former Dems voted for him in the NH primary. They can have him.

      1. I haven’t followed Newt entirely, so could you please provide some quotes where Perry demonized Wall St or slammed capitalism?

        The closest he has come is stating there is a line of corruption between Wall St and Washington DC. Is that not true? Keynesian corruption is real. Solyndra.

  30. I have been a staunch Rick Perry supporter for a very long time, his 1% in N.H. cemented my support for Rick Santorum. I hope Newt and Rick Perry will consider throwing their support to Rick Santorum. This was not an easy decision and I am sure Rush, and Mark Levin (being public figures) do not make these statements without a lot of self- reflection.

    1. 1% isn’t bad for a guy who didn’t even run in the state.

      Rush & Levin have been off their rocker lately. I think the crazy conservative virus is going around. Dr. Sarah Palin set them straight. (See Sarah’s interview with Hannity.)

  31. Santorum is not electable nationally and everybody knows it. Its over.

    Romney will be the nominee, and Romney will lose to obama narrowly.

    There you go GOP establishment! YAAY! You’re still losers!

    1. BS…. Santorum is as much electable as anyone else. He is a solid conservative that will attract lots of evangelical votes and Catholic votes. Of course, he gets all the anti-Obama votes and there will be lots of those this time around. The only thing that worries me are Libertarians/Ron Paul fanatics being idiots and throwing votes away.

      1. You can try and force it all you want. There are people who have “it” and those who do not. Rick does not. I think he IS a GREAT Conservative, but that’s not the same as being a GREAT ELECTABLE Conservative.

        1. Yeah we know because look at 1980, the GOP rejected the non-electable conservative the establishment knew would lose to the original Obama.

          /sarcasm

        2. The only person who can unite the party, fire up the base, beat BHO and has the”IT” factor is not in this race!!!

        3. Please define “electable.” I don’t mean that sarcastically. What makes a person electable to be POTUS? Moderate views that Dems, GOP and “truuuuue conservatives” can all accept? A willingness to focus strictly on the economy and not on “religious” issues? Name/photo recognition? Executive experience?

          It seems that what the citizens of America wanted in 2008 was something new and different. That brought us ZerObama. Now we want something else; I’m just not sure that you could get 200 random conservatives to agree on a platform or any one candidate. I fear that “Anybody but Obama” is not enough to keep us from 4 more years of President ZerObama.

      2. Santorum is a blue-collar guy from a working class family of immigrants. He can relate to the average American.

        Santorum’s Christian/Catholicism will resonate with the nation’s huge Hispanic population, many of whom are fed up with Obama but wouldn’t vote for an out-of-touch elitist like Romney.

        1. I hope you’re right. We need to overcome the group identity politics that the dems use to bamboozle these demographics.

          1. I don’t think he ever says he’s a blue-collar working man. He says he can relate because he’s from the coal and steel areas of Pennsylvania and his father was a blue-collar worker. So he can relate. Nobody thinks he is living on blue-collar wages though. He obviously has money he was a senator.

        2. Catholics are quite liberal. This is thanks to poor Catholic education in the churches and priests (though men like Michael Voris and some good Bishops are working to turn the tide on this). Conservative Catholics aren’t as big a portion as you would believe.

          1. Sadly, so true, so true. From what I read, Catholics overwhelmingly support Romney. Barf, barf. They also voted Obama into office. OBAMA, the IL senator who voted against the Born Alive legislation! Sigh.

      3. Here is one Catholic that wouldn’t vote for him in the primary, and I am a tradi-Catholic like him!

          1. You’re not alone. A friend of mine, a nun from PA, really likes him because of his strong social stands. She does not know about his run away spending and support of government growth. I briefly told her that all the non-Romneys score high on the pro-life issue and other social issues, so that’s not really an issue. It’s all a learning process I guess.

      4. Solid conservative? Are you joking? Santorum is more boring than watching paint dry. My eyes bleed watching the guy. He offers nothing in his platform that we haven’t heard a billion times before; nothing is new! Nothing is “bold”! He’s a tepid conservative and a mediocre choice.

    2. Just remember there is a big difference between this election and 2008. Obama has a record. There are a lot of people that took this clown Obama at his word. A lot of lunatics will still vote Obama, but many more IMO will see how destructive Obama is and say NO MORE! The point is things are not getting better for anyone. The latest Unemployment numbers are BS and most people know it!

      1. That’s true, but who will be our messenger?

        The most pathetic thing is that the GOP is in the right, but keeps putting the biggest stuttering degenerates in command and is poised to nominate a candidate the base is sure not to like, nor get excited about, nor vote for with ferocity. Genius, huh?

    3. I hate to admit it but I think you are right. I do not think Mitt can beat the Obama machine but he has been playing very dirty politics with our guys he viewed as a threat. I personally do not trust Mitt to try to repeal Obamacare because he is the father of Romneycare.

      1. Hey, I HATE TO ADMIT IT! I appreciate your honesty. As for me I don’t want people walking around making fools of themselves and making cash money bets on a horse that won’t win.

        I always encourage people to look at the electoral map. Being fair to Romney, its a losing numbers game (of course unless there is some colossal event).

        Romney is the douchyist of douches. He thinks he’s being clever, but what do you think obama is going to do? He will will dissect him and give him a colonoscopy with his record.

        I wonder if the GOP establishment will ever change?

        1. I was so PO’d at the GOP establishment that I quit being a member. I am unenrolled here in MA and will not give the GOP a dime. They recycle candidates. McCain was too old and had no life in him last time and I think it’s time for him to retire now, he sounds half dead.
          We have to purge the GOP establishment and start with new faces like Rubio, he’s great. I gave him one $25 donation in 2010 and he sent the best Christmas this year. It had his children and he and his wife too. It said the most important thing is “Love”. I am going to keep it. I don’t have it now, I am saying this from my memory of it. Rubio, Ryan and others like them are the GOP future.
          McCain, McConnell, and they rest of the RINOs have to go.

          1. Agreed. The firewall for another obama term is a SOLID Congress to check his line-stepping. Then run Rubio in 2016. He’ll definitely be a two-termer.

            1. One of the best and logical posts I’ve read in 24 hours. Run the RINO’s out of town on a rail and get a Senate that will NOT compromise. As for the GOP in the House, they had better check themselves after watching a number of them endorsing Romney. In SC DeMint and Haley make me absolutely sick.

              Agree..Senate and House first. Romney is another hopeless RINO that cannot win.

              1. You’re so wrong!! Romney can win, with your attitude go vote for BHO!! We’ll be much better off!!

                1. A vote for Romney is a waste as you’re only getting Obama Lite. Keep drinking the establisment Kool Aid.

              2. Start calling people like Mark Levin then and ask him why its bad strategy for Obama to be advertising US intentions(pull out dates etc..) to our adversaries in Iraq/Afghanstan but not bad strategy to advertise to our adversaries within the GOP establishment with the ABO meme the establishment is using to force Romney because everyone will fall in line and vote ABO. I’d love to hear his explanation.

              3. Seems they are all rascals, so throw them out. Get a bunch of new people. (like Obama), with no track record, put them in, hope for the best? I don’t think so.

            2. If we can make it four more years with Obama! Why aren’t the Rs stopping him now? That really burns me too.

          2. I agree with alot you say. We need tp support Romney, he’s no Juan Mccain thank god! Romeny will either get Rubio or Ryan, maybe Santorum. WE MUST DEFEAT BHO!!

              1. Yep. Romney *lost* to Mr. John “Obama would make a fine President, so why don’t I just concede now” McCain.

                1. Yep. This is one area where I even worried about Sarah Palin’s stance on it. She mentioned greedy Wall Streeters a few times and I went, “whoa, what?”

                2. Wasn’t it the greedy Wall Street gang trading mortgages and playing funny games that they had to bail out with taxpayer money?

                3. They were required to accept bad loans, thanks to Frank and Dodd, and their overreaching regulations. Once the door was open, it was a “grab what you can get, because this thing CAN’T last, and someone will be left holding a very nasty, and bankrupting bag.” Which was exactly what many Conservatives were pointing out all along, and were proved correct.

                  Once government corrupts the process, calling the players in the process “greedy” is like complaining about the use of new rope when you’re being hanged.

                4. Nope, there are ‘Greedy’ wall streeters, just like they are ‘greedy’ Libertarians. Got to thin the herd. Try to figure out the best man for POTUS, then listen listen listen. No one forced money into my hands, but they tried.

                5. Of course they exist. Just like welfare cheats exist. But, we can’t get control of the White House by claiming we’re gonna end all welfare cheats, either. Even if it’s a good idea, it just doesn’t play well.

                  Same with this anti-Bain stuff. The only people it lights up are the leftists. Only Ron Paul draws in votes from the left.

        2. Re “I wonder if the GOP establishment will ever change?”

          I doubt it. I think the reason why Gov. Palin stayed out of the race is that she knew the GOP establishment would do everything they could to destroy her in the primaries, and in the process divide the base to the point where they might destroy the party itself. Because that’s how dumb they are. She’s charismatic beyond belief, she’s a genuine populist and her record as a good-government conservative is impeccable: she’s been an unqualified success in every position she’s ever held, and the media have turned over every stone to find dirt on her and come up empty. (Can you name one politican who you honestly believe could have been vetted so closely and not been ruined? One politican whose body of 24,000 emails could have yielded *absolutely nothing* in the way of dirt?) She’d be the perfect candidate to mop the floor with Barack Obama — to demolish him in a Reagan-scale landslide — yet the Beltway GOP hate her as much if not more than the left.

          I used to think that John McCain’s team knew what they were doing when they tapped her for VP, but they didn’t. The left is right: they didn’t tap her so much because she was a popular governor, but to go after the women’s vote. That’s why they put her in a cage and didn’t defend her when she was vilified. They really are that dumb. The GOP establishment gave us John McCain, though he had spent his entire career enraging the party base; they gave us weepy fraud John Boehner, muscling out principled conservative Rep. Bachmann; and now they are doing it again — shoving down our throat Mitt Romney, a man who stands for absolutely nothing but that he should be president, who oozes insincerity and so inspires no one with any actual convictions with regard to conservative governance.

          These people are deal-makers and frauds; they’re as much a part of the repulsive permanent political class as Obama or the Clintons. Now and then they will be defeated, but they will always come back to fight tooth and nail against principle for the simple sake of power.

        3. I wonder if the GOP establishment will ever change?

          Nope! It seems they don;t mind going back to being a Rockefeller minorities who can get a President for one term every now and then.

          Nancy Pelosi said “we need to get to a point where the differences between the parties are trivial” and the GOP establishment is playing along. Status quo and insider trading etc.. is more important than conservatism because they go to DC as regular Joes and come out millionaires like Palin said. Now they want to hold power so bad since most are millionaires they pass McCain/Feingold to favor incumbents. That’s your post-conservative GOP that give us baseline cuts in future spending and calls them actual cuts in spending.

          If Romney is the nominee I will not subMITT to the Is-Lame-ist in the GOP establishment.

          1. Agreed, re your analysis, but if Romney is the nominee I will vote for him. Like Mark Levin says, I’d vote for an orange juice can put up against Obama. (Come to think of it, I wonder if the US had a three-way race between an OJ can, Obama, and Mitt Romney, how well would the can fare? Not too poorly, I think.)

            That said, I won’t give Romney any money. I learned my lesson w/ McCain — donating to his damned “honorable” campaign and yelling at the TV, “Fight back, damn it!”, till I was blue in the face… Never again. If Mittens can beat Obama with his $1B (much of which I expect will come from Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny, cemetery residents, and taxpayer dollars laundered through unions and government “investments” (e.g., Solyndra-type frauds), though the GOP establishment will never bother to bring this up), I’ll be thrilled — but betting on that limp rag is another story. I’ll donate to congressional races (e.g., West, Bachmann, conservatives running for the Senate) and maybe some gubanatorial candidates I think can win.

            1. A vote for Romney is a wasted vote and a victory for the GOP establishment. If they want to put up these losers, I’m staying home. If that means 4 more years of Obama and probably the end of the country… so be it. A vote for Romney is a vote for the end of the country anyway, just a bit slower and with different language. Romney is a lame POS.

              1. Indeed! And let the establishment get away with it and nothing will ever change.
                I will not subMitt and vote the lesser of two progressives.

                “I think people recognize that I’m not a partisan Republican, that I’m someone who is moderate and my views are progressive” -Mitt Romney

                “I’m Not Running As The Republican View Or A Continuation Of Republican Values” -Mitt Romney

      2. He will appeal Obamacare! Romeny care, was for Mass, and it was only 8%. It’s up to the states! All Romney did was point out Newt’s record! That’s attacks lol! Don’t ever get into politics!!!

        1. Do you actually believe that tripe. An architect tearing down his own work?

          A Romney troll is now inhabiting this board.

        2. “He will appeal Obamacare!”

          Yep. He’ll *appeal* it all right. He’ll make sure it “appeals” to all of us.

          Trouble is… Romney won’t REPEAL Obamacare.

          1. This is a list of the candidates and the percentage (at best) of Obamacare the candidate will repeal:

            Romney – 25%
            Newt – 50%
            Santorum – 65%
            Perry or Newt -100%

            Here’s the why:

            1. Romney will remove only a piece of the child he help grow. Romney + Obama = Obamacare.

            2. Newt (50%) – Newt the policy wonk justifies the redeeming qualities of Obamacare and promises to remove only the damaging pieces.

            3. Santorum – His compassion and belief government is a force for good, aka compassionate conservatism, will force him to keep 35% of the legislation, “the parts that really improve people’s lives.”

            4. Perry – Obamacare is treated like the coyote that threatened his dog on a morning jog. Shoot it! Shoot it dead!

            5. Newt (100%) – Newt of the 1990s is back! Time for another revolution. Drop the NEWTon bomb on Obamacare. “Quite frankly, I have a better idea.”

    4. Suppose 4 years ago I told there was this half white guy born to a rabid anti-colonialist Kenyan father, a communist activist mother, raised by an Indonesian islamist, ran as a New Party Socialist before hijacking the democratic ticket with Acorn thugs, who had won only a few elections via smear campaigns and qualification shams, and a best had 2 years experience in government, and most of that absent.

      Would you have said he was “nationally electable”.

      My point is if the RNC decides to get behind Santorum, if the Capitalists send enough money and if the great People of this great Nation open our wallets and get off our butts and hit the streets with passion, we can damn sure elect him.

      1. I feel your pain, but knowing is half the battle (GI Joe). Some people didn’t know and choose to follow him, others knew and couldn’t convince others. I saw obama at the Convention and shockingly agreed with Chris Matthews he was a future President based on presence alone. The first 1/2 black President and you don’t think that’s an advantage?

        The RNC WILL NEVER get behind him-are you kidding me? Why do you think no one gives Mr. Pubis, Prebis, Pubescent (whatever) our money anymore? I’m telling you it is going to take a humiliation at the ballot box before the RNC is reformed.

        1. “The RNC WILL NEVER get behind him.”

          They hate him of course. So let’s force the issue. We just cannot survive another Progressive – Republican or Democrat. They intend to finish us off.

          Let RNC walk away from a true conservative. I am not so sure it is any better or any worse than letting them kill off the Republic with Romney.

      2. I like your optimism, but there are 2 factors that aren’t in your equation.

        1.) The media- that one is self explanatory, they would have helped elect Joran vad der “double-murderer” if he was a Democrat by not reporting about him.

        2.) I believe the country, although they see themselves as conservatives, really is not ready to give up their government addiction and even if they vote for it once, they’ll recoil and give up that path once it has anything more than a minimal effect on their lives.

        1. Then lets stop pretending these progressives like McCain and Romney are conservatives and have it out once and for all.

          If Americans cannot see what they are getting then lets give them what they want – a ruler.

          I have had it.

          1. If Americans cannot see what they are getting then lets give them what they want – a ruler.

            They’ve already got one. O/T: All these news stories, that get little attention but are significant in demonstrating the consolidation of power to the POTUS, remind me of how we heard about Honduras’s leader trying to seize power or Chavez trying to write law by dictate…..how quickly it happens and goes largely unnoticed. Barely a report in the news to inform the people of the transgressions taking place, only a few of the countries’ people were aware enough to pay attention and stop it before it was too late (Honduras).

              1. We need a POTUS that knows his role, his limitations, government’s role, and government’s limitations.

                Lets just say that I admire the Honduran military for stepping in when necessary. Whether out of sense of duty to protect their people, or for political reasons, it was the right thing to do.

      3. Logical but not going to happen as Santorum nor the other conservatives are part of the club. The stablishment likes the status quo as it serves their own personal interests in Congress and when they retire (Alan Simpson).

      4. Absolutely! It’s not a spectator sport, folks.

        This election isn’t about sitting on the sidelines picking apart a solid candidate. It’s about supporting him…in every way we can.

        E Pluribus Unum!

    5. Santorum doesn’t have any of Romney or Gingrich’s baggage and/or problems (cough*Romneycare*cough). His opponent nationally would be the Obama.

      It’s difficult to see a path to the nomination for Santorum, but if he magically appears on the ballot, Obama loses in a landslide.

      1. Santorum doesn’t have any of Romney or Gingrich’s baggage and/or problems

        or anywhere near their money. Just Google Santorum to get an idea of how the left will define the largely unknown Santorum to the country with $1 Billion attack campaign when Santorum can’t buy any ads to counter.

          1. With that kind of money disparity, Santorum is whoever Obama tells the country Santorum is, unfortunately. And don’t forget, whatever Obama says will be magnified and parroted throughout the broadcast media 24/7.

            1. And THAT is the scariest part of all of this. Americans in general don’t pay attention or seem to care… that is until something is taken away from them. In 2008, 20% of Americans came out and voted and that was considered “historically high”. With the moocher class growing (thanks again Maobama… get your voters hooked on gernmental crack) and people not taking the time to educate themselves and understand what the government is doing to them, they will again become hypnotized and follow the lemming in front of them and in ignorant zombie style, cast another vote for his majesty.

              Sickening!!!

    6. Who exactly is the “GOP Establishment”, seems you can’t think for yourself. You just throw things out there like Rush and Levin do. Is the Establishment Newt! He is Mr Washington! Santorium, former Congressman! Perry Governor of Texas. Romney, former Governor of Mass. Then he worked in the private sector. Once again who is the Establishment. I’ll assume you’re talking about Romney, cause he’s the front runner. He’s the farthest one from being Mr Washington.

      1. They are those that wish to keep the status quo with as little change as possible. They want their nice offices and perks and to “play politics” instead of being “public servants”. They don’t like the tea party, and they don’t like waves. Just, as Boehner said, “get your ass in line” and all will be well.

        Who? Start at the top: Boehner, Cantor, McCarthy, McConnell, Luga, Nelson…etc, etc, etc.

        In the media, go to FoxNews and you can see establishment Republicans everywhere: Rove, O’Reilly, Krauthammer, Hume, etc.

        1. I agree with everything you said till you ge tto the end. Rove, he’s not establishment. Thought estbalishment is just happy to be there. Rove wants the Republicans to win and have power. That’s not status quo. O’reilly is an Independent. Kraut, and Hume are conservatives. RINO Mccain for sure!!

      2. “Romney, former Governor of Mass. Then he worked in the private sector. Once again who is the Establishment. I’ll assume you’re talking about Romney, cause he’s the front runner. He’s the farthest one from being Mr Washington.”

        BEEEPP! Oh, so sorry! That’s the wrong answer. We do appreciate the fact that you played the game though. We regret that we don’t have a year’s supply of Rice-A-Roni for you. But please accept our thanks for your participation and for being such a good sport Mrs. Romney.

    7. Nice to see that mental children have the ability to infest this site too. Lovely to see your true colors… thanks Saul Alinsky for your pathetic 2 cents. Now crawl back under your rock and embrace your eventual demise. America and freedom will prevail. Live with that you worm.

      1. Sorry to tell you, but Romney is going down: 1. as a candidate that can’t return what obama will send his way, 2. the base won’t come out in droves for him, and 3. HIS RECORD

        It is what it is. RINO candidates fair poorly in elections, no matter how much of a moron obama is (the power of the incumbency). This is why we need term limits in Congress and Conservative candidates for President.

  32. “However, because Gingrich backed off today from his populist attacks, Levin now says let’s wait and see what happens in South Carolina.” Right, because Mark knows that it is perfectly acceptable for everyone but the Bain of “the real” conservatives’ mittsistence to flip flop.

    1. did you really listen to newt. he gave a particular reason for stepping back. not exactly waving a white flag. he is just as disgusted now as he was. but with republicans have a wee wee fit, no sense in continuing. not exactly a “i am sorry. i was wrong.”

      mark wants to push santorum. believe rush the same, since they are big buds!

      1. mark wants to push santorum. believe rush the same, since they are big buds!

        And big dopes! See my post above.

        1. Explain why he’s lame. He’s the most well-rounded candidate in this race. No, he’s not perfect. But he has an excellent foreign policy, he understands the middle east and what radical Islam represents, his economic plan is bold (he embraces Paul Ryan’s plan and is planning to cut 5 trillion in 5 yrs), his social values are nearly perfect, he has solid ideas for dealing with illegals, his hard stance against unions… I could go on. Provide evidence for your position. Progressive snipes come on here and other sites and vomit cheap accusations like that, then slip back into their holes, waiting for the next time to pee on conservatives. Back up your accusation.

          Santorum and Perry are easily the most dangerous opponents for Maobama and Romney. They have the least dirt, are the most consistent, and overall, have the best records to run on. Sadly, Perry swallowed a stupid pill after N.H. and unless he recovers, Santorum is the only balanced option against Romney and Maobama. To quote you: “What the hell are people thinking?” We need to immediately rally behind ONE conservative candidate… and right now, that candidate is Santorum. Otherwise we’re stuck with McLame 2.0 (Romney).

    2. make me suspicious of Mark Levin as one of Bains investors.nothing wrong with that, but why condemn other candidates that talk about Bain. It is simple, Romney explain Bains deals and behavior and all that involve and approve and benefit from it. Then I as a voter citizen will check it and decide from the facts brought forward. Now it’s only bunch of hot air flapping noise trying to cover or shut up what are in the dark.

      1. He also tied capitalism to the Constitution. See how that works? Question a candidate’s private sector record, and you are not only anti-capitalism, but also anti-Constitution.

        I heard Newt and Perry are also anti-Semites and eat babies.

        Is this extremist kind of talk the kind of talk we hear from liberals? Is Mark Levin anti-conservative? :-

        1. And what kind of market system would you like? Questions?? That was a clear attack kamiller42 you are doing what so many libs do. Spinning

              1. I made an absurd, logical conclusion based on what I heard on the show today.

                I mean he and others already made the illogical conclusion that the governor of the state with the #1 economy in the union is anti-capitalist and even anti-venture capitalist(!). Why not keep hanging yourself with more inane remarks Mr. Levin?

                The bad assumption here is assuming Newt and Perry were judging capitalism.

                1. Don’t change the subject. You said:

                  “He also tied capitalism to the Constitution. See how that works? Question a candidate’s private sector record, and you are not only anti-capitalism, but also anti-Constitution.

                  I heard Newt and Perry are also anti-Semites and eat babies”

                  You assume he actually said this, base your whole argument on it, then dismiss everything else he said.

                  Using your logic now, should I now make wild accusations about what you believe and dismiss everything else you’ve said?

                2. If you’re defending Perry, then that’s valid. In spite of his questionable approach at this point in his campaign, he’s still viable and someone we all can support. He needs to right the ship though and do well in S.C. at least or Florida… otherwise, I agree with Mark… his message and platform are not resinating and for him to stay in the race after poor showings would hurt a real conservative candidate.

                  If you’re just joking around (“eats babies” – classic), then it’s amusing to an extent.

                  We all may be on the same side here… let’s not fight each other… take the fight to progressives, marxists, and radicals in Washington. United we stand, divided we fall… and our backs are absolutely against the wall.

                3. I agree. Personally I got no problem with any of the candidates, except maybe Romney, but that is only because I smell RINO. But, there is no way to know for sure what will happen. It is very possible that any of these candidates could step up to the plate in a very positive way when the going gets tough.

                  Its a real kick-in-the-pants though when ‘conservatives’ start backstabbing some of our greatest allies because they failed to actually LISTEN to what they say. I’m not saying we should be ‘carrying their water’, just saying to slow down and put your thinking cap on, especially if you are listening to Levin.

        2. Of course they’re anti-capitalist/constitution and not just pols pouncing on a rivals perceived weakness. Pols never do that! I’m shocked! Shocked I tell you. Besides its not like Romney would behave like a Democrat and attack Perry on SS or anything because Romney is a businessman not a pol just ask him.

          /sarcasm

Comments are closed.