I knew that wouldn't escape you .

I love this headline.

Krauthammer: Obama Saved The US Auto Industry

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/287978/krauthammers-take-nro-staff

RR, gagged and didn't even have ta use a spoon ! I never saw that but it so much sweeter when you bring it ! Swear on my mothers eyes .

Looking finer in Carolina
Southern conservatives lining up behind Mitt

By GEOFF EARLE Bureau Chief, NY Post

WASHINGTON — A group of key South Carolina conservatives fell in line behind Mitt Romney yesterday, bolstering the former Massachusetts governor’s chances to win the first primary in Dixie.

Three Republicans considered loyal to Sen. Jim DeMint — a key powerbroker in the state with ties to the Tea Party, but who has remained neutral — came out for Romney yesterday.

In a stunning move, one of them, former state chair Barry Wynn, is a member of Rick Perry’s finance team.

Wynn said he was irked by Perry’s attacks on Romney, which included ripping Mitt as a “vulture capitalist.”

“It’s like fingernails on the chalkboard,” Wynn said.

The move toward Romney — who had a sweeping victory in New Hampshire Tuesday — came as prominent national GOPers came to Romney’s aid to push back at withering attacks by Perry and Newt Gingrich.

Gingrich, who is making what many see as a last stand in the Jan. 21 South Carolina primary, has slammed Romney for “looting” companies while running venture-capital firm Bain Capital.

“What they’re doing to Mitt right now is totally unfair and bad for the Republican Party . . . What the hell are you doing . . . Newt?” asked former Mayor Rudy Giuliani on Fox News.

Arizona Sen. John McCain, who like Giuliani is backing Romney, told Fox that to go after Romney “on really what is the essence of what we Republicans believe in about [the] economy, I think is a serious mistake and frankly I think it’s the last resort of a very desperate campaign.”

But Gingrich got some support from an unlikely quarter: AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka.

“Here are words you won’t hear from me very often: I agree with Newt Gingrich,” wrote Trumka in an e-mail to supporters.

“As Mr. Gingrich recently pointed out, presidential hopeful Mitt Romney ‘looted’ companies, leaving behind ‘broken families and broken neighborhoods.’ That’s not the kind of capitalism that built America,” Trumka said.

A poll released yesterday by Insider Advantage shows Romney with just a 2-point South Carolina lead over Gingrich, 23-21 percent. Rick Santorum follows with 14, and Ron Paul has 13.

Gingrich’s campaign is keeping up its tough talk, while a pro-Gingrich super-PAC lights up the airwaves by spending more than $3 million on ads.

geoff.earle@nypost.com

Real-life righties
Why conservatives are voting for Romney

John Podhoretz, NY Post

If you follow politics, you’d have spent 2011 certain that conservatives didn’t want Mitt Romney to be the Republican nominee. That’s what the loudly expressed views of self-styled conservative leaders suggested: They made it clear that on a variety of issues, health care primarily and abortion secondarily, Romney’s record as a candidate and governor in Massachusetts was too moderate to be acceptable.

Well, guess what? In the New Hampshire primary, Romney won the support of 42 percent of conservatives, more than doubling the conservative take of his nearest rival, Ron Paul.

A Gallup poll taken last week shows Romney as the candidate most acceptable to conservatives nationwide, with 59 percent saying he’d be an acceptable nominee. (Fifty-one percent say the same of Newt Gingrich, and 46 percent say so about Rick Santorum).

Even in Iowa, 46 percent of the voters who stood up for Romney in the caucuses described themselves as either “very conservative” or “somewhat conservative.”

South Carolina is next up, and a poll by the reliable Democratic firm PPP last week had Romney leading there with 30 percent to Newt Gingrich’s 23 percent — in a state in which 79 percent of Republicans describe themselves as either somewhat conservative or very conservative.

So what gives? Why are conservatives lining up behind a politician of whom Rush Limbaugh has said flatly: “Mitt Romney is not a conservative” — a sentiment echoed by Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor and 2008 Iowa caucuses winner?

The answer lies in a misunderstanding of the “conservative” voter. It’s a mistake to think that voters who describe themselves as “conservative” think about politics and react to politicians the same as people who are professionally or avocationally conservative.

Those of us who are professionally or avocationally conservative get into the weeds when it comes to politicians’ view. So for us, it isn’t enough that Mitt Romney now says he is pro-life; we know that in 1994 he ran for senator in Massachusetts as an unapologetic abortion supporter. He says flatly that he changed his mind, but people for whom the pro-life cause is central find such a record untrustworthy.

But that isn’t true of the conservative voter. That voter listens to Romney, and she hears Romney say he’s pro-life. That’s more than likely enough for her if the issue is important to her.

Because his rivals know that’s usually enough, they find themselves spending time in debates and money on TV trying to convince her that she shouldn’t take Romney at face value. They’re trying to turn her from a rank-and-file conservative into an avocational conservative.

But that’s not her calling. She has other things to do. They want her to dig the way they dig, to view Romney with suspicion rather than implicit acceptance.

But what reason has Romney given her to distrust his sincerity? She’s watched him some over the last year. He seems like a pleasant and well-spoken guy. He’s won two states already. The other Republicans have all kinds of obvious problems and drawbacks. Romney seems to have fewer. Why shouldn’t she back him?

This also helps explain why Romney hasn’t been derailed by his signature legislation, the Massachusetts health-care law requiring that everyone in the state purchase an insurance policy. He says he thinks that it was a good idea for his state but that it wouldn’t be a good idea for the country. He says he’d repeal ObamaCare.

The other candidates and the conservative media are telling her not to trust Romney, that he’s lying, that he won’t do it — or that he’s so compromised by the Massachusetts law that he wouldn’t be able to bring the fight on health care to Obama.

In the end, she has to make the judgment: Do I trust that he means what he says now? He says he’d repeal ObamaCare. She doesn’t like ObamaCare. What more does she have to hear?

That’s the call. And it turns out to be a lower hurdle for Romney to clear than many of us expected.

In the end, professional and avocational conservatives want a candidate who was in the trenches with them, who speaks their language and whose views resonate with theirs down the line. They want purity.

The conservative voter? She doesn’t care all that much about purity. Turns out she wants a winner.

jpodhoretz@gmail.com

They're following him because he's going to win the nomination. He really should pay Charlie Sheen royalties and use his catchphrase for a bumper sticker slogan: "Winning, DUH!"

But this should be noted, yet ignored completely by the media.

2012 GOP Delegate #

Mittens 10
Paul 8
Santorum 6
Newt 4
Perry 3
Huntsman 1

The media is totally ignoring Ron Paul. Not that he'll ever be President BUT the guy did come in second. No glory. LOL

Also, I haven't heard the media report how close it is in SC between Romney/Gingrich. There's only a few point difference within MOE in some case yet media's mum. Just a few days ago they kept reporting how Newt get going down in polls.

Anyway, are we finally thru with debates? Or do I need to go out and buy more popcorn?

TIS

I don't know why you state that. I saw Ron interviewed by Megyn Kelly on Fox today. He gets his share of publicity.

Media disregards that fact that he came in second. Granted, he likely won't be President but Santorum got more notice than he did. To be clear, I am not a Paul supporter.



TIS

I don't see that at all. Santorum received alot of attention prior to the NH primary because of his Iowa showing. Since that primary, he's received no attention more than Paul.

Romney has attracted alot of attention because of his Mormonism. However, Huntsman has not attracted any as far as I can tell for his. Double-standard, or is it because he's never risen above 1% in the polls?

Well he shot his foot in that primary when he openly said he believed in evolution and global warming.

He might as well ate a baby in front of TV cameras.

What an asshole.

(Damn I'm almost tired of saying that.)

Romney up by 21 points in SC latest poll.
Poll

What does the peanut gallery think of Mittens' past proposal to tie-in the federal minimum wage to the CPI?

Well, Huntsman is out. It'll have little effect upon the race. But I wonder if Huntsman's funding will go to Romney.

Perry will be next I'll bet.




TIS

Mormon analytical prejudice?

(J/K. Considering Huntsman's daddy was a big funder, I doubt he'll help Mittens unless Junior gets a plum job.)

He's set to endorse Romney.

"Don't hold NH against me Mitt! Don't send me up to Iceland!"

It's over, we have officially the best attack ad of '12.

The Economist on the debate tonight:

Debate reax claim that for the inevitable front-runner, Mittens didn't have a good night. The crowd booing the mention that his father was born in Mexico (good thing that fact wasn't publicly mentioned earlier) and Mittens promising to release his tax returns around Tax Day in April.

Why did you say that Mittens? Every time a politician's tax returns have been made an issue, that said issue died a quick and quiet death once the returns are made public. Elected officials know better than to write off your trip to Disney World as a tax deductable. (If they're gonna cheat the IRS, you'll most likely never find out exactly how.)

So if you really do keep them to your chest till then, Newt and Santorum and Paul will slap you silly over it. And once those campaigns end, the Democrats will commence and carry on that meme. Until you do.

Either Mittens is truely stupid, or that damn arrogant. I can't decide.

What is he talking about? Turkey doesn't receive anyforeign aid from the US.
He talks about Turkey as if it was a country like Iran or Saudi Arabia. It's more secular than most European countries.

Does that moron know Turkey is a member of NATO? Does he even know what NATO is? He speaks volumes about the quality of a Texas A&M education.

Siokening. When you see ignorance like that on display, how can you defend White Southerners from the inbred redneck stereotype?

They just don't get it and never will. ALL white Americans descended from immigrants.

Assholes.

Interesting article from CNN regarding audience reaction to debate:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/17/opinion/graham-south-carolina-debate/index.html


TIS

Btw, why do you think Mitt is dodging showing his tax return records? I mean we all know he's mega-rich.

how is he still running! its official, george w bush is einstein compare to this jackass.

Willard just said he paid 15% or less. Great tax code we have.

US sells military arms to Turkey. Is Turkey really more secular than most European countries...in what way? From the moderators question, it doesn't sound like it.