Michele Bachmann, Jason Lewis and Grover Norquist headlined Saturday’s Taxpayer Rally on the Mall of the State Capitol in Minnesota. Here are some of the highlights of that event. Complete video of Bachmann and Lewis’s comments can be found at my blog at AmericanMillenniumOnline.com here.
Tag Archives: Michele Bachmann
I have been listening to the cacophony of cowardly Republicans jumping all over Congressman Todd Akin of Missouri concerning his comments about rape and abortion a few days ago. I understand that what he said was ill-advised but he tried to answer a very tough question instead of dodging it as most politicians would do. He did manage to make a mess of it but has attempted to make amends in a very humble and honorable fashion. Akin has apologized profusely, explained what he actually meant, explained where he got the information he was basing his statement on, and has also acknowledged that he spoke on facts that he now knows were feasible but questionable. The man made a mistake in the way he stated his point and the entire Republican Party is throwing him to the wolves for it.
I was listening to him on the Sean Hannity Radio Show today and it reminded me of why I rarely listen to that political hack (www.mediaite.com). Rep. Akin explained himself, AGAIN, and said he was staying in the race. Hack Hannity complains daily about the double standard in the media yet he is the first one to dive into the double standard, urging Akin to get out because he will “hurt the Republican Party”. Hack Hannity must have “suggested” he step aside a dozen times in the few minutes Akin was on the radio. How does one whine about a double standard and then jump right into the middle of that same double standard? Isn’t that being a bit hypocritical?
Republican National Committee chairman Reince Preibus and a whole bunch of former Missouri “moderate” RINO cowards are urging Akin to get out and let someone else run against Claire McCaskill, one of the most liberal of senators and an Obama doormat. I heard today on the Hannity hack show that the “moderate” Mitt Romney is also urging Akin to step aside, “for the good of the party”. What a bunch of slap fighting sissies!!!
The reason Republicans can’t win is people like me are fed up with the cowardly actions of the party establishment. Every time some liberal hollers boo they go hide under their beds and cry for their mommy. Akin is a staunch supporter of the FairTax, has voted against all of the big spending Democrat legislation, voted no on raising the debt ceiling (http://akin.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1641&Itemid=88), against the wishes of John Boehner and the other RINO’s in the party, and has voted against the party leadership on many other occasions because he values principal over politics. AHA!!! I think I just struck on the problem Akin has today. He actually shows honor, integrity, and backbone so he must be thrown to the wolves by the cowards of the party establishment.
I have said before, and I will repeat here, that I have more respect for Harry Reid, Dingy Harry Reid, than I do for John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and a host of others in the Republican Party. Harry Reid will stand up in your face and say “SCREW YOU!!!“ when he has a different opinion. Republicans, on the other hand, cower and beg for someone to let them do a little bit of what they want to do. Reid has refused to pass a budget for 3 years because John Boehner doesn’t have enough backbone to force the issue. Boehner the traitor passes one Continuing Resolution after another to keep Harry Reid, and fellow Republicans, from being forced to take a vote on a budget. Boehner doesn’t want the budget “to be an issue right before an election”. So much for the resolve needed to solve the financial problems of our nation. He will let Democrats go right on spending like there is no tomorrow because he doesn’t have the courage to take a stand. And we ousted Pelosi for this wimp? I don’t see a gain here. The spending hasn’t dropped one iota since Boehner took over the speakership, and Akin is the one who is destroying voter confidence in the Republican Party? I don’t think so!!
And now to Mitty the Poo Romney. I never thought he was the one America needs, until he picked Paul Ryan for his VP choice. Finally, I thought, Mitty actually found a spine. Then today comes and he is back to his cowardly “moderate” ways of throwing anything or anyone conservative to the wolves (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/08/21/Romney-Calls-For-Akin-To-Step-Down).
I have lived for 24 years with the “vote for this guy and we will get a conservative next election cycle” story. It isn’t going to happen as long as We the People rely on the Progressive Republican Party to represent our conservative views. Conservatism gets hammered by Republicans every time it sticks its head up. Once again we see the lack of backbone that has kept Democrats in power, for the most part, over the last 60 years. I saw this in 2010 when Charles Thompson, a staunch Constitutional Conservative, was running for the Oklahoma 2nd Congressional seat held by Democrat Dan Boren. Charles refused to sell We the People out for his own benefit and the RNC refused to help him at all. Charles lost the election by about 6% in a race that had not been closer than a 70%-30% split since Tom Coburn left for the Senate. This is the attitude of the Republican establishment towards conservatives.
As long as we conservative voters rely on meeley mouthed cowards to represent us we will never solve the problems facing our nation. Republicans have been a huge part of the problem because they lack the courage and the integrity to stand up for what they say they believe in. They are real good at criticizing and back seat driving but they lack the fortitude to govern responsibly.
I was told a few weeks ago that there is no place for me in the Republican Party because I am critical of Mitty the Poo and the Republican establishment. I was told I need to either get behind the establishment totally or get out of the Republican Party and go Independent. I told this person that I am exactly what the Republican Party needs, a person with the courage to stand up and tell Dingy Harry “SCREW YOU!!! we will do it right and bury you under public support”. Maybe the man was right; maybe there isn’t a place in the Republican Party for a conservative with the backbone to stand up and speak boldly for true conservatism. Courage and straight talk doesn’t seem to be appreciated in the Republican Party, nor does there seem to be a place for forgiveness.
I say “crapola” on this hurting the Republican Party. To me Akin’s show of repentance, courage, and the resolve to fight through this is refreshing. I want to see men and women who will stand up for America and conservative values. We the People need men and women who we can count on to stand up for us. Look at what the establishment has done to Michele Bachman over the Muslim Brotherhood thing. She and a few, a very few, others stand up for liberty and our way of life, and look what happens. These same “moderates” that now throw Todd Akin under the bus castigated Bachmann for having the temerity to care about American values, American ideals, and the liberty guaranteed by the Constitution.
It is time for the Republican Party to show We the People they deserve our votes. This whining about a “double standard in the media” just doesn’t cut it any longer, especially when they participate in such behavior themselves. It is time to go out and find a spine. Mitt Romney is worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Why not spend some of that money on spines for all of the establishment elites of the party and give We the People, the conservative people, something to hang our hats on. If they can’t stand with us now they don’t deserve our votes in November.
Todd Akin is the sacrificial lamb Republicans will use to explain away any losses, just as Sarah Palin was McCain’s scapegoat in 2008. America is going down the tubes to dictatorship because Republicans either don’t have the courage to change our path or they are complicit and desire to see a Third World toilet dictatorship established here. Which is it Republican Party establishment?
I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.
August 21, 2012
Yahoo, that staunch defender of all things “progressive”, jumped on the media bandwagon in gushing over Malaysia’s Nur Suryani Mohamed Taibi making the trip to London to compete in the Olympics. They fawned all over the feel good story about how just one month before she is due to give birth to a baby she is scheduled to compete in the 10m rifle event. The 29-year-old is not the first pregnant Olympian, but is believed to be the farthest along in history.
This shows the utter stupidity of European countries that are so welcoming of people who want to destroy Europe, European culture and the last vestiges of European Christianity. As in: muslims.
Who cares if she is pregnant and in the OIympics? Within the bigger picture, that is so trivial it is ridiculous. This is a taquiyya based PR move on the part of muslims and their “progressive” western co-conspirators.
Thanks to the suppression of women in muslim countries where sharia law is enforced, women are not allowed out of the house without being accompanied by male relatives…or to drive, much less allowed to shoot a gun.
Most muslim countries are still sickeningly misogynistic.
Should Tabili decide to stay in London after the Olympics she would be just another pregnant muslim woman helping to overthrow another European country by outbreeding “politically correct” natives who themselves refuse to reproduce because doing so would lead to overpopulation and “harm mother earth”. In a couple of decades muslims will complete their centuries old quest to conquer Europe.
This is exactly the same type of “progressive” multicultural diversity politically correct “tolerance” gobbledygook nonsense that led the American Ft. Hood shooting incident to be officially classified as “workplace violence” and to unwarranted attacks on Michele Bachmann and other Congressional Reps who courageously called for an investigation into the infiltration of America’s government by elements sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood.
When it comes to “political correctness”, “progressive” Americans are not far behind Europe. If you ask a typical college grad who has recently been released from the indoctrination camps known as American college campuses, they are oblivious to the fact that over the years, communist regimes have killed 100 million of their own people. If you ask them what country is the greatest force for evil in the world, they will tell you it is the United States. These are the same brain dead “progressive” lemming useful idiots that will give you the kneejerk, propaganda based response that islam is “a religion of peace”.
Consider this exchange found on Jihad watch:
This death threat came in to ABN after I interviewed Pamela Geller in a show on “Islamophobia” last Monday night. I posted an expurgated version of this death threat already, but the unexpurgated version gives the full flavor of the opponents we face in fighting for freedom and human rights. Pamela Geller has the full audio, plus a transcript:
Now listen to me, a$$hole: if you ever disrespect my belief, I’m going to personally find ya, ok? If you ever disrespect Islam ever again, I’m going to personally find you all, ok? Take what I’m saying very f**king seriously, ok? And I f**king mean it. I’m going to personally find you all, ok? Your life will be a f**king nightmare. Take what I’m saying very f**king seriously. And start to learn how to respect other people’s belief system. This is not freedom of speech. You’re being a f**king d*ckhead. I’m going to personally find you, if I ever see your f**king a$$. Don’t be disrespectful of other people’s belief system, ok? F**king a$$hole d*ckhead. I’m gonna find you. You’ll see it. You’ll f**king die.
That is “a religion of peace”?
Nur Suryani Mohamed Taibi’s winning a gold medal then using her triumph to rub it in the faces of her culture’s misogynistic pigs would be an achievement worthy of universal acclaim.
You go girl.
Bachmann letter raises furor over inclusion of Muslims with extremist ties as advisors to the Department of Homeland Security
Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is in the news again and under fire for her unflinching criticism of the government for its adoption of Muslims associated with terrorist affiliated Muslim Brotherhood as advisors for Homeland Security.
A scathing letter addressed to the Inspector General of the DHS specifically names three individuals used as advisors to the DHS, granting them high level security clearances as a result, who have direct ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Bachmann calls for the investigation of the matter as well as corrective action.
The Bachmann letter states:
“. . . the Department of Homeland Security has utilized in a key advisory role three individuals with extensive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, other Islamist organizations and causes: Dalia Mogahed, Mohamed Elibiary, and Mohamed Magid.”
Bachmann doesn’t flinch, but names names and specifics in the letter, co-signed by four of her colleagues in the House Of Representatives: Trent Franks-R Arizona, Louie Gohmert-R Texas, Thomas Rooney-R Florida, Lynn Westmoreland-R Georgia.
Bachmann goes on to say: “The problematic nature of this arrangement is evident. . .” and a cause of great concern. It is of great concern, unless you are the President or his White House staff, who don’t seem to have a problem with any of this.
Bachmann notes in the letter that these members, and others, may be having undue influence on the way law enforcement and the military are trained to identify and deal with extremist Muslim terrorists organizations, noting the softening of the language in regards to such groups and the outreach to these groups that could tip off the enemies of our country before action against them can be taken.
Michele Bachmann and her colleagues in the House might as well be talking to a wall when it comes to addressing this issue to the White House, who seems not to have qualms about inviting these dangerous individuals into Washington for a sit down. But it should also serve as warning bells to those who are listening and keeping score. It should be noted that the politically correct policies regarding those sympathetic to Jihad led directly to the tragic shooting at Fort Hood, allegedly committed by trained psychiatrist and Army Major Nidal Hassan. It should also be noted that the shooter was interested in homeland security issues and attended events for the George Washington University’s Homeland Security Policy Institute during the Obama administrations initial transition into the White House.
Jerome R. Corsi makes the claim in his column for World Net Daily that alleged Fort Hood Shooter, Hassan, is listed on the event’s final report as a uniformed services participant. In his column entitled, “Shooter Advised Obama Transition: Fort Hood triggerman aided team on Homeland Security Task Force” Corsi includes a link to the very document where Major Hassan is listed as a participant as well as video of Hassan at an event. The University acknowledges to Corsi that Hassan did attend, but says it is unclear if he had any direct influence in the committee’s final report. A link to the document in question is no longer available and the document has been scrubbed from the George Washington University’s website, but I have included them here, and here.
The University says it is unclear if Hassan had an influence on a national security report. But, that’s not the point is it? The point really should be that dangerous Muslim radicals are attempting to access high levels of our government in order to influence them in favor of their Jihad against the west; and government officials seem to be unable or unwilling to vet these people properly.
The Army clearly knew about this military psychiatrist’s radical beliefs as I am sure the DHS must know of the affiliation of these radical three. But because of political correctness, or incompetence, they refuse to act to prevent these people from having influence at the highest levels. And Americans have and will suffer as a result.
Bachmann appeared early this morning on the Glenn Beck radio show to outline her reasons for the letter. Her comments can be seen on TheBlaze.com. Beck and Bachmann have been allies on the issue of Muslim extremism, leading Beck to produce a three-part video series on his flaghip Internet TV show GBTV, entitled “Rumors of War”.
The White House isn’t the only ones who would like to ignore this issue. Minnesotan Congressman Keith Ellison piled on recently with CNN’s Anderson Cooper where he called his colleges’ concerns over Muslim extremism infiltrating the government as “nonesense”.
Ellison, the first African-American representative from Minnesota, and the first Muslim to be elected to Congress, admits in the interview that when he asked for proof of the allegations, House Representatives sent him a 16-page document. Ellison poo-pooed the document, telling Cooper, “Sixteen pages doesn’t take nothing and turn it into something, it’s still nothing, and the fact is, I would hope that we would let our saner, more courageous spirit prevail.”
We believe Muslims should have a stake in the government of the United States, provided they are properly vetted for radical Islamic or anti-American views!
Minnesota’s political junkies and elected U.S. House Representatives are eagerly awaiting the release of redistricting lines approved by a five-judge panel later today.
According to the 2010 Census, more Minnesotans moved out of the cities and into the suburbs, causing massive shifts in population in some congressional districts.
Each district must have 662,991 people in it.
District 1: in southern Minnesoat, mostly rural communities, must decrease by 18,204 people, currently held by Rep. Tim Walz (DFL)
District 2: mostly 2nd tier suburbs of the Twin Cities, must decrease by 69,524 people, currently held by Rep. John Kline (R)
District 3: 1st tier suburbs of the Twin Cities, must decrease by 12,806 people
currently held by Rep. Erik Paulsen (R)
District 4: St. Paul, South St. Paul and White Bear Lake, must increase by 48,367 people, currently held by Rep. Betty McCollum (DFL)
District 5: Minneapolis, St. Louis Park, Robbinsdale, must increase by 46,509 people, currently held by Rep. Keith Ellison (DFL)
District 6: Suburbs and outlying rural areas, St. Cloud, must decrease by 96,457 people, currently held by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R)
District 7: rural northwest Minnesota, must increase by 37,479 people, currently held by Rep. Collin Peterson (DFL)
District 8: “Iron Range” in northeast Minnesota, Duluth, must increase by 2,649 people, currently held by Rep. Chip Cravaack (R)
Govtrack.us has an interactive map by district here: Congressional Map
Obviously there is an enormous opportunity for Republican candidates to pick up seats in areas outside the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, though Duluth could continue to prove problematic for the GOP.
The new district maps are sure to cause a stir among DFL’ers and GOP alike.
THE MAPS ARE COMING!
Map Party in the Twin Cities
Happy hour, panel discussion and Q&A for the general public regarding redistricting maps in Minnesota
When: Tuesday, February 21 7pm
Where: Poor Richard’s Common House, Bloomington, MN
Who: Elected officials, media gurus, bloggers and political activists are confirmed to attend. Everyone is invited!
RSVP: not necessary, please join us!
“Dumber than a bag of hammers”, “one peanut short of a snickers “, “dumber than a rock”… I could go on…. And I will! “A few fries short of a happy meal”. “One clown shy of a circus”….
Dumber than a post… a doornail…. an entire sector of the population that doesn’t have to pay taxes and will subsequently vote for the candidate that promises them the world using other people’s money…
We often use phrases like this to describe people or more accurately, people’s actions, as being ill advised, immature, adolescent, persnickety, childish, self-indulgent, knee-jerk, hasty…. In a word – stupid!
For example, the guy who tries to ride his scooter down a staircase – A few beers short of a six-pack. How about this: robbing a house by attempting to go down the chimney – a couple of cards short of a full deck. This was my favorite: attempting to dissect, while still alive, a presidential contender to find all of his faults, only to realize that you’ve killed off all the viable candidates and are left with only a couple of duds. BWAAHAHAHAA!! Oh! That one kills me everytime!
And, unfortunately, I believe we may have just killed off our country.
2012 marks the 50th anniversary of our Supreme Court officially telling God to take a hike. You remember, don’t you? Back in 1962? Engel v. Vitale – the Supreme Court case that banned prayer from public schools – was brought by several students from New York State who thought that voluntary (yes, I said voluntary) prayer in public school violated their First Amendment rights. The prayer that was so offensive read like this:
Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen.
A utilitarian prayer to say the least, this was also one that was not forced on anyone. Yet a group of activist lawyers appealing to an activist judiciary were successful in ripping the right of the freedom to express your religious beliefs from everyone else, just to placate a few who did not believe that way. One taco short of a combo plate, if you ask me.
Perhaps I do have a different First Amendment than these folks did, but mine reads like this:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibit the free exercise thereof……
In the world of common sense, a voluntary (for those educated in the public schools, that means you don’t have to do it) prayer is not the equivalent of Congress creating a law that establishes a national religion. Furthermore, in this increasingly shrinking world of common sense, one could arguably state that banning a “voluntary” prayer would tend to stomp on that last part of the First Amendment, “nor prohibit the free exercise thereof.”
Yet because we did not want to anger a few, we ripped fundamental rights away from the vast majority. Out goes God, in comes political correctness.
It’s been downhill from there folks.
I recently checked out a book from my local library. I needed to show them a photo ID. I recently took a test for teacher certification in a specific subject area. I needed to show them a photo ID. My wife and I just swapped out a Christmas present for another item at Walmart. We needed to show them a photo ID. I’m going to go vote for my Congressman, a Senator, a President and many other state and local officials on November 6 of this year. You’ll never guess what I don’t need to show them?? Dumber than salt!
A modern definition of insanity is attempting to do the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Republicans, who started with eight or nine viable candidates for president, all of which would be better than the current occupant, have a macheted their way down to basically one. Herman Cain rises up (click, click) BOOM! See ya! Michele Bachmann does well at the Ames Straw Poll? KABLAM! Down you go! Rick Perry comes out with favorable numbers? RIP, TEAR, SLASH! He’s out here! Newt Gingrich surges from the bottom of the pack. SUPER-PACK, SUPER-PACK! He’s done!
Who’s next? We haven’t finished “vetting” candidates yet!…… we have to find someone to go up against Mitt Romney!……. oh crap! Only Ron Paul is left!
If you are experiencing flashbacks to 2008 or 1996, take comfort – you’re not alone. TOO DUMB TO LIVE!!
So I ask the question: Is America now simply just too dumb to live? Have we destroyed every person that could lead us back to our former glory, all in the name of vetting? At the same time, have we turned a blind eye to the fact that now almost half of the electorate either doesn’t have to pay federal income tax or is on some form of federal aid? Do you think people like that are ever going to vote to make the hard choices that this country needs to make in order to fix itself? Have fun going down the chimney!
Perhaps Alexis de Tocqueville was right:
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”
Remember some of chants of the OWS protesters, “This is what democracy looks like!” Yeah, folks, it does. That’s why our founding fathers didn’t touch democracy with a 10 foot pole. They specifically called for a republican form of government, one that would not run headlong into hasty decisions, but one that would take it’s time, deliberate, debate and then finally decide.
We don’t want to do that anymore as Americans. We want our patience and we want it right now! That, my friends, is too dumb to live!
If we are to survive as a country, we are going to have to eradicate this type of thought. My question to you is this: with all of the “dumb” we have done in this country over the last 50 years, have we come to this moment – a pivotal one in our history – confident that we will elect leaders that will make the difficult choices to get us back on track? Or have we finally hit that tipping point, where all we can do is watch in horror as a once great nation collapses in on itself? Have we really become “too dumb to live”?
One of the hottest topics currently is the Ron Paul Newsletters.
Whether you are a Ron Paul supporter or not, facts are facts, are they not?
Is Ron Paul a racist? I do not know the man personally, so I cannot say he is or he isn’t. One thing is for certain: this video puts things in perspective.
Tuesday night, Governor Rick Perry announced, after a disappointing showing in the Iowa caucuses, that he was returning to Texas to reevaluate his campaign. Wednesday morning, he tweeted that he was on his way to South Carolina.
The question of the moment for Perry supporters is this: Can Perry still win?
If the behavior of the Romney and Gingrich campaigns is any indication, he certainly can.
Pro-Romney PACs ran a littany of attack ads against Gingrich in Iowa, and it’s likely these ads are partially responsible for Newt’s poor performance there. Gingrich will likely retaliate in kind in New Hampshire and South Carolina.
This gives us the prospect of a mutually-assured-destruction scenario: Romney’s been successful at assailing Gingrich, and Gingrich’s ego demands he respond with an even harsher assault. Gingrich’s legendary ability to draw proverbial blood with his comments will force Romney to escalate in turn (remember, this is the same Romney who tried to physically intimidate Rick Perry [PIC], and often tells other candidates “It’s my turn now” in debates). I predict this escalation will go back-and-forth between Mitt and Newt for quite some time.
Attack ads from both camps could have two effects: 1) Souring primary voters with the negativity of both campaigns; 2) Souring voters on both of their records.
This leaves the door open for a candidate who can distance himself from the schoolyard fighting and, by comparison, ‘look Presidential’. Who could be that candidate?
I think it’s safe to say Jon Huntsman won’t be the nominee at this point. Michele Bachmann has dropped out. Rick Santorum, despite his win in Iowa, doesn’t appear to have the organization or fundraising to last beyond Iowa. And once the closed-primary states start voting, Ron Paul is finished.
By default, it would be Rick Perry.
In order to succeed, Perry needs to rework his campaign. As Erick Erickson pointed out in this post at RedState, Rick’s reboot must include removing the under-performing people in his staff who are handicapping him.
This also means Perry’s people need to be better at disseminating information to pro-Perry bloggers, who make up the backbone of his messaging. This ties in to fundraising, too: the more the Perry message is spread, the more money comes into the campaign. It’s a simple numbers game.
If Rick Perry is the candidate we believe him to be, we’ll soon see a big turnaround in his campaign.
The giant sucking sound you may be hearing coming from the general direction of the mid-west is the sound of every politician, pundit, reporter and talking head bolting the Hawkeye state like a young boy caught with the farmer’s daughter. After the candidates that ‘cared so much for Iowa’, haul cookies out of the state for places east, we are left to interpret yet another set of baffling caucus numbers, now consistent with the “first in the nation” event. But if this year’s tally doesn’t prove to the world that Iowa has “jumped the shark” politically, nothing will.
After a contest that had more lead changes than a NASCAR race, we get what amounts to a tie between Mitt “please vote for me this time” Romney and Rick “the last un-Romney candidate who hasn’t been shot at” Santorum. Reynolds Wrap spokesman Ron Paul comes in third, followed by a limping Newt Gingrich and three other candidates that just should whip out the hari-kari sword and get it over with.
And what does it all mean in a post-winner take all style of delegate allocation caucus? NADA, ZIP, ZILTCH, ZERO! Did I mention it doesn’t mean diddly??
Here’s what you need to know about Iowa and the campaign season so far, especially if you are a conservative – circular firing squads kill people!
Perfecting the technique that worked oh so well in 2008, Republicans, in their attempts at “vetting” the candidates have once again shot down every viable prospect leaving only whack jobs and moderates who know when to duck. This brand of head-hunting left the dead political bodies of Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney and the like strewn along the side of the road to the White House and paved the way for John “back to Mordor with you conservative Hobbits” McCain to fight the man, the myth, the manufactured legend – Barack Obama. Given the sentiments and economic woes of the time, only a conservative could have defeated the “change” machine and anyone who even resembled one was splayed out on the side of the road.
Nary a week into 2012, we have run from the same playbook, thinking this time it will work. Need I remind folks of the famous definition of insanity?
So, here’s what you really need to take from Iowa, what we should do about and what will probably happen:
Santorum & Romney tie, but Romney will win New Hampshire in a wash (Santorum may be a teeny bump, but nothing big) and that will propel him to likely victory in South Carolina. Santorum has NO shot in New Hampshire and will likely split the South Carolina vote with Gingrich, both with lose to Romney. Paul will do well enough in each contest to convince himself to stay in the race, but he will not win ONE state, ever. But for an ego like his, this will be fuel for his third party fire, which will pretty much secure the general election for Obama. Perry, Bachmann and Huntsman are done and should all suspend their candidacies now (looks like Bachmann is doing this as we speak), coalesce around either Gingrich or Santorum, shoot the other candidate and hope the anti-Romney chosen one can prevail.
My prediction: egos won’t let that happen, the conservative vote will again be split, Romney is nominated, Paul runs under the “Tin Foil” Party flag, Obama wins second term, America loses.
I have never been one to proclaim himself as a prognosticator and these are indeed dangerous times to even be in the business, but this isn’t really hard to call.
We made this bed folks! In the name of vetting, we slaughtered every good candidate, thinking we could survive a circular firing squad. In all likelihood, we will reap the harvest – Obama in the White House until 2016 and worse, Obamacare truly getting its meat hooks into the economy, never to be expunged.
There is one last shot: Put Reagan back in his coffin and let him rest in peace. Re-evaluate the living with the realization that NONE of them are Ronaldus Maximus and pick the closest one to him. Restore Reagan’s 11th commandment and immediately push anyone who violates it from this point forward off the political cliff. Bottom line, if your guy can’t win without having to pull down another one of his fellow Republicans, he doesn’t deserve to occupy the office.
We’ve got about a week to do this folks so quit pointing fingers, throwing rocks, put the kool-aid down and take off the tin-foil hats. Vote with conscious and confidence with visions of Reagan’s morning in America dancing in your heads. Only then will this road truly lead to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and not to Perdition.
After Michele Bachmann announced that she had her tickets to South Carolina and would be continuing her candidacy for president of the United States, she then cancelled the trip, scheduled a press conference for Wednesday morning and announced that she would be suspending her campaign.
Bachmann came in last out of the six viable candidates and among the GOP candidates with active campaigns, she only bested Jon Huntsman who had spent no time in Iowa and had slighted Iowan’s approach to the nomination process.
With less than 6% of the vote in Iowa, Bachmann’s campaign was in serious trouble. Considering that she was polling dismally in New Hampshire and is not eligible for the ballot in Virginia, she was on a long, dark road to nowhere.
Rick Perry also suffered disappointing results in Iowa and headed back to Texas for a few days to consider his next steps. Perry was also intending to skip New Hampshire and focus on South Carolina.
Throughout the day, pundits have been proclaiming that there would only be three tickets out of Iowa – the candidates that come in first, second and third in the state’s caucuses.
With 41% of Iowa voters answering that they had not made up their minds yet, election-watchers could be up for a wild ride. Take into account that Iowa is also a partial delegate state which means that the candidates will receive a number of delegates proportional to the number of votes they get, and it begs the question – why only three tickets?
With seven candidates in the race, should we expect that four will be finished once Iowa’s precincts report?
Romney, Santorum and Paul are widely expected to top the results, but Iowa has had surprises before and many in Iowa are still undecided.
Lately, Santorum has been soaring in Iowa polls and Perry has been retaking some of the ground he had lost during the fall debates. Judging by Gingrich’s stellar crash, it would appear that Santorum and Perry are benefiting the most from Newt’s fall.
So who might get the lucky three tickets out of Iowa? Rep. Bachmann says she already has her tickets, Romney isn’t predicting a win, Santorum is hopeful and Paul is hosting some rather large gatherings.
My prediction is that Santorum will pull out a surprise win with Paul close behind. Romney and Gingrich will be fighting over what the election analysts insist is the crucial 3rd spot – I see Romney winning that spot. The 4th spot will be the actual watermark so there will actually be four tickets out of Iowa – a seat Perry or Gingrich could take.
If Perry takes the 4th spot, Gingrich will likely not have the funding to continue. If Gingrich takes that final seat, Perry might have the funds to continue for a bit, but a projected poor showing in New Hampshire and no chance for delegates in Virginia means it wouldn’t make much difference. That means Huntsman and Bachmann will be left to hitchhike or give up along with either Perry or Gingrich – we are but hours from finding out.
follow the Iowa Caucuses live blog for results and news
Folks, it’s time to break out the crystal ball and predict what will happen in Iowa tomorrow.
While there’s no clear leader in Iowa, Mitt Romney might be considered such, since he has led the polls the most consistently. However, the horse-trading nature of Iowa’s process means that Romney has no guarantee of success. In addition, the politically-attuned Iowa caucusers may reconsider support for him, since Romney recently expressed support for a national VAT tax.
Then there’s Ron Paul. The nature of the Iowa caucuses gives Paul an advantage: 17-year-olds can participate, independents can register Republican the day of the caucus, and active-duty military personnel registered to vote in Iowa but stationed elsewhere can’t participate as absentees. These demographic ‘slivers’ taken together could make a big difference for Paul. On the other hand, Paul’s racist, bigoted, and generally loony newsletters may make him too toxic for good-natured midwesterners.
Rick Santorum has seen a recent surge in polling. Whether this is an aberration or a genuine swing of support to him is anyone’s guess; personally, I’ve stopped giving serious weight to polling, since the frequency with which the results change leads me to believe recent polls are unreliable.
Newt Gingrich has fallen slightly in polling, now in fourth place according to some polls behind Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, and Rick Santorum. If one is to believe the polling (see above), this would indicate that caucusgoers are growing wiser about Mr. Gingrich’s poor Second Amendment record, long history of supporting socialized medicine, admiration of big-government historical figures, and his track record of poor leadership, and have decided to favor a more stable candidate.
And then there’s Rick Perry, ostensibly in fifth place. Rick could have an excellent showing tomorrow, given the nature of the Iowa process: Iowa is a state where second choices count almost as much as first choices. Once a candidate is disqualified in the caucus process, that candidate’s supporters can re-negotiate to back another candidate. Michele Bachmann is likely to be disqualified first; and if the “Santorum surge” is an aberration, and Santorum doesn’t perform well, his supporters and Bachmann’s supporters will most likely end up backing Perry as a second choice, which could push Perry above Gingrich.
As I noted a few days ago, things are changing among Republicans in Iowa, even the generally-accepted support for ethanol subsidies.
Whatever happens tomorrow, one thing is certain: It’s going to be a nail-biter for political junkies.
(Image via Wikipedia.org)
As the only consistent conservative in the race for President, I am crisscrossing Iowa meeting with voters who share our values. We need to work together to create jobs, reduce our debt, turn the economy around and protect our country from enemies who wish us harm. To do this, we must work together to send a consistent conservative to defeat Barack Obama.
I’ve been on the front lines fighting Barack Obama’s policies from day one. He has led our country down a path of destruction, and as conservatives we must join together to defeat him.
The United States is in economic turmoil, and is yearning for a leader to stand by their principles and set this ship right again. Much like how in the 1980’s Britain was in a similar situation and then Margaret Thatcher took the country by the reigns with her conservative policies and was nicknamed, the “Iron Lady.” As President, I want to be America’s Iron Lady!
We have an all-important fundraising deadline on Saturday, and I need your help to meet the fundraising goal we’ve set for our campaign.
The Iowa caucuses are just around the corner. In just a few days, Republican voters will begin the process to nominate our candidate to take on Barack Obama, and we need to ensure a conservative wins this fight. That’s why I’ve turning to you for support.
You may not be able to cast your vote in an early caucus or primary state, but you can make your voice heard today. You can show Republicans and Democrats around the country that you support the only consistent conservative in this race by making an contribution of any amount before our Saturday deadline.
You’ve likely heard that reporters and political pundits across the country will be looking at the fundraising numbers from this fundraising deadline as a key indicator of each presidential candidate’s strength. It is absolutely vital to show that we have the strong support to win this campaign, and so I ask that you follow this link to give $25, $50, $100 or even $250 right away.
Please don’t wait until it’s too late. This election is too important to sit on the sidelines. I’m asking you to get involved today and show your support for electing a consistent conservative to defeat Barack Obama. Follow this link to make your urgent donation before Saturday at midnight!
Thank you for your support!
P.S. Time is running out to show your support for the only consistent conservative challenging Barack Obama in 2012. I need your immediate help to show that support for our shared, conservative ideals are strong and widespread across the country. Please follow this link to make your generous donation of any amount before our December 31 deadline. Your support will make a big difference, so I urge you to take action today! Thank you.
Let’s pause for a moment and assess the GOP frontrunners:
It’s come to light this week that Ron Paul’s newsletter didn’t publish just one possibly racist article, it printed several definitely racist articles. From Mark Mayberry at The Truth About Bills:
The comments below seem to be the most notable:• “Given the inefficiencies of what DC laughingly calls the criminal justice system, I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.”• “We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational.”• After the Los Angeles riots, one article in a newsletter claimed, “Order was only restored in L.A. when it came time for the blacks to pick up their welfare checks.”• One referred to Martin Luther King Jr. as “the world-class philanderer who beat up his paramours” and who “seduced underage girls and boys.”
Ron Paul’s response to this revelation is, well, irrelevant. The statements were published, and they’re clearly racially-charged. That should be the last nail in the coffin of Paul’s campaign, but it probably won’t be.
Thomas Sowell’s “endorsement” of Gingrich this week is pretty standard fodder as far as Newt endorsements go. It can be summarized thus: ‘Newt isn’t a very good guy, but Obama is much worse… and yadda yadda Mitt Romney’. To me, common sense dictates that any candidate who must be endorsed with a disclaimer- such as “I know he’s not a nice guy…” shouldn’t be endorsed at all.
And the endorsements- just like Sowell’s- follow the same unspoken inevitability assumption: There is no candidate other than Newt (well, OK, there’s Mitt), Newt is the inevitable choice, suck it up and vote for him in the primary, and he’ll look good debating Obama. I see no enthusiasm amongst Gingrich supporters, merely acquiescence.
Speaking of Mitt: I think it’s safe to say few of us on the right really want to vote for him. The thrust of the Presidential race so far as been to find the un-Romney, after all. I don’t think I need to say much more than that about him.
Jon Huntsman, Michele Bachmann, and Rick Santorum are barely worth mentioning. Their poll numbers are so consistently low, they’re guaranteed to never earn the nomination.
And then there’s Rick Perry. It is maddening to me that more people aren’t getting behind him! Unlike Gingrich, he’s extremely personable, has no plans to socialize medicine, and has a clean gun rights record. He’s also the ideal ‘not-Romney’. He has an impeccable record of governance in Texas and a sensible immigration plan.
In fact, I don’t think anyone even disputes any of these points.
So what exactly is the barrier to getting behind Perry? If it’s the one dumb video referencing ‘gays in the military, let’s point something out: Although it wasn’t well-stated, the basic point of the ad was to illustrate that not all groups are gaining equality in the law. While one group- the gay community- are gaining legal equality, another group- Christians- are rapidly losing it. Compare this to Gingrich flatly telling the gay community to vote for Obama, and tell me who is less LGBT-friendly.
So again I ask: What is it about Perry- a solid small-government conservative with an impressive record as Governor of Texas (as well-illustrated by “Ace Of Spades” here)- that makes him less appealling than Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich or Ron Paul? Anyone?
Come on, GOP! Do we really want a poor candidate like Gingrich or Romney? Or do we want a great candidate with a proven track record of success?