Great Job Mark. I wish you could explain these exclent facts to Sean Hannity and O'Relly. They don't seem to coprehend any of what the facts are about. GOOD WORK!
Then why doesn't Levin endorse Gingrich? I still maintain that while Romney has claimed to have created thousands of state jobs, Gingrich was responsible for creating millions of jobs throughout the country. Santorum? I suppose he can be credited for creating all those jobs to the bridge from nowhere.
Gingrich is the one who has the national experience and proven record at a time when our American has been molested by the policies and czars of Obama. It will take a big thinker and doer like Gingrich to return America to its greatness.
Yup. As he did with the Massachusetts Republican party, he will do with the National party; decimate it.
It's all about Mitt. Always.
Well said, Great One!
Whatever the hell is going on in the GOP, I want no part of it! And I WILL NOT accept Mitt Romney as my candidate!
Love Mark, and love conservatism. Just wish they would stop acting like Liberals and remember the Buckley Mantra: "find the most conservative person who can win". And just how conservative does one have to be than to be more conservative than BO. Get with it guys, there is not perfection, but lets look for improvement.
Newt, who wants to build an American colony on the moon by the end of his second term is running as a "conservative." Newt, who's committed adultery in 2 marriages and divorced his ex-wives when they were ill, is conservative. Newt, the erratic, verbal bomb thrower, calling Ryan's plan "right wing social engineering," and sitting on the couch with Pelosi, is a conservative. Newt the conservative "outsider" who spent his life in Washington, profiting and peddling interest. Do you understand how backwards and hypocritical that is? If you're going to vote for Newt, don't lie to yourself and say he's running as a conservative outsider.
Let's get real Americans. We are a center-right country, not a far right country. We don't need an ideologically pure conservative. We need a fiscally responsible conservative who knows how to get this economy going, cut cap and balance the budget, who has the experience in both business and government.
Mark is right. http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/2012/01/he-who-must-be-destroyed-palinization.html He who must be destroyed: The Palinization of Gingrich is an ugly thing...
"...a loud mouthed nitwit..." who has written several cogent and very well-thought out books that simply and eloquently make the case for the fundamental ideas of conservatism while you apparently find it impossible to compose a coherent sentence. 'The Bush Family' which you, as a good Obamunist, blame for all our country's ills did not do in twelve years of stable, scandal-free governance, too liberal in my mind but still competent, didnt do one trillionth of the damage that The Worst President In American History and the vile Party Of Compassion have done in three years of misrule. The housing crisis arising from BJ Clinton and the Democrats' urge to make a personal profit from forcing banks to abandon lending standards is a good example of how you dimwit liberals blame your stupid Utopian policies on others after the damage has been done. The complete and total failure of every single Obamunist policy, obvious to all but the completely stupid, cant be blamed on even liberal Republicans who were completely shut out of the process for two years. Go peddle your illiterate, ignorant left-wing tripe at Huffpo.
If Romney gets the nomination I'll vote for him but it will be with a sour taste in my mouth. It will be with the realization that we wont be cutting the extra trillion dollars that the Obamunists tacked onto our budget in 2009 and have refused to cut one penny from. It will be with the knowledge that Obamacare, national health care, will now be a permanent fact of life in this benighted country. The catastrophe of national bankruptcy will not be turned aside and as the social welfare states of Europe collapse we will join them on the trash heap of history. There will be no supply side tax cuts. The EPA wont be cut back and will even be expanded. Unions will still be able to force people to join and then extract their dues to use for leftist candidates. It will be business as usual all the way. Conservatives will have lost everything forever with all hope gone of changing direction. The vile, idealess campaign run by the dishonorable Mutt-man, wholly consumed by personal ambition and surrounded by the corrupt Republiclown cronies that made the eight years of The Feeble Bush such a disgrace to our party, contains not a ray of hope that the leftist course of this nation can be reversed and the iron grip of an elite which has an unbroken record of failure can be undone. The saddest part of this travesty is that there are millions of Republicans, fellow conservatives, who can believe the lies of this claque of self-aggrandizing bureaucrats and vote for a man who has demonstrated such a complete lack of scruple. Shame on us if Romney wins after this sickening, dishonest performance. Shame on every voter he has fooled with his lies.
Deal with it you foul-mouthed Stalinist; your Party Of Compassion has brought us The Worst President In American History and policies that have caused an economic depression, corrupted our education system, turned our country from an industrial power into a land of rusting, empty factories, destroyed our country's position in the world and eroded our Constitutional rights. You lying lefties are good at calling other people names, some of them obscene all of them vulgar, but when it comes to running any kind of government the result is always the same...total failure. I dont believe you support Romney. Use of the Tea Bagger insult is restricted to the most foul, doctrinaire leftist, of which you are one.
How about someone pressing someone on Romney's defrauding of Medicare? He made millions and thousands lost their jobs after Bain capital sold Damon to Corning. When first confronted with the accusation in 1994, Romney claimed he knew nothing of it. Later, when it was revealed that he most definitely knew, he said he investigated and stopped the fraud in mid 1992. Later the truth came out. Romney did know and allowed the fraud to continue right up until the day they sold Damon to Corning in mid 1993. Corning found the fraud and stopped it but were fined 119 million since by buying the company, they took over any and al debts. They were forced to close Damon and lay off every one of it's thousands of employees. Bain made 12 million (7.4 million profit) and Mitt made 473,000. Who says crime doesn't pay?
Four years ago he did was well, I don't know anyone who was excited about McCain. But Most of us were worried about Clinton, not Obama.
Romney Bot actually. I'm just voting for Ron in the primary because I think conservatives should vote for fiscal sanity, sound money, and a limited role for government when they are offered the chance to vote for it, because that's what we call 'conservatism'.
Wow, this looks like a case for the self-appointed "tone" police to lecture us on getting personal.
If we want to take cheap shots at people's wives, then we could always ask Newt which of his wives never lacked for talent.
But you have a great point. We should probably consult a fortune teller to pick our nominee. After all, if Nancy did it it must be the one sure path to the truth.
Good one with the WHINO. But I don't need to prove it because Newt admitted it in the last debate.
That's what "that was taken out of context" means: He said that non-english languages are "languages of the ghetto".
And enough with these lame excuses about how we must ignore incredibly inappropriate or offensive statements because somehow they can be taken out of context. It is not only *possible* to say something so stupid that context doesn't matter, it's the lefts favorite damage control mechanism. ACORN employees offering to help traffic in child sex slaves? That was taken out of context. -Oh, Ok.
I'm not saying that Newt hates Spanish speakers, far from it. Obviously he cares about upward mobility and opportunity for immigrant populations. But it is Joe Biden stupid to talk that way when you are running for the ONLY Federal office that every citizen gets to vote for.
Should the representative of the Republican party tell the most successful Hispanic caucus in the country that their mother tongue is from the ghetto? Is that how we convince Latino's to give the Republican Party a chance? Should he show up at a black entrepreneur's convention and call them a bunch of welfare queens? It is possible to be unsuitable as a nominee simply because you constantly shoot off your mouth and sabotage your prospects.
I'm not saying he isn't right to criticize Huckabee. What is far more mysterious is why he's not saying it about Newt.
Have you used the Drudge Report? Drudge writes the links himself, which is why much of the fun is finding the facts he's referencing in the article he links to (usually buried). Drudge uses the power of headlines to highlight the bias of news sources.
Here's a perfect example:
Drudge's link (from my recollection):
"FED gave secret loans of $7.7 Trillion"
Now compare that with the articles actual headline, and where the part about 7.7 Trillion is buried:
Drudge is performing a public service for conservatism which is difficult to understate.
Isn't Cain responsible for Cain's "lynching"? You should be pissed at him for sucking all the Tea Party air out of the room, because he's why you are left with Newt and Santorem as the supposed "champions"of fiscal conservatism when it is clear they are anything but. And that's why the Tea Party is left with no recourse beside supporting a fiscally responsible moderate.
As for Perry, didn't you happen to notice when Perry claimed "we had no heart" if we didn't use O.P.M. (Other People's Money) to pay for illegals to get in-state tuition rates?
Did you happen to catch when he described basic mechanisms of real, free market capitalism as "vulture capitalism"?
Did you happen to notice when Santorem hit him upside the head with a proverbial 2x4 for claiming the state should be able to forcibly innoculate pre-teen girls against a disease that can't possibly be caught in from fellow students unless the school is utterly negligent in it's duties?
Did you happen to notice when he had that 4 second BSOD on live national television?
Perry has only himself to blame for his collapse. Beyond that, I was not surprised to learn what sort of "conservative" he is: He's a "conservative" because it's easy to be conservative when you're surrounded by them. But in reality, Perry, like Newt, only plays a conservative on TV. (aka, at election time.)
I know that Levine is correct about that, which is I have padded nose clips for voting since I'm not a child who takes my marbles home when my golden candidate on horseback fails to show up.
I'm just trying to prepare blueniner for when he first hears Mark Levine telling him to vote for Romney in a few months.
Regarding Palin, it sounds like shilling to me when it got beyond "keep Newt in it", I say that because I think it should be obvious that Newt is the antithesis of the Tea Party movement: He's the ultimate insider: He helps himself to taxpayer funds, claims he wants to spend all sorts of money for extravagant projects we can't afford, attacks the financial mechanisms of capitalism and WORKED FOR FREDDIE MAC.
I didn't know that Freddie had a History Department either, but then Newt told me he was just helping Freddie satisfy it's previously undisclosed interest in the US History for $30K a month. That's really funny, because I would say that a former speaker who was hired by the chief lobbyist of Freddie for that sort of money might have been hired for who he knows, as opposed to scraping gum off the underside of the desks or providing ad hoc lectures on the causes of the Civil War.
I'm here as a visitor, never been a very political person, until Obama was elected and started ramming bailouts, healthcare, birthcontrol mandates, etc. down our throats. And I am absolutley stunned by how this Republican election season is being carried out. And beginning to believe that if Romney gets the nomination, I will for the first time in my life vote third party, or not vote at all, as a protest against the stupid Republican establishment. Obama's re-election will give them what they deserve.
You sound like you're from OWS when you reuse the words "vulture capitalism". Good word choice though because Perry was also someone who obviously didn't understand capitalism and only played a conservative on TV.
Do you remember when Newt criticized Mitt's big house and wealth a few months ago? That's called the politics of envy. Do you remember when his defense to having the same investments in mutual funds as Mitt [which Newt distorted as "shares of Fannie and Freddie" when in fact a) it is not, b) is in a blind trust and c) isn't immoral.] was that "one was a mouse and the other was an elephant"? [Well, if it's so bad to invest in Fannie than you should keep it at the mouse level then?] That just shows that Newt doesn't know when he's making an ass of himself. Remember when he tried to claim that Bain capital was bad because it shut down a failing factory? That's attacking capitalism at it's core. Go watch Gordon Gecko's speech in Wall Street. It's really about accountability, and it's 100% correct.
Don't you need to win at least once before you can start calling it a "Dynasty"? You seem to have a loose grasp on basic facts and to be quite excitable. By any chance did you just write a story for Newsweek decrying that Obama's critics as stupid?
Hey, you might want to change your handle then...
I'd suggest "ObamaAintAsBadAsMitt" so that people can see you coming from a mile away.
Make the case how a conservative can attack Paul Ryan's budget or attack capitalism when the chips are down. I'll give you a pass on him working as a lobbyist for Freddie as just horribly bad judgement, but not for him insulting everybody's intelligence by claiming that Freddie needs highly paid historians more than they need lawyers.
I'm pretty sure Matt Drudge has done far more for conservationism by becoming the defacto news source for pretty much anybody that doesn't get their news from ultra left hacks. Even the ultraleft hacks admit they use him to follow what's going on.
"Tea baggers" aren't for a candidate that wants a moonbase or cap & trade.. At least half of the Tea Party are behind Romney. The other half haven't figured out that Newt is big government status quo guy, which is quite disappointing I think.
Our "bite" ran half these establishment types back to the unemployment office last time. We couldn't help it that not enough "moderates" who want to "compromise" with Socialists (aka, stupid sheep that get their news from ABC?NBC/CBS and the Daily Show) couldn't catch the clue train because they hit every branch on the stupid tree on the way to the party.
And despite all of this, Mitt Romney, moderate squish, is the closest thing we've got to a candidate that will cut the spending and has the good fortune to not have the last name of Obama or otherwise be inclined to appoint real live socialists and marxists, which is why Tea Partiers are supporting him (just as they supported Scott Brown) and he will be the next president if we can convince fools who voted for Obama to vote against him this time. From the way you talk I wouldn't be surprised if you were one of those people. If so welcome back to reality.
Romney would be far worse than Obama because of one thing - term limits.
Obama can't win again in 2016. Romney could extend this spending spree all the way till 2020.
You can't ignore the fact that Romney wants to increase military spending, and wants to debate the merits of Romneycare vs. Obama care.
When you increase military spend, increase social spending - you balloon deficits.
We passed 100% of GDP - our debt is larger than our GDP now.
It can't hit 200% - we'll default before then.
Romney's one chance to do something about deficits will take the form of unprecedented new taxing authority - he supports VAT taxes.
VAT taxes are hidden - but ultimately paid for by the consumers of products and services - they are a regressive tax.
But that isn't the main thing - don't hope for any solution to the real problem - spending, from Romney - he's believes, as Obama does - that government spending boosts the economy. He's been for stimulus all along, he's been 'more liberal on social issues' all along and he's been for growing the military all along.
Don't kid yourself - most Republicans like most Democrats are Keynesian - but you know what even countries like Germany are rejecting that - and they control their budget much better - and their economy is doing well on top of that.
You don't have to be Keynesian - there is another choice. Romney will be the end of Republicanism - I sure hope he doesn't win. At least Obama, if he wins again will be blamed for the mess he's making - and maybe in 2016 we can run a real conservative - meaning a real fiscally strong - non-Keynesian for office.
Excuse me? A man who has led a repulsive personal life, been thrown out office by his peers for malfeasance and fined a record amount for ethics violations, a man who casually knives conservatives in the back be it their name is Reagan or Doug Hoffman or Paul Ryan, we're supposed to be extra sensitive in dealing with him? You're joking.
Of course they did ... same with Herman Cain, and now Newt.
They consider outsiders like Ms. Palin and Mr. Cain ... and "rogues" in their camp like Newt ... as existential threats to their primary concern: the maintenance of DC status quo that richly provides the meal tickets, social status, and access to peddle-able influence they enjoy.
The political professionals -- party professionals, consultants, pollsters -- get paid by winning elections. The quality of governance after the election does not affect their paychecks.
They, along with the elected leaders they serve and are served by, wrap themselves in the mantles of "expert" and "statesman" and sometimes even think they are doing all this for the good of We the People ... but liberty and the ability of We the People to pursue happiness have become only secondary concerns to them.
They refuse to consider that the migration of the political process into one dominated by permanent institutions and career aspirations -- a professional/political complex that is far more corrosive to liberty than the military/industrial version -- is the primary facilitator of the biggest problem we face: the outsourcing of our personal responsibilities, resources, and decision-making authority to these same few Best and Brightest in DC to solve our problems FOR us.
All the other dysfunctions -- from the debt to the crony capitalism -- are symptoms of this fundamental problem, and the DC status quo has every incentive to perpetuate it.
Until we elect people who will ignore those incentives and focus on OUR liberty ... outsiders and rogues like those I list above ... our slide into decline will continue.
Would someone please cram a copy of this down Ann Coulter's throat?
What's up with her?
Did Newt turn her down?
Just understand, if he's the nominee, it's 100% sure we get four more years of Obama. Personally, as a committed conservative who does NOT identify with the GOP, because it too often seems only a shade different from the Democrats, I despair at what GOP voters and GOP pundits and web pages are doing. The circular firing squad antics, plus pushing a loathsome creep like Gingrich? What, are you on the Axelrod payroll?
You know it's really funny you say that, because you know who Mark Levine was in favor of in the closing weeks of the primary in 2008? His name was Mitt Romney.
Prepare yourself, because Levine also ran several shows where he explained why it was worth voting for McCain rather than staying home precisely because it really does matter which party wins the whitehouse.
In other words anybody but the two candidates who can actually win. Yes Ron Paul. Far more electable than Newt (phony) or Santorem. (A good man, but not exactly committed to rolling back the expansion of government)
What this thread needs is another lecture from the "tone" police. Clearly the "unintentional irony" and "hypocrisy" police have long since abandoned this place.
You should have heard him sing the praises of Romney in 2008 after it became obvious that McCain was going to win the nomination if people kept voting for Huckabee. I think you're right on the merits. Levine is fine with mud-balling if it hits the right people.
NP! We can be patient with this influx of new folks stopping by to defend Romney. After visiting other sites they aren't used to the vibe Scoop has created.
Scoops place is a Zen Garden. With knobs on.
Dan Quayle was an honorable VP who spoke out for social conservative issues, you moron. He didn't misspell potato either, (the teacher did) but he instructed his staff not to correct the press when it turned into a feeding frenzy.
Even Candice Bergman of Murphy Brown eventually admitted that Dan Quayle was right about single motherhood.
Don't you feel like an idiot now? You should CINO.
Newt did leave his office in disgrace. Do you think getting voted out of a position of authority by your own party is a badge of honor?
So Mitt is a disciple of Saul Alinsky? Does he sacrifice babies to Baal too?
Why don't you ask Mark Levine what his opinion on the relative strengths of Romney and Huckabee were back in 2008. He may not have been on the radio in your town back then, but I remember those broadcasts quite clearly.
Another CINO calling someone a RINO for the sin of noticing that their "conservative" is a fraud.
Dougx was listening when Ron Paul told you about the budget scam. I was listening. Weren't you, CINO?
Were you listening when Newt said he supplied witnesses to ABC and then admitted he didn't? Were you listening when he claimed he was a "historian" for 30K/mo at the 2nd most wealth destroying agency in human history? Were you listening when he talks about shrinking government and then talks about building Jacksonville their own Carrier Battle Group and moonbases for Titusville? Were you listening when he attacked capitalism itself?
Conservatives don't see what they believe, the believe what they see, CINO.
You're new around here, so let me advise you to watch the tone. Scoop runs a friendly place, and needless flames are whisked away.
I believe you misinterpreted his term. "RINO Romney supporter" is what he wrote, which is quite different from "RINO, Romney supporter".
I think you should read this thread more closely. I see "RINO", "Alinsky disciple", "just as bad as Obama" and even M_J_S passing on the "Dan Quayle was an idiot" myth.
Olympia Snow is a RINO. Murkowski is a RINO. Lincoln Chafee and Charlie Crist were RINO's. The people who are trashing Coulter, Drudge, Christie and everyone else that refuses to ignore that Gingrich lies like a rug and holds "interesting" positions for a "conservative" are the ones who should watch their tone.
I'm referencing Newt's favorite debate tactic. Unfortunately for him, it got old about two debates ago.
Where did I say anything about stopping you from asking questions? You can either comply with the rather generous and lenient rules Scoop has laid down, or you don't need to be here.
I raised the issue that people on this site are unjustifiably calling people RINO's. That's not getting personal, and is worth addressing if you're genuinely concerned about people's tone.
I'm not a liberal media personality from CNN/ABC/NBC, So claiming a tough question is offensive when it isn't is not going to stop me from asking it.
My reading comprehension is fine, thanks.
If you keep making things personal, you probably won't last long, here.