Last night’s debate wasn’t all that eventful certainly not to where you could make a judgment as to whether or not one of the candidate’s is slipping or mounting a serious rise. Several things stood out and I had all kinds of reactions to said things. First off I’m getting sick and tired of the Romney campaign going in and filling the audience with Mitt Romney’s fanboys. All throughout the debate every time Romney uttered a word his annoying supporters would cheer and howl like they were at a wet t-shirt contest. As a matter of fact I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that like being at a wet t-shirt contest many in the crowd had boners.

It’s fine to cheer your candidate but to do that and openly oppose Santorum on the basis of “He’s challenging Romney” is plain stupid and it plays into what I said above, Romney supporters are freakin’ fanboys, plain and simple. Romney supporters are starting to act more like Obama supporters than your average Republican base supporter and that scares me. We know you like Mitt’s “Mittness” whatever the f**k that is or means, but don’t make yourself out to be the annoying wing of the Republican Party; although I fear we’re too late for that.

Second, what the heck is this talk of Santorum having a horrible performance? The talk was “Oh Santorum had a bad night because he was on the defensive” So what? The guy had to defend his voting record and his beliefs; is that bad? Better he do it now than in a general election where he has no shot at a benefit of the doubt. I understand the double standard for Santorum and Romney where all Romney has to do is be steady yet Santorum has to all but open his chest to show you his beating heart, because I understand Santorum isn’t suppose to be challenging the anointed Romney who’s entitled to the nomination because he’s the next guy in line. But I thought Santorum did fine and it’s not like he had a complete and utter breakdown which is how his performance is being spun in the media and by Romney’s groupies.

What did hurt Santorum a lot was Ron Paul’s covert surrogate role for Romney. It’s obvious to everyone with eyes and ears that Ron Paul’s role going forward is to take out Santorum and clear the way for Mitt Romney. Now I think that’s sad and I lost a lot of respect for Congressman Paul because I think these petty rabbit punches he’s throwing at Santorum are beneath him. And you know it’s ironic, odd, a bit funny the man touted as the consistent principled, constitutional, by the book candidate Mr. Ron Paul who never voted for raising taxes and spending money because he never sold out, did exactly that and sold out to the Romney campaign for whatever reason. I’ve heard he wants to be the chairman of the FED but that’s just hearsay right now. I do know it really makes you look at Ron Paul differently because he’s never done this before. In 2008 he stayed in because he believed in his libertarian message, now he’s staying in because he sold his soul to appease Romney’s from birth dream of being president.

In closing you know that crowd really got under my skin as I could imagine they must have really pissed off Rick Santorum because Romney didn’t even have to say a word and they would cheer for him. And you know they had marching orders and that’s why they acted the way they did. It’s like Romney buying the CPAC straw poll.

Overall I don’t think this will hurt Santorum like the Florida debate hurt Newt Gingrich because Romney still has a hard time going after Rick Santorum in a way that’s credible because let’s be honest Mitt Romney ain’t credible on very much. Santorum wasn’t the reason why he lost I think the crowd made Romney sound better than he actually did. He said all the usual Romney talking point answers and the crowd made it seem like he gave the sermon on the mount. Romney could have said “I like sweaty men and German porn” and the crowd still would have cheered and hooted.

This feeling I have toward Romney is nothing new on my part. I used to like Barack Obama and was willing to vote for him but his supporters ruined it for me. It was because of them that I slowly started to dislike him and that’s how I’m feeling toward Mitt Romney. I don’t dislike him personally because I don’t know him, and I’m sure he’s a good dude, but his supporters both within the part voting block and inside the Beltway are well, douche bags.

Oh and Newt did very well last night.

For the most part, last night’s debate was refreshing in the sense that the candidates were honest about their lack of conservatism.  Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul affirmed their support for some aspect of earmarking (although some parsed words), Rick Santorum owned up to his support of No Child Left Behind, Ron Paul unabashedly enunciated his support for Iran’s nuclear program, and Newt Gingrich also confirmed his support for Obama’s federal intervention in education via the “Race to the Top” program.

Nevertheless, there was one man who refused to own up to his lack of conservatism; Mitt Romney.  Romney consistently criticized Rick Santorum for his support for things that he undoubtedly would have voted for had he been in the Senate.  Some of the items, including NCLB, Planned Parenthood, and bailouts, he did support even without a voting record in the Senate.

Let’s face it; had Romney won the Massachusetts Senate seat in ’94, he would have voted for earmarks, No Child Left Behind, every bailout under the sun, funding for Planned Parenthood, and yes – he would have supported Arlen Specter.  After all, he ran to the left of Ted Kennedy in ’94.   We all know that Romney would have made Olympia Snowe look like Jim DeMint had he been more successful at electoral politics.  So don’t try to use your time out of Congress to your advantage, Mr. Romney.  Own up to your liberalism.

The most egregious claim from Romney was his false declaration that he opposed raising the debt ceiling without a cut, cap, and balance provision.  Romney asserted, “I said yes we should increase the debt ceiling in this last vote, but only if we have a cut, cap and balance provision put in place. Only in that case. And, therefore, I did not agree with the deal that was done in Washington. That was the wrong way to go.”

This is simply not true.

Read More →

For the most part, last night’s debate was refreshing in the sense that the candidates were honest about their lack of conservatism.  Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul affirmed their support for some aspect of earmarking (although some parsed words), Rick Santorum owned up to his support of No Child Left Behind, Ron Paul unabashedly enunciated his support for Iran’s nuclear program, and Newt Gingrich also confirmed his support for Obama’s federal intervention in education via the “Race to the Top” program.

Nevertheless, there was one man who refused to own up to his lack of conservatism; Mitt Romney.  Romney consistently criticized Rick Santorum for his support for things that he undoubtedly would have voted for had he been in the Senate.  Some of the items, including NCLB, Planned Parenthood, and bailouts, he did support even without a voting record in the Senate.

Let’s face it; had Romney won the Massachusetts Senate seat in ’94, he would have voted for earmarks, No Child Left Behind, every bailout under the sun, funding for Planned Parenthood, and yes – he would have supported Arlen Specter.  After all, he ran to the left of Ted Kennedy in ’94.   We all know that Romney would have made Olympia Snowe look like Jim DeMint had he been more successful at electoral politics.  So don’t try to use your time out of Congress to your advantage, Mr. Romney.  Own up to your liberalism.

The most egregious claim from Romney was his false declaration that he opposed raising the debt ceiling without a cut, cap, and balance provision.  Romney asserted, “I said yes we should increase the debt ceiling in this last vote, but only if we have a cut, cap and balance provision put in place. Only in that case. And, therefore, I did not agree with the deal that was done in Washington. That was the wrong way to go.”

This is simply not true.

Read More →

From the diaries by Erick.

Remember the arguments that Obama couldn’t conceivably win reelection if unemployment was over 7.2%? Or that the GOP had a lock on the Senate because they just had to defend 10 seats? Or that Democrats could never pick up the 25 House seats necessary to gain control?

And, by implication, that all of these good things would happen while Republicans sat on their lazy rear ends?

Still believe that?

And it’s not like winning would have required uncommon genius.

Read More →

From the diaries by Erick.

Remember the arguments that Obama couldn’t conceivably win reelection if unemployment was over 7.2%? Or that the GOP had a lock on the Senate because they just had to defend 10 seats? Or that Democrats could never pick up the 25 House seats necessary to gain control?

And, by implication, that all of these good things would happen while Republicans sat on their lazy rear ends?

Still believe that?

And it’s not like winning would have required uncommon genius.

Read More →

After the debate last night I am gratified to know that at least in the spoken word our four candidates are mostly headed away from BHO and in a direction I’d rather the country go. I’m still undecided and in the ABR camp (Anybody But Romney), however, my vote can be swayed.

I was on Redstate chat during the debate and hands down Newt won. We all agreed I think. those that didn’t agree thought their candidate did the best who ever they were sold out for in the first place. This morning I find Drudge with a voting graphic up asking who I though won the debate. Imagine my surprise when the tally came back as the image I’ve inserted here!?!

Read More →

It was the last debate. Newt Gingrich won it.

He was the only candidate who repeatedly steered the questions toward Barack Obama. He was the only candidate who dared point out that the media barely touched Obama’s infanticide support as an Illinois State Senator. He returned to the role of elder statesman.

The crowd leaned to Mitt Romney. It was probably inevitable. Mesa, AZ is the second largest concentration of Mormons in America and the State Republican Party handled getting the seats filled. It threw Rick Santorum off his game. The crowd booed Santorum taking on Romneycare’s individual mandate.

Santorum did not shine. He came in, it seemed, prepared to be beaten up. He was off his game. In the second half of the debate he did better. But the beginning was stumbling, bumbling, angry, and in the weeds. One thing he did very, very well is steer the contraception issue to families.

If Santorum can consistently steer this issue back to stable families, he has an issue that will win over independent voters. Note to the Santorum campaign: you will actually win the debate even in the general election if you focus your social values critique on the integrity of the American nuclear family.

Romney out performed Santorum, but he had two flaws. First, Romney claimed to be a long time proponent of school choice, but he opposed school vouchers as Governor of Massachusetts and the Boston Hereald noted Romney refused to ever meet with the head of the Massachusetts Charter School Association while in the Governor’s Mansion.

The big problem for Romney was his concluding moment in the debate. John King asked him what was the biggest misconception about him. It was a legitimate question and a chance for Romney to help himself. Instead, he got bossy and arrogant and told John King he wouldn’t answer the question. That question of all questions was the one he chose to get arrogant about?!

Newt Gingrich won. He kept the focus on Obama. He sounded like the adult in the room. He was both diplomat and scholar.

I would caution the media on one thing — the Rick Perry Factor.

Read More →

It was the last debate. Newt Gingrich won it.

He was the only candidate who repeatedly steered the questions toward Barack Obama. He was the only candidate who dared point out that the media barely touched Obama’s infanticide support as an Illinois State Senator. He returned to the role of elder statesman.

The crowd leaned to Mitt Romney. It was probably inevitable. Mesa, AZ is the second largest concentration of Mormons in America and the State Republican Party handled getting the seats filled. It threw Rick Santorum off his game. The crowd booed Santorum taking on Romneycare’s individual mandate.

Santorum did not shine. He came in, it seemed, prepared to be beaten up. He was off his game. In the second half of the debate he did better. But the beginning was stumbling, bumbling, angry, and in the weeds. One thing he did very, very well is steer the contraception issue to families.

If Santorum can consistently steer this issue back to stable families, he has an issue that will win over independent voters. Note to the Santorum campaign: you will actually win the debate even in the general election if you focus your social values critique on the integrity of the American nuclear family.

Romney out performed Santorum, but he had two flaws. First, Romney claimed to be a long time proponent of school choice, but he opposed school vouchers as Governor of Massachusetts and the Boston Hereald noted Romney refused to ever meet with the head of the Massachusetts Charter School Association while in the Governor’s Mansion.

The big problem for Romney was his concluding moment in the debate. John King asked him what was the biggest misconception about him. It was a legitimate question and a chance for Romney to help himself. Instead, he got bossy and arrogant and told John King he wouldn’t answer the question. That question of all questions was the one he chose to get arrogant about?!

Newt Gingrich won. He kept the focus on Obama. He sounded like the adult in the room. He was both diplomat and scholar.

I would caution the media on one thing — the Rick Perry Factor.

Read More →

Someone who IS a conservative doesn’t have to convince us he is a conservative because he lives like a conservative, thinks like a conservative, and acts like a conservative.

¹⁵ Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
¹⁶ Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
¹⁷ Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
¹⁸ A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
¹⁹ Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
²⁰ Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
Matt 7:15-20 (KJV)

Cross posted at www.firstchevalier.com

The Drudge Report put up a story about Rick Santorum’s speech to Ave Maria University in which Santorum said Satan was attacking the United States. The speech was giving in 2008, but is largely consistent with statements he has given in the past few weeks.

I agree with Rick Santorum. I also think that this is a Romney leaked piece. Given the close ties between Matt Drudge and the Romney camp, that’s an easy guess. I also think it will hurt Santorum who apparently has Gingrichitis, a disease the frontrunners all seem to get where they mouth off on any topic under the sun once they are the front runner.

Focus on this topic does not help Santorum and is largely irrelevant to being President. Nonetheless, I feel compelled to defend Santorum given how clueless some of those attacking him seem to be on the specific points he made and also given the cluelessness of a lot of reporters trying to put his remarks in context or explain them.

Read More →