http://spectator.org/blog/2012/01/27/elliott-abrams-caught-misleadi

Mark Levin and Rush are truly separates among the others. Rush today as well was pointing out the problem Mitt will have with Romneycare and how bad of an issue that the GOP will lose with Romney because of his Romneycare being essentially the birth of Obamacare. Romney’s answer to me was pathetic and blantantly liberal garbage. Santorum did an excellent job exposing as Rush pointed out. Rush also took issue with Romney’s characterization of Santorum as being angry…Rush thought he was angry because he had to sit through Romney’s ineffectual defense of Romneycare will still saying he is conservative and could hammer Obama with Obamacare.

Levin is also classic. He san see through all the political pundits like Rove, Hume, Abrams, McCain, Morris, Coulter and others who is knows are full of it!! Newt was the first Speaker in 50 years he was the instrument by which we even have the majority today due to his abilily back in the 90s to orchestrate such a shift! He was clearly a Reagan conservative and Levin recognizes the utter hyprocrisy from the Establishment and it makes him angry like so many other conservatives. He is right the DC Elites could care less about the conservatives and Christie is a an overweight clueless wonder who if he had to pick to A, B, C or D as the first letter of the word conservative he would pick L for liberal. He has done nothing in NJ except fight with the teachers but outside of that he is no different than any other Northeast RINO! Levin sees that and knows how the liberals, who are the minority of the GOP, are trying to force the majority to accept a liberal RINO from Mass.

Levin is right is it is okay to criticize Newt but to destroy a man with blantant lies is a disgrace!

so there’s a thread of hope that coming off the huge SC win, Floridians rode the victory wave and voted before the debates

Limbaugh, Levin, Palin have sat on their hands while the true conservatives in the race have fallen away. Santorum is not going to get enough momentum to go anywhere. When it was time for either he or Perry to go, in his arrogance, Santorum hung on even knowing Perry had the money (and potential to raise a whole lot more) and organization to keep on Romney’s heels. That’s all water under the bridge. Today, we’re at a the final point of no return. If something big doesn’t happen very positively for Newt in the next 3 days, Romney wins FL and then there’s no stopping him. The big megaphones at Drudge and elsewhere will taunt and sneer and revel in the victory and this thing is over.

O’Reilly doesn’t sound too happy either about what Team Romney has done to Newt. All these guys need to get a game plan in place and quick. Rush lives in FL; he can make some appearances on the campaign stops this weekend. We have a country to save; surely he can pass on golf.

Santorum went home to file his taxes. He’s out of money and the polls are telling him the same story they told Perry in SC. He’s done and if Romney beats Newt by a wide margin, the wind’s at his back and we get 4 more years of Obama.

If I am a Floridian, I would vote for Newt Gingrich! Maybe there is some clause in her contract with Fox that fprbids her to endorse anyone outright and she had found a way! He He He!

Newt and Mitt are very close in most all issues. Move On Already! The biggest issue: Reduce spending. I believe the primary difference between the two candidates is the way in which they will implement or persuade congress and the senate to follow their agenda of Reducing Costs and Cutting Regulation. So the only questions to ask have yourself is, How Much Will You Cut, Where will you cut, and the absolute most important of all HOW FAST will true reform changes, etc., will be implemented.

Romney: Knows how to cut departments and spending. His position at Bain Capital proves that. There is no question about that. Over my 50 years of life, I have seen venture capital companies restructure and re-build or close many of companies. Scale it down to the bones and if it is a good product, it will rebound and grow. If not, sell the assets and move on. The primary goal is to cut and cut quickly to minimize risk with the worse case being liquidation. Is that the way you want the U.S. to be handled and polices enacted over the next four years. I will leave for you to decide. That doesn’t sound bad. Or, is it?

Newt Gingrich: 1994 Time man of the year for leading the way of bring back the house to the Republican Party after 40 years. FORTY YEARS!!! While he was House speaker, the House enacted welfare reform, passed a capital gains tax cut in 1997, and in 1998 passed the first balanced budget since 1969. Newt knows how to coalesce or bring together people for big common causes. He knows how the economy works and he knows how to implement much needed sweeping reform without killing the American People.

Both positions will get us where we want to go. With a shoot-gun that is quick and messy (Mitt) or like a bowling ball which is more steady, heavy and reaches its goal and scatters the mess out of the way (Newt). So…it’s a gun or a bowling ball.

Everything else is a completely mute point. Now…choose how you want the next four years to go. You decide. I have.

Here is Giuliani support for Newt on MSNBC….

Speaking on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani praised Newt Gingrich and criticised Mitt Romney as a flip-floppoer.

“I’ve never seen a guy change his positions on so many things, so fast, on a dime, on everything,” Giuliani said about the former Massachusetts governor. “Pro-choice, pro-life. And pro-choice because somebody, a close friend, died, and he became pro-choice because this woman died of an abortion. Then he figures out there are embryos and he changes.

“Then he was pro-gun control,” Giuliani opined. “Fine. Then he becomes a lifetime member of the NRA. Then he was pro-cap-and-trade. Now he’s against cap-and-trade. He was pro-mandate for the whole country, then he becomes anti-mandate and he takes that page out of his book and republishes the book. I could go on and on.”

Giuliani concluded that Romney was a “man that will say anything to become president of the United States.”

Meanwhile, the 9/11 icon likened Gingrich to Ronald Reagan.

“I kind of go back to 1980 and I remember the Carter White House just dying [to run against] Ronald Reagan,” Giuliani said. “Ronald Reagan was the dumb actor, Ronald Reagan said incendiary things, Ronald Reagan was like Newt — gosh, you never knew what he was going to say and the whole world would go crazy — The New York Times would write editorials. There was Bush, greatest resume of anyone who ever ran for president, solid citizen. They got Reagan and they got trounced.”

Giuliani continued: “I think Newt has a much more consistent position as a conservative, with some real exceptions like Ronald Reagan had. Ronald Reagan signed a bill that made abortion legal in the state of California. Ronald Reagan did in fact raise taxes several times, not just as president, but also as governor of California.”

Giuliani also talked about electibility.

“It may be that Newt is appealing to some that maybe Mitt isn’t appealing to,” Giuliani explained. “There’s something wrong when you’ve been running as long as Mitt has and you’re at 25 percent, and you don’t go much below, and you don’t go much above. Seventy-five percent of the other Republicans are telling you something.”

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Giuliani-Knocks-Romney-Praises/2012/01/28/id/425835

PRICELESS!

tactics. Its sad to see them try for 3 failures as if conservatives will cave into to media propaganda.

With all due respect to Levin, he has gone on the deep end lately. This is the same guy who thought Michelle Bachmann could beat Obama and was qualified to be president of the United States. Are you freaking serious, Mark?

Mark is missing the point thought with regards to Newt. No one is denying that he played an instrumental role in ushering in a GOP House majority. As a strategist, his skills are apparent. But what did Newt do once he actually gained power? His erratic behavior, lack of discipline, and oversized ego, was a giant distraction that impeded the GOP’s ability to achieve policy goals. Does anyone else remember the Air Force tantrum? Or the fact that Newt got badly outmanuevered by Clinton during the government shutdown debate?

The problem with Newt has less to do with ideology than his temperament. We cannot afford to have a loose cannon as our nominee, let alone President. The leader of the free world should be stable, calm, disciplined. Newt is missing these qualities, and a lot of congressmen who actually worked with Newt know this as well.. Hence, you see their fierce opposition to a Newt nomination.

I am deeply concerned about what I believe to be the misrepresentation of Romney as a conservative and as a moderate Republican in the current presidential race.

The stark difference between Romney’s views now and his record as Governor of Massachusetts should give us pause.

As a PTA mom from Maryland and a Republican volunteer in our county, I have followed Massachusetts politics via email news from www.MassResistance.org since the 2003 court redefinition of marriage in Massachusetts. Living in a “blue” state with 2 children in public schools, I have been concerned about the impact of the redefinition of marriage on public schools.

In their comprehensive report of Romney’s record entitled, “The Mitt Romney Deception”, the grass roots pro-family group Mass Resistance states “Indeed, this report will demonstrate that Romney was probably the most pro-abortion and pro-gay rights Republican official in the nation for the last decade.” The evidence is carefully documented by newspaper accounts with all sources listed at the end of their report.

Romney’s record as Governor in Masschusetts from 2003-2007 and his actions while a presidential candidate have not shown a committment to good government and have shown a willingness to exert undue influence on the media in my opinion. We are so in need of good leadership to take on the politically motivated decisions that harm so many Americans and benefit only a few. I do not feel that Romney’s record as Governor indicates a willingness to govern in that way.

I am also concerned about Romney’s choice of judges and the state of the Republican Party in Massachusetts after his tenure as Governor.

For more information, please refer to the details under the subheadings below.

Thank you for your consideration of this material.

**************************************************************

www.MassResistance.org/romney

***************** the subheadings below are copied from The Mitt Romney Deception Report The 26-page comprehensive report describing how Gov. Romney ran for office and governed as a liberal, despite his claims to the contrary. This covers a wide range of topics and is an essential read.

Romney supports abortion in general, and believes in sustaining Roe v. Wade.

Romney campaigned for Governor of Massachusetts as a pro-choice candidate, and was endorsed by a pro-abortion political group

Romney is willing to support some embryonic stem cell research

Romney Approves of Abortion Pill and Supports the Legalization of RU-486

Romney signs “Right to Privacy” Proclamation celebrating birth control availability

Gov. Romney has a long history of promoting and furthering the homosexual agenda, and working closely with leading gay activists

Romney twice sought and received the endorsement of the homosexual Log Cabin Republican Club

Romney’s campaign distributed pro-gay rights campaign literature during Boston’s “Gay Pride” events

Romney supports homosexual “anti-discrimination” laws

Romney advocates homosexual couples’ adoption rights be recognized by the government

Romney supports homosexual domestic partnerships

Romney supported and promoted legalizing homosexual civil unions

Romney Opposes the Boy Scouts’ Ban on Homosexual Scoutmasters

Romney barred Boy Scouts from public participation in 2002 Olympics

Romney appointed prominent homosexuals to key positions in his administration

Romney appointed prominent homosexual activists and Democrats as judges

“Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents — including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights, a Globe review of the nominations has found. Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats.”
- Boston Globe 7/25/2005, “Romney jurist picks not tilted to GOP; Independents, Democrats get call”

Romney Rewards one of the State’s Leading Anti-Marriage Attorneys by Making him a Judge

Romney announces he won’t fill judicial vacancies before term ends

Romney’s Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth used huge taxpayer funding to promote homosexuality in the public schools

Romney’s Commission organized public gay “Youth Pride Day” parades and “transgender proms” which promote unhealthy and risky behavior

Romney issues a proclamation celebrating gay “Youth Pride Day”

Romney’s Department of Education promotes the homosexual agenda

Romney’s Department of Public Health (DPH) cooperates with the homosexual activist movement

Romney opposed federal legislation that would stop public schools from promoting homosexuality

Romney’s Dept. of Social Services honors homosexual “married” couple as adoptive “Parents of the Year”

Romney refused to endorse the original 2002 Mass. constitutional amendment absolutely defining marriage as one man and one women

Romney unnecessarily (and unconstitutionally) implemented homosexual marriages in Massachusetts

Romney had marriage licenses changed to allow same-sex marriages

Romney administration ordered Justices of Peace to perform homosexual “marriages” when asked – or be fired!

Romney administration’s training of Town Clerks (on how to issue same-sex marriage licenses) states that marriage statutes were not changed

Romney signs bill eliminating Sexual Transmitted Disease (STD) testing requirement for marriage

When requested of him, Romney personally issues special one-day certificates to allow otherwise unqualified people to perform homosexual “marriages”

Was Romney’s public opposition to homosexual “marriage” based on expediency, not principle?

Romney favors “Assault” Weapons Ban

Romney Favors Waiting Periods

Romney supports minimum wage laws

Romney Balances Budget with $500 Million in New Fees

Romney imposes “socialized” health care on Massachusetts

Romney’s dismal record as the Republican leader in Massachusetts

Romney pledged to build the Massachusetts Republican Party, but in fact he did almost nothing. During his tenure there were two elections for the entire Legislature (2004 and 2006). In each election the Republicans lost seats. Republicans now hold the fewest seats in the Legislature since the Civil War.
During the four years of Romney’s tenure, the number of registered Republicans in Massachusetts fell by 31,000. During that same period, the Massachusetts Democratic Party gained 30,000. “…… That means Republicans now make up 12.5 percent of the state’s voters, … according to the data released by the Secretary of State’s office. When the state elected Romney, a Republican, in 2002, the GOP made up 13.4 percent of the electorate. ”
- Boston Globe, 11/2/2006, “GOP ranks dropped by 31,000 since state elected Romney”
In the 2006 elections, most offices were not even challenged by Republican candidates. In the November general election for the six statewide Massachusetts constitutional offices there were more Green-Rainbow Party candidates on the ballot than Republicans!
The party’s slide has been so precipitous that Republicans yesterday did not contest 130 of 200 legislative seats, fielded a challenger in only three of 10 congressional districts, and put up fewer candidates for statewide office (three) than the Green-Rainbow Party (four).
- Boston Globe, 11/8/2006, “For Republicans in Mass., a feeling of out and down”

**************************************************************************

Comments from the head of the Massachusetts Republican Party, James Rappaport, who was Chairman while Romney was Governor.

“…James Rappaport, former head of the Massachusetts Republican Party held a press conference recently to announce his endorsement of Rudy Giuliani. ….. Rappaport, who served when Romney was governor, said Romney “has a strong record of showmanship as opposed to actual performance.” On his relationship with the State Legislature, “His word is no good … Mitt Romney would say one thing in a meeting and literally go out of the meeting to the press and tell the opposite story. There was no desire in the legislature to be accommodating to him because they couldn’t trust him…. Romney will be clear today on what he believes today, and he’ll be clear tomorrow on what he believes tomorrow, but they may be different things.”

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/SandyRios/2007/12/10/mitt_romney_may_have_had_no_choice,_but_i_do

**************************************************************************

Conservative media has a conflict of interest with Romney.

I believe that some conservative media, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levine, Rich Lowry, Hugh Hewitt, and others perpetuated a false idea during the 2008 campaign, i.e. the idea that Romney is conservative. Their scrutiny of Huckabee and McCain’s conservative credentials during the 2008 campaign was often emotional and full of highly charged, derogatory terms, while they were more silent about holes in Romney’s conservative credentials.

On Nov 16, 2006, Clear Channel Communications agreed to be acquired by Bain Capital and Thomas Lee Partners for nearly $19 billion. Bain Capital is the private equity firm founded by Mitt Romney in 1984; that he left in 1999 to head the 2002 Olympics; that he sold his majority interest in, in 2001 to run for Governor of Massachusetts; where he is still a silent partner. The sale was completed in Dec 2007 after 1 year of pending negotiations of the leveraged buyout agreement. Clear Channel owns more than 1,100 full-power AM, FM, and shortwave radio stations, twelve radio channels on XM Satellite Radio, and more than 30 television stations in the United States.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/16/AR2006111600537.html

Premiere Radio Networks, which is the largest syndication company in the United States, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Clear Channel and is home to Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, FOX NEWS Radio and many other talk radio shows. Premiere Radio Networks is transitioning to a new CEO Charlie Rahilly from Kraig Kitchin. Sean Hannity recently signed a large multi-market contract with Clear Channel.

The early Bain Capital team included Romney’s campaign advisor, Robert F. White. According to CNN/Money magazine’s Dec 10, 2007 article entitled “Millionaires-in-chief”, some 43% of Romney’s portfolio is currently invested in Bain Capital. On the Bain Capital website it says “Our principals are the largest single investor in each of Bain Capital’s funds,..”
(http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2007/moneymag/0712/gallery.candidates.moneymag/6.html )

**************************************************************************

Other informative reports:

Report on the true pro-life views of Gov. Romney – Written in reaction to the controversy over Romney’s various pro-life stands.

How Mitt Romney brought “gay marriage” to Massachusetts – Complete report with comprehensive legal analysis. The Supreme Judicial Court made a ruling and ordered the Legislature to act. The Legislature did nothing, so Romney stepped in and ordered same-sex “marriages” to begin — essentially violating his oath of office.

A new book, “Mitt Romney’s Deception — His Stealth Promotion of “Gay Rights” and “Gay Marriage”in Massachusetts” Contrary to Governor Romney’s claim that he defended marriage, the Constitution, traditional values, and religious freedom, he actually undermined them.

Nice post, but we have to make sure this is clear since there’s a BIG difference!

Yes, I said it. That’s right! He’s an idiot. Who says Newt is a good conservative, let alone a great one? He’s blown that. HE did that to himself. Not Romney’s ads.

Newt Gingrich wrecked his own conservative credentials the same way that he ruined his marriages and his career….by selfishly acting out. By serving NEWT.

Please, Levin and the rest of you Newt pimps. I’d FAR sooner for for Ron Paul than Newt Gingrich. For that matter, I’d vote for Santorum before I voted for Newt, the serial philanderer/couch sitter/Freddie peddler/Ryan basher/class warfare-spewer. And of course, Mitt Romney is the premiere “Private Sector” candidate with a successful track record and Newt…well, Newt is Newt. A classic Washington insider and career bureaucrat who thyinks he’s smarter than everyone else and has the right as a “conservative” to stick his finger in our eye anytime it serves HIM or his pocketbook well. Sorry, won’t work.

Mark Levin can take Newt and his big FAT, whiny, sniveling @$$, along with his non-conservative/philandering ways, and stick ‘em where the sun don’t shine, as far as I’m concerned. Most conservatives REJECT Newt Gingrich outright and reject Levin’s incessant trashing of Romney. The few who are stuck in the mud continue to shill for Newt because they hate Romney so much. Why? Because they are deranged (RDS) and seem to think that most of us are like them…with a narrow view of what “conservatism” means.

Romney/Ryan ’12

Palin at Energy
Petraeus at Defense
Newt at Education
Rudy G. at Justice

Sorry for the harsh language in my last post. I get very angry at those on the FAR RIGHT who disparage, trash and try to chase away moderate conservatives from the GOP. Let me tell you all something. The Tea Party are MODERATE conservatives. They are not right-wing nuts or evangelicals, for the most part. They are for individual liberty and economic freedom, which in some cases flies in the face of those folks on the far-right…mainly the “individual liberty” part.

The far-righties, for lack of a better term, seem to think that THEIR views are the dominant view in the conservative movement and the Mitt Romneys, Chris Christies, Tim Pawlentis, Jon Huntsmans, GWBushes, Bob Doles, John McCains of the world should be rejected, shamed, called names and tarnished. This is not a “conservative” view nor is it conservative behavior to admonish someone because they agree 80% but not 99% or 100% with you. Real conservatives, like Tea Partiers, are concerned with the free market, with economic prosperity and with individual liberty. Romney represents them well in these respects. In fact, it was the BOSTON TEA PARTY, remember? Yes, the people of Massoftaxes had the first Tea Party. Romney is doing well with them and the more they see him, the more they like him.

People have been misrepresenting Tea Party conservatism with regularity, both from the right and in the lamestream media. The claim is to tie “Tea Party” conservatism with “southern” conservatism. And that’s simply not the case. The Tea Party is actually an eclectic, diverse group of conservatives and moderates, with a few liberals thrown in, from all over the country. Tea Party conservatism is fiscally conservative and more moderate socially in that personal liberty is paramount to them. In this way, they love Ron Paul’s views. But Paul has cornered himself as an extremist on foreign policy. That appeals only to the far LEFT. His point is well taken, that we need to cut back our “overseas excursions” and wars, to be sure. But his extreme view (Clear ‘em all OUT NOW!!! We’re to blame!!!!) is over the top and not acceptable to many conservatives and Tea Partiers.

With regard to the far-righties, one can name at least 4 or 5 things that individuals are “not allowed” to do TO THEMSELVES in the far-right, non-Tea Party wing of the conservative movement. These folks are a small minority in the party but speak as if they’re the vast majority. They’re not and the sooner they realize it and join the rest of us (see Florida results) in accepting a few sensibly “moderate” positions, the better we will be as a party and as a nation.

We all know the list…abortion, gun control, drug laws, gay rights, even euthanasia. If the GOP were to adopt SENSIBLY moderate positions on all of these things, we could become a permanent majority and the LIBs would be virtually out of business. As it is, however, we bow to the far-righties and we have this never-ending battle where we win a few, lose a few and the LIBs wreck the country whenever they take full control (’92 – ’94, ’07-’10).

Tea Party conservatism IS sensibly moderate conservatism. Embrace it because that’s actually where REAL conservatism lies…the kind that puts an emphasis on FREE markets and PERSONAL LIBERTY.

Feb. 17, 2012, “Mark Levin taken off Toledo radio station for disagreeing with Ron Paul,” Examiner.com, Joe Newby. The program director at the Toledo station, Brian Wilson, is a Ron Paul fan, ordered Levin to apologize for some remarks, Levin refused, now radio station has a new show on called Free Talk Live which supposedly is pro Paul.