Romney Rising

Ryan Mauro is a fellow with the Clarionproject.org, the founder of WorldThreats.com and a frequent national security analyst for Fox News Channel. He can be contacted at ryanmauro1986@gmail.com.


Pages: 1 2

Gingrich used his speech to announce that he would be releasing a new contract between himself and his supporters modeled on the 1994 Contract with America. He previously released a 21st Century Contract with America in September. He said that the first part will be “conditional” and would require winning the presidential election and a majority in the House and Senate. The second part will be promises of actions he will take.

He listed several executive orders he would sign, including one that would move the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Gingrich framed his candidacy as one of sweeping change, instead of “managing the decay,” that would confront “the establishment” and both parties.

Rick Santorum came in third place with 13% of the vote. He congratulated Romney on his “resounding victory.” He devoted most of his speech to railing against the nastiness between Romney and Gingrich. He said that the “campaign went downhill” in Florida and that the Republican Party can do better. He defended Romney from Gingrich’s criticism of his time at Bain Capital and defended Gingrich from Romney’s criticism over his ties to Fannie-Mae and Freddie-Mac. He respectively criticized both for supporting the bailouts.

Santorum swiftly rebuffed suggestions from Gingrich that he should drop out so that the non-Romney vote could consolidate. He said that “Newt Gingrich had his opportunity” in Florida and had all the momentum after winning South Carolina. Gingrich lost, Santorum said, because he became the issue. Santorum said that the Republican Party should not have a candidate that will distract from making President Obama the issue.

Santorum made it clear that he will fight on. In interviews after his speech, he pointed to polls in Ohio and Missouri that showed him at or near the top. Ohio votes on March 6 and Missouri votes on March 17.

Ron Paul came in fourth in Florida with only 7% of the vote, but he did not actively campaign there. He wasn’t even in Florida on primary day. He was in Nevada to get a head start on the caucus, where he has two campaign offices. In his concession speech, he said that “We will spend our time in the caucus states, because if you have an irate, tireless minority, you do very well in the caucus states.”

Mitt Romney didn’t even mention Gingrich in his speech and Gingrich limited his attacks on Romney to calling him a “Massachusetts moderate.” Santorum, who won a huge applause in the last debate for demanding that the two end the personal attacks, reiterated his call. It’s too early to tell, but the presidential candidates made be reacting to a desire from Republican voters for a more respectful campaign.

Mitt Romney now leads with 87 delegates and Gingrich follows with 26. Santorum has 14 and Ron Paul is in last place with 4. Santorum makes it known that he won’t quit anytime soon and Gingrich and Paul each vow to fight until the convention. Romney is far ahead of the pack, but this race isn’t over and an upset can’t be counted out in this wild campaign.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • http://www.resonoelusono.com/NaturalBornCitizen.htm Alexander Gofen

    What a disgrace!.. And this is the best so called "opposition" America disposes: Romney, a typical liberast. The entire repoooblican deck of the same old cards stinks! This fallen nation has no organized opposition to the liberast coup… May God have mercy on us…

    • WildJew

      There are a few conservative Republicans out there – some tea party activists, etc. – who are not swayed by the Republican Establishment and the elites in Washington. Let's name a few names: Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Governor Chris Christie, Charles Krauthammer, Bob Dole, John McCain, Elliot Abrams, Jennifer Rubin, Marco Rubio, to name a few. Some might wonder why I include Limbaugh in the list. Limbaugh wimped out in the past days and weeks. He knows what you know about Mitt Romney. Yet unlike Sarah Palin and maybe one or two others he covered his derriere.

    • BS77

      I think you are over reacting. Mr. Romney is a good man, a hard working family man with a vision for progress and American greatness. Our nation is nearing default…we are sixteen TRILLION dollars in debt….a figure I cannot grasp, actually…….We need someone who has REAL WORLD experience in economic matters. No candidate will satisfy everyone. Just relax.

      • http://frontpagemag.com Francisco Bravo

        Hoover and Carter were better business men Nd you know the rest. Hillary and Romney describes themselves as Progressives , I do not know about you but, to me a progressive is a code word for communist AKA LIBERAL.

    • Fred Dawes

      We are a owned nation state and the new owners want a new guy to rule over us now!

    • http://www.resonoelusono.com/NaturalBornCitizen.htm Alexander Gofen

      Romeny is a McShame on steroids. Unlike Gingirich, he does not bother to throw even one bone (say moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem). It is not about as though he "cannot be all" required for survival of this nation (so that we must be happy with something). He is nothing, zero, a total liberast. He is set on being defeated in the same 8-years-you-8-years-me game of one criminal enterprise.

      • WilliamJamesWard

        You have good cause for concern, which is lost on so many because of
        the glare of the lights put out by the media and misinformation. I have not
        been enamored with any of the candidates and would like to see a real
        patriot in Office……………….William

  • http://grannyjanandjihadkitty.blogspot.com/ Granny Jan

    I wasn't a Romney supporter until tonight but I've never seen such a bunch of sore losers.
    I hope I'm not alone. That old saying about Republicans "I'd rather be right than President" holds true.

    • WildJew

      Where are you seeing all the sore losers. I will vote for Romney in the likely event he is the nominee. Obama is an unmitigated disaster. That having been said, Romney I think will prove to be a disappointment in many respects to the conservative movement, because he is not at heart a conservative. If, unlike George W. Bush, there is an adversarial relationship between the White House and conservative activists, radio talk show hosts, bloggers, etc., that might be a good thing. Under a President Romney, I would expect the economy to improve in the near-term but the march toward socialism will proceed apace albeit at a slower pace than under Obama.

      • WildJew

        Where do you see a bunch of sore losers?

        • http://frontpagemag.com Francisco Bravo

          Soros sees Romney as one them. A vote for Romney is a vote for your own demise ably slower than Obama. you never empower a bad Christian like Obama and Romney to do things for you.

          • WildJew

            So he says. After the American people elected Barack Obama, I lost faith in the good sense of the American people. Romney I believe is an American, even if he is slick and detached one – I am not talking about citizenship. Unlike Obama and his twenty-something year spiritual mentor, he is not a dedicated racist in my view. Radio talk show host Neal Boortz asks his listeners if they / we have have an "escape plan" should Obama be re-elected. I have no means of escape should, God-forbid, Obama be re-elected. I would prefer Gingrich. I voted for Gingrich. With Romney I can at least devise an escape plan; maybe.

            I no longer trust the judgment of the American people. How can I after Obama? This is a stupid people. Anyone who voted for and continues to support Obama is a stupid American.

          • Fred Dawes

            The two would rape us all and soon one or the other will do rape and murder on us all.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Soros sees Romney as one them. A vote for Romney is a vote for your own demise ably slower than Obama. you never empower a bad Christian like Obama and Romney to do things for you.

            Uhm…what about actions speak louder than words, regardless of your insane and ridiculous propaganda? Indeed, Newt Gingrich supported George Soros' handpicked and personally financed candidate in New York, Dee Dee Scozzafava, like the loyal Soros' soldier he is. Meanwhile, Romney refused to support her for that very reason.

          • WildJew

            That was a dumb move on Gingrich's part. He's made several dumb moves. If you can't support the conservative in a race, best not to support either one. Santorum did much the same with Senator Arlen Specter.

  • cedarhill

    Still, it looks like the GOP will get their "next in line guy". As an independent, there's not much difference between the GOP and the Dem Big Government folks. If Mitt wins the nomination the choice will be Big-little Gov versus Big-Big Gov. Won't wast the gas to go to the polls. Will need the cash to get treated overseas.

  • pierce

    Mitt Romney must have swallowed a bitter pill in 2008 at the hands of John McCain. Perhaps the same bitter pill that McCain swallowed in 2000 when he lost to George W. It seems to me that Mitt thinks he is entitled to be the standard bearer for the GOP, because he has paid his dues, otherwise why would he wage such a vicious primary battle to win the nomination. He definitely has not earned this writer's admiration, and he had better defeat Barack Obama in November, or he is finished as a pol, that is if he becomes the nominee.

  • Bigbird

    willard is a lying, sniveling, corrupt wall street crony narcissist. I am a political junkie that wont turn on the news now because the sounds of his and bari shabazz hussein obama voice makes me wretch. First the morons in this country vote in satan, an anti american, anti capitalist, marxist communist that bows to our enemies, takes over our auto industry, banks, health care, shrinks our military and makes us more dependent on saudi arabian oil(wow the guy he bowed to). Our country is DOOMED.

  • WildJew

    Asked by Dan Gilgoff of U.S. News & World Report if his repeated references to "jihad" in a speech at the Heritage Foundation characterized Islam in sinister terms, Mitt Romney surprised Gilgoff with this reply:

    "I didn't refer to Islam at all, or to any other religion for that matter. I spoke about three major threats America faces on a long term basis. Jihadism is one of them, and that is not Islam. If you want my views on Islam, it's quite straightforward. Islam is one of the world's great religions and the great majority of people in Islam want peace for themselves and peace with their maker. They want to raise families and have a bright future.

    "There is, however, a movement in the world known as jihadism. They call themselves jihadists and I use the same term…. It's by no means a branch of Islam. It is instead an entirely different entity. In no way do I suggest it is a part of Islam."

    • http://frontpagemag.com Francisco Bravo

      I am sending a Koran to Mitt , maybe he can read were the Muslims get their hatred toward humanity.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        I am sending a Koran to Mitt , maybe he can read were the Muslims get their hatred toward humanity.

        Please also at the same time send Koran's to Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, both major political parties, and the US federal government as well, as they all hold and maintain the same exact official positions as well.

        • WildJew

          Can you provide any evidence Gingrich hasn't read the Qur'an and unlike Mitt Romney, Chis Christie, George W. Bush and other apologists, sought out honest scholars on Islam?

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Can you provide any evidence Gingrich hasn't read the Qur'an and unlike Romney, George W. Bush and other apologists, sought out honest scholars on Islam?

            Dude I've read or watched every speech Gingrich has given on the subject of Islam and after each one I was left very disappointed because it is clear that he still doesn't have a clue. Indeed, find some sentences where he doesn't preface Islam with the word radical please, and post them. Please excuse me though if I won't hold my breath.

          • NorthStar

            So the answer is that you can't provide any evidence.

    • ObamaYoMoma

      What is this…like the 10,000th time you spammed this ridiculous crap on FPM?

      The only problem with Mitt Romney's above utterly absurd and ridiculous characterization of the problem, is it is thanks to GWB not only the official policy of the US federal government and also the official Republican Party position as well, but it is also the carbon copy same exact official position of Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul as well.

      The problem is the Republican Party and all of our political elites get their knowledge about Islam from university and college professors and with respect to those of us that have been paying attention for a while, we all know that the universities and colleges throughout the USA, Canada, and Europe have all been hijacked, co-opted, and usurped by oil rich Saudi and Gulf State Emir petro-dollars since in the late '70s.

      Hence, someone or something outside the university system must somehow break through the barrier and demonstrate to our political elites why it is a major mistake to get knowledge of Islam and Muslims from university and college professors.

      Indeed, normally I wouldn't even vote for any of these political elites since they are so incompetent with respect to the covert global jihad and because their knowledge of our enemies is so abysmal and filled with false PC multicultural myths. Indeed, before it is over with, in the long run eventually GWB will become known as one of the most incompetent US presidents ever in history.

      However, because I believe that the USA is on the precipice of rapid and steep decline thanks to the insanity of Obama and GWB, I will make an exception in this case to hold my nose to vote for the most conservative, least objectionable, and most viable candidate in the race. Which is Mitt Romney in this case, as Newt despite his claims is not the most conservative in the race, as his actions speak louder than words. Meanwhile, Santorum other than social conservatism, with the exception of amnesty is a carbon copy of GWB, and Paul is simply an unhinged loon.

      Not only that but out of the four candidates in the race for the nomination, Romney has by far the best shot at defeating Obama in the November elections, while Newt Gingrich has by far the worse shot. In fact, in all the battleground states, Obama has an insurmountable lead over Gingrich, making it virtually impossible for Gingrich to win.

      Hence, even if his actions didn't betray Gingrich's false claims of being a conservative, I still couldn't support Gingrich because it is simply impossible for him to defeat Obama in November, and the sole reason I'm voting for one of these loon candidates this time around is to defeat Obama because the USA is on the precipice of rapid and steep decline.

      Nevertheless, in the long run the college and university monopoly stranglehold on our political elites must be broken. Otherwise the world is doomed.

      • WildJew

        Can you provide a quote from Gingrich that indicates he thinks similarly about Islam as Romney.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          Can you provide a quote from Gingrich that indicates he thinks similarly about Islam as Romney.

          Can you supply a quote where Gingrich does not call mainstream orthodox Islam radical Islam? I rest my case. They all carefully go out of their way to separate what they view as extremism from the peaceful religion of Islam. In other words, they are all loons when it comes to understanding the real threat emanating from Islam because they all get their information on Islam from the same damn place, our colleges and universities which have been hijacked and usurped by Islam since in the 70s.

          • NorthStar

            So again you can't supply evidence for your claims.

            But that won't stop you from pretending that you know what you are talking about.

      • Fred Dawes

        what about his best friend in the world the international bankers? and real power Behind Mitt, he is always in the washroom with one or two.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          You should take your meds Fred before you post at FPM because you know your blood supply to your brain is notorious for fluctuating.

  • WildJew

    December 10 Iowa debate; excerpts:

    Speaker Newt Gingrich: 22:04:50:00 Somebody oughta have the courage to tell the truth: These people are terrorists.

    GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: 22:05:09:00 Governor Romney, (APPLAUSE) you just heard the Speaker say he was just telling the truth. Do you take any issue with that characterization of the Palestinians as an invented people?

    GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: 22:05:22:00 I– I happen to agree with– with most of what the speaker said, except by going down and saying the Palestinians are an invented people. That I think was a mistake on the speaker's part. I– I think– you– you– I think the speaker would probably suggest that as well. I– I don't think we want to–

    22:05:35:00 (SPEAKER NEWT GINGRICH: UNINTELLIGIBLE)

    GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: Maybe not. I– (LAUGHTER) I think we're very wise to stand with our friends, Israel, and not get out ahead of them.

    Romney: 22:05:51:00 They– Israel does not want us to make it more difficult for them to sit down with the Palestinian (terrorists – wildjew).

    Governor Mitt Romney: 22:06:03:00 –and the– and the United States of America should not jump ahead of Bibi Netanyahu and say something that makes it more difficult for him to– to do his job (i.e., negotiate with the terrorists – wj).

    Romney: 22:07:30:00 If– if– if– if Bibi Netanyahu wants to say what you said, let him say it. But our ally, b– the– the people of Israel, should be able to take their own positions and not have us negotiate (with the terrorists – wj) for them.

    SPEAKER NEWT GINGRICH:
    22:07:42:00 I feel quite confident an amazing number of Israelis found it nice to have an American tell the truth about the war they are in the middle of and the casualties they're taking and the people who surround them who say, "You do not have the right to exist, and we want to destroy you."

    Romney: 22:08:29:00 And I'm president of the United States, I will exercise sobriety, care, stability. And make sure that in a setting like this, anything I say that can affect a place with– with rockets going in, with people dying, I don't do anything that would harm that– that ("peace"?) process.

    • ObamaYoMoma

      January 26 / University of North Florida – Jacksonville, Fla. excerpts:

      Moderator

      Let's take another question from the audience.

      Please give us your name and tell us where you are from.

      Abraham Hassel from Jacksonville, Florida.

      How would a Republican administration help bring peace to Palestine and Israel when most candidates barely recognize the existence of Palestine or its people? As a Palestinian-American Republican, I'm here to tell you we do exist.

      Moderator

      All right. Let's ask Governor Romney, first of all.

      What would you say to Abraham?

      Mitt Romney

      Well, the reason that there's not peace between the Palestinians and Israel is because there is — in the leadership of the Palestinian people are Hamas and others who think like Hamas, who have as their intent the elimination of Israel. And whether it's in school books that teach how to kill Jews, or whether it's in the political discourse that is spoken either from Fatah or from Hamas, there is a belief that the Jewish people do not have a right to have a Jewish state.

      There are some people who say, should we have a two-state solution? And the Israelis would be happy to have a two-state solution. It's the Palestinians who don't want a two-state solution. They want to eliminate the state of Israel.

      And I believe America must say — and the best way to have peace in the Middle East is not for us to vacillate and to appease, but is to say, we stand with our friend Israel. We are committed to a Jewish state in Israel. We will not have an inch of difference between ourselves and our ally, Israel.

      This president went before the United Nations and castigated Israel for building settlements. He said nothing about thousands of rockets being rained in on Israel from the Gaza Strip. This president threw —

      (APPLAUSE)

      Mitt Romney

      I think he threw Israel under the bus with regards to defining the '67 borders as a starting point of negotiations. I think he disrespected Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

      I think he has time and time again shown distance from Israel, and that has created, in my view, a greater sense of aggression on the part of the Palestinians. I will stand with our friend, Israel.

      Moderator

      Thank you, Governor.

      (APPLAUSE)

      • WildJew

        I watched that debate. I listened to Romney's answer. All I can say is Romney is a fast learner. Above you wrote it's, "like the 10,000th time (I have) spammed this ridiculous crap on FPM."

        First none of this is "ridiculous crap." These are Mitt Romney's own words. Yes or no OYoM? I've been posting his appeasement words on virtually every conservative site I read. I have posted and reposted them. I mentioned them on talk radio programs. If any of Romney advisers got wind of it, so did Romney. Little doubt Romney realized how much damage his appeasement words of surrender and retreat have done. I don't know what you see in this man that is attractive; this Palestinian-lover.

        For all I know this "Abraham Hassel" is a Romney-supporter who was put up to help Romney undo some of the damage he did in the December 10 Iowa debate but it is too late. Romney's sympathies for our enemies is evident.

        • ObamaYoMoma

          I watched that debate. I listened to Romney's answer. All I can say is Romney is a fast learner.

          You should have paid closer attention to Romney in the 2008 debates instead of supporting that liberal McCain.

          Above you wrote it's, "like the 10,000th time (I have) spammed this ridiculous crap on FPM."

          Excuse me, I was trying to be conservative. It's more like the 15,000th time.

          First none of this is "ridiculous crap." These are Mitt Romney's own words. Yes or no OYoM? I've been posting his appeasement words on virtually every conservative site I read. I have posted and reposted them. I mentioned them on talk radio programs. If any of Romney advisers got wind of it, so did Romney. Little doubt Romney realized how much damage his appeasement words of surrender and retreat have done. I don't know what you see in this man that is attractive; this Palestinian-lover.

          I hate to rain on your unhinged parade again, but Gingrich's views on Islam are identical to Romney's. In fact, all the candidates views of Islam are based on false PC multicultural myths and misconceptions about Islam including Gingrich's. Indeed, he is just as clueless and as incompetent as Romney. How do I know? I make it my business to know, just like I make it my business to know about Islam as well.

          For all I know this "Abraham Hassel" is a Romney-supporter who was put up to help Romney undo some of the damage he did in the December 10 Iowa debate but it is too late. Romney's sympathies for our enemies is evident.

          Romney's positions on Israel and Islam haven't changed one iota since the 2008 campaign. Maybe if you weren't busy supporting that RINO John McCain in 2008 you'd have noticed. With respect to the 12/10 debate, because you are biased against Romney, you misunderstood Romney and Santorum's words out of context.

          • WildJew

            I didn't support or vote for John McCain in the 2008 primary. Neither did I support the liberal Governor from Mass. I'm pretty sure I voted for Alan Keyes in our Fla. primary. Either Huckabee or Giuliani would have been my second choice based on foreign policy / national security.

            Why do you say I misunderstood Romney and Santorum's words. They were both very clear. They both support Israel negotiating with the Palestinian terrorists. Romney especially was clear he would not want to say or do anything that might interfere with the phony peace "process." Romney: "I don't do anything that would harm that– that process." What process is Romney talking about if not the phony peace process? And if you are still uncertain, Romney added, "They — Israel does not want us to make it more difficult for them to sit down with the Palestinians (i.e., the terrorists)."

            And if you are still uncertain where Romney stands on these murderous peoples, he told Dan Gilgoff of U.S. News & World Report, Jihad or jihadism "is by no means a branch of Islam. It is an entirely different entity. In no way do I suggest it is a part of Islam."

            What am I taking out of context?

          • NorthStar

            Romney's position on Islam is Bush's position

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Romney's position on Islam is Bush's position

            Gingrich's position and Santorum's position as well is Bush's position, as they all get their information from the same exact place, our elite colleges and universities that have all been hijacked, co-opted, and usurped by the Islamic world thanks to Saudi petro-dollars and corrupt Leftist since in the 70s.

          • NorthStar

            Santorum and Gingrich are much better on Islam. Romney is Bush III

          • ObamaYoMoma

            Like I said, their positions on Islam, just like Romney's too, are all identical to GWB. Anyway, if you don't believe me, then prove me wrong.

  • mrbean

    Most women are herd thinkers and voted for Romney for three reasons: He is better looking than Gingrich therefore more sexually acceptabl; he is less of an alpha male than Gingrich so less threatening, and he has never cheated on his wife. Also Romney is a Harvard Business School elitest and passes muster for the GOP Country Club set and Gingrich is from one of those "Southern Universities" Tulane and thereby has unacceptable credentials for President

    • WildJew

      Yours is radio talk show host, Michael Savage's theory. Savage – who professes to be an expert historian – thinks most / many women will not vote for a man unless they can imagine themselves sleeping with him. No way, Savage says, will women vote for a "fat, old white man." If true, it's a pretty sad commentary on contemporary politics. I have a NRA (as in rifle) neighbor; Mary. Mary tells me women should never have been enfranchised in the first instance. I doubt there are too many like her.

      • Fred Dawes

        ASK OLD Savage why he hates old Paul? maybe its his banker friends?

        • mrbean

          Many women openly professed their sexual fantasies when they voted for Bill Clinton. Maybe many white women had a mandingo fantasy or a Kim Kardasian hangup for Obama, like "hit meh wit youse big choclit luff hamma Barack!

          • Ghostwriter

            Wonderful. You just attacked women and black people. You must be so proud. And please give up the "Amos n' Andy" bit. It's never worked and it only makes you look stupid,mrbean.

          • mrbean

            Yassah, dah Ghostwritaw dun beez dah Kingfish har un he dun tol meh tah stop mah "Holay Mackral Anday" rooteen.Tribalist Blacks, White Guilt Women, and the Leftist Media are why we have got a clandestine Muslim Marxist anti-semite incompetent empty suit like Barack Hussein Obama contaminating the oval office.

    • Fred Dawes

      Maybe old mitt is a woman and we don't know about it?

  • ObamaYoMoma

    He claimed that the state had “made it clear” that the campaign had narrowed down to two people, with Romney as the “Massachusetts moderate” and him as the “conservative leader.”

    How is Newt more conservative than Romney? Is supporting amnesty for illegal immigrants just like Obama somehow not leftwing? Is supporting global warming and cap and trade legislation with Nancy Pelosi and John Kerry somehow not leftwing? Is rejecting Paul Ryan's medicare reform like Dhimmicrats somehow not leftwing? Is supporting a federal individual mandate and a top down federal healthcare solution for almost 20 years somehow not leftwing? Is launching Alinsky like bogus anti-capitalist and class-warfare attacks against a fellow Republican and the free enterprise system somehow not leftwing. Is promoting FDR instead of Reagan as the best president ever in history somehow not leftwing? Is accepting $1.6 million dollars from Freddie Mac in 2008 at the same time Freddie Mac was destroying our financial system and creating the mortgage crisis somehow not corrupt? I mean at what point do actions speak louder than words? Give me break, Newt is by far the most leftwing Republican candidate in the race, plus he is a big emotional crybaby, another dead give away.

    Santorum, who won a huge applause in the last debate for demanding that the two end the personal attacks, reiterated his call.

    The only problem was his demand was incredibly hypocritical because almost immediately he turned around and launched his own personal attacks against both Newt and Mitt himself. Indeed, the only reason that Santorum is not slinging mud right now is because he isn't really a threat to anyone. Otherwise, he would be exposed for being the big government and big spending liberal he really is and launching at the same time his own personal counter attacks in retaliation.

    Indeed, the inevitability of Romney is becoming more and more apparent, especially when you look at the polls in the battleground states, which all indicate that it would be impossible for Newt to beat Obama if somehow he won the nomination. Not to mention that Newt's campaign is hurting big time for money and his defeat in Florida will only make it that much harder for him to raise cash. Meanwhile, Romney's campaign and ability to raise cash just received a big boost thanks to the momentum it received by defeating Newt by such a wide margin in Florida.

    • Stephen_Brady

      " Meanwhile, Romney's campaign and ability to raise cash just received a big boost thanks to the momentum it received by defeating Newt by such a wide margin in Florida."

      As the only "true" conservative on this site, it doesn't worry you about all the establishment cash coming the Mittster's way? It doesn't worry you that exit polling in Florida showed that Republicans believed that Newt is the ONLY true conservative in the race (I don't agree with that … Santorum is quite conservative, also)? It doesn't worry you that you support the man who called himself a "progressive"? It doesn't worry you that Romney has a glib assessment of the Middle East?

      After the inveitable attacks on me as a liberal, PC Multicultural, progressive, One-World Order type … ad infinitum … could you please grant us the gift of your wisdom as to why conservatives should support Mr. Romney?

      • ObamaYoMoma

        As the only "true" conservative on this site, it doesn't worry you about all the establishment cash coming the Mittster's way?

        First of all, Newt Gingrich has been in Washington continuously since 1978. Newt is not only a long time very loyal establishment Republican, but he is also a career professional politician and long time Washington insider who has maintained offices on K Streets for more than a decade.

        Nevertheless, even though Newt has been a long time very loyal establishment Republican, those that worked with him and know him best also know that he is incompetent, which is why 88 percent of Republicans voted against him on his way out of Congress in 1998.

        Hence, put yourself in their shoes, would you vote and support someone for President you know from personal experience is incompetent and of low moral character even if they were a very loyal establishment Republican? Well…knowing you, you probably would, but thankfully not everyone is as dumb as you.

        It doesn't worry you that exit polling in Florida showed that Republicans believed that Newt is the ONLY true conservative in the race (I don't agree with that … Santorum is quite conservative, also)?

        No not really, all my life I've encountered loons like you that claim to be true conservatives that are really liberals. Hence, it is not surprising to me in the least.

        With respect to Santorum, he is pretty conservative when it comes to social conservatism exactly like GWB, and with the single exception of the issue of amnesty, Santorum is a virtual carbon copy liberal of GWB when it comes to everything else.

        Hence, he supported GWB every step of the way when it came to doubling the size, scope, and power of the federal government, when it came to declaring war on terrorism, which isn't even an Islamic manifestation, by the way, and when it came to pursuing two fantasy based and counterproductive nation-building missions founded on false PC multicultural myths and misconceptions that inevitably became the two biggest strategic blunders ever in American history.

        Indeed, the biggest reason the USA is on the fast track to becoming the next Greece today is because of the massive expansion in the size, scope, and power of the federal government that occurred under GWB so that we could continue accommodating mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage that is really covert non-violent jihad for the purpose of stealth demographic conquest to make Islam supreme.

        It doesn't worry you that you support the man who called himself a "progressive"?

        When two decades ago? When he told all his colleagues and friends beforehand that he was entering the race for Senate not to win the race but instead to give his opponent, Ted Kennedy, a hard time, and indeed he did force him to take out a second mortgage on his house. Excuse me if I don't take anything he said in that intentionally disingenuous race seriously.

        In any event, most conservatives were liberal before they gradually became more and more conservative as they gained experience through the school of hard knocks known as life. Romney's experience closely matches the experience of most conservatives in that regard. So most conservatives can relate to Romney's experience because it closely mirrors their own experience and transformations.

        Not to mention that his record as governor indicates that Romney was a solid conservative and the fact that his conservative positions from 2008 to 2012 haven't fluctuated one iota since 2008 when he was the conservative candidate that most conservatives like me rallied around in 2008 in an effort to stop McCain, proves that Romney is a solid conservative. Whereas if you closely examine Gingrich's actions relative to his words, it is irrefutable that Gingrich is easily the most liberal candidate in the race.

        It doesn't worry you that Romney has a glib assessment of the Middle East?

        Romney's views on the Islamic world are far closer to your PC blinded views than they are to my views. However, Romney's views of the Islamic world are identical to Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Ron Paul, the Republican Party, the Dhimmicrat Party, and the US federal government since they all acquire their knowledge from the same exact source, which is America's colleges and universities that like the colleges and universities of Europe and Canada, have all been hijacked, co-opted, and usurped by Saudi and Gulf State Emir oil money since in the 70s.

        –continue below

      • ObamaYoMoma

        After the inveitable attacks on me as a liberal, PC Multicultural, progressive, One-World Order type … ad infinitum … could you please grant us the gift of your wisdom as to why conservatives should support Mr. Romney?

        Excuse me, but I never suggested that you are a one-worlder, however, the fact that you are a liberal PC multicultural progressive is irrefutable. Indeed, read your own emotional posts! And the reason why conservatives should support Romney is because he is easily the most conservative in the race. Hence, I'm not surprised you struggle with that issue, especially since you aren't a conservative.

        In addition, Gingrich can't possibly defeat Obama, while his generic numbers may not appear to be too far behind Obama, when you take a close look at his numbers in all the battleground states and indeed in the states that will ultimately decide the election, it becomes clear that Gingrich can't possibly win as Obama has an insurmountable lead on Gingrich in every battleground state. In fact, Ron Paul and Rick Santorum have a much better shots at winning than Gingrich, and Romney has the best shot of all since he is either a couple of points ahead of Obama or only a couple of points behind Obama in those same battleground states.

        • Stephen_Brady

          "… that you are a liberal PC multicultural progressive is irrefutable …."

          Of course it can be refuted. Unfortunately, you need someone willing to listen to reason, in order to have a debate. Also, you put me in the position of having to refute a negative. Unlike what most people believe, it is not impossible to do so, but requires the repeated refutation of the original debater's position. Since this is the internet, with the regrettable but necessary anonymity required, it is virtually impossible to do this, with any effectiveness.

          I am a conservative, however, and my family has been invested into the Republican party since 1854. I fought for my country in Vietnam, have worked in the campaigns of several high-ranking officials, including former Rep. John Paul Hammerschmidt (R-AR), and had to hide my conservatism in academia, until such time as I gained tenure. I know who I am. You clearly do not.

          On topic, I believe that the DEM's enthusiasm for Mr. Romney is a clear indication of whom they wish Obama to run against. I supported Mr. Gingrich … and still do … because he is the most conservative of all the Republicans left in the race (except for Dr. Paul, who is a libertarian). My original choice was Michelle Bachmann. Your first post, in the series above, clearly shows your concern over his past. You grant Romney the ability to change, while you deny it to Speaker Gingrich. You're worried. I am, too, since he is likely to get the nomination.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            On topic, I believe that the DEM's enthusiasm for Mr. Romney is a clear indication of whom they wish Obama to run against.

            Hell…you are not only a progressive, you are apparently very delusional as well. Indeed, what are you smoking? Obama has been running campaign ads against Romney off and on for several months now. The Obama campaign hasn't run any ads against any of the other candidates, just against Romney. In addition, the Obama campaign also knows that Gingrich can't beat out Romney for the nomination and even if he somehow managed to miraculously win, he is so far behind Obama in the battleground states that it wouldn't matter much anyway, as it would just make the campaign far easier than anticipated.

            I supported Mr. Gingrich … and still do … because he is the most conservative of all the Republicans left in the race (except for Dr. Paul, who is a libertarian).

            Give me a break, Gingrich is easily the most liberal candidate in the race, no wonder you support him, and Paul is a self-hating lunatic who shouldn't even be allowed on the same debate stage with Republicans. With all due disrespect, neither Paul or his Jew hating supporters are conservatives. They are mentally deficient kooks!

            Your first post, in the series above, clearly shows your concern over his past. You grant Romney the ability to change, while you deny it to Speaker Gingrich.

            Actually, if you examine Mitt Romney's record carefully it is clear that he did matriculate into a true conservative as time went on. While Newt Gingrich during the same time vacillated so many times it will make your head spin. Indeed, actions speak louder than words.

            You're worried. I am, too, since he is likely to get the nomination.

            I'm not worried in the least. Indeed, I knew that even with the backing of the lamestream media in South Carolina that Gingrich couldn't defeat Romney in the long run. Not to mention that South Carolina has a long history of choosing the most liberal Republican candidates as well.

            In any event, like I have been trying to tell you all along, even if Newt somehow managed to win the nomination (either Romney gets caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy) he couldn't defeat Obama in any case, because Obama's lead in all of the battleground states over Newt is insurmountable. It may seem as if Newt has a reasonable amount of support nationally, but all that support is clustered and concentrated in states that vote Republican regardless. Meanwhile, in the battleground states, Romney is ether beating Obama by a couple of points, or losing to him by only a couple of points. Thus, he has a much easier row to hoe than Gingrich.

          • NorthStar

            Your candidate claimed he was a progressive. If you support him that makes you a progressive too.

  • Fred Dawes

    Obama is a puppet of the world bankers so why not a white boy puppet as a good little one world banker puppet and come on boys we are so owned its a joke just look at your cops and your political police and the WORLD BANKERS DEBT That the poor will pay for under old white obama Mitt, we will see the Final Solution under Mitt and the banker

  • BLJ

    Right now if Putin ran against Obama I would vote for him. The whole objective is to get the Chosen One out of the WH. I don't think Romney is the "perfect: candidate (who is?), but I do believe he is a much, much, much better man than Obama and I do not question his love for America.

    The whole key for whomever the Republican nominee ends up is to go on the offensive concerning Obama's horrible record as President. Make him defend this.

    The Dems will pull out all the race crap as per usual, but the Repub needs to stay the course. Keep the heat on the Chosen One. Make him run on his record.

    • Fred Dawes

      Sad Putin would make a great American leader, only joking maybe?

  • maria

    We have two choices. One is to have BHO second term with socialistic states of America which soon will become Islamic states of America. To that time we will be dead and our children as unbelievers will have the same fate. Do you want it? What's wrong with Mitt Romney or any other (exept, in my opinion, Ron Paul) Republican candidate? Nothing !!! At least they are AMERICANS, they are PATRIOTS, their are experienced and responsible, etc. Any of them incomperable to that fraud, socialist, muslim BHO. They are not perfect? Who is perfect except our Creator? Wake up!!!

  • maria

    You are right BLJ. BHO is a disaster for our country. He already bankrupt us and embolden Islamists in all the world. If he be reelected it is end of our country founded on Judeo-Christians valued. First stage will be socializm (with, of course) dictatorship) and second one will be Islamization he promissed in his Cairo speech to Muslim brothers.
    Any Republican candidates are incomparably better than he. (exception is Ron Paul but he has no choice to get nomination, G-d bless). Mitt Romney, Gingrich, etc are all Patriots of this country, great Americans, shared our Fathers-founders values, experienced, etc. They are not perfect? Perfect is only our Creator. But Republicans are our hope that we will live in USA but not in socialistic states of America or Islamic states of America. More over in the last one we will have no choice to be alive at all as infidels.

  • logdon

    From the east side of the Atlantic I watched McCain sally forth against Obama and knew it was all over.

    Old, grey, bloated and infirm in his speech he looked like a middle of the road dying whale.

    Meanwhile Obama rode rings around him with a black sneering hipness and the assured manner of a well practiced hustler.

    No contest. What was the GOP thinking?

    In similar fashion I see these two and from that all important image point of view could not for the life of me imagine Gingrich besting the anointed one.

    It's the same here in Britain. Think snake oil smooth and slippery Blair pitted against the grey, balding fogeys amongst the Tories. His landslide choreographed by a ruthless team of media savvy operators ensured that he was pretty much untouchable in Parliament.

    This is how it is in modern politics.

    • Stephen_Brady

      I think that more voters on this side of the pond ought to listen to you. What worries me is that the GOP has decided to run a smooth and slippery candidate against the incumbent smooth and slippery president.

      November will not be a battle of virtues, valor, and values. This will be a battle of the bogus, the bankers, and the billionaires.

  • Ano

    Most people would agree that one of the biggest mistakes Americans have made in the past was not vetting the person….Well, here we are trying to do that from our homes….humm…. When the truth is becoming harder to find and at times harder to understand, it can be frustrating if not down right depressing. Sometimes we are facing that age old position of picking the better of two evils…after all, we are only human so evil dwells in us all. So I decided to go at this election like a scientist….I made my list of what I truly thought was the biggest problems we are facing. My next list was to see who, based on past records, came the closest to solving those problems….more depression………..Ok, start over…..Now my list was made up of my biggest concerns, still more depression…..I was left thinking there was no way out of this and it reminded me of the old saying "The best cure for a headache is to stub your toe"
    Instead of looking at them to solve all our problems, I ended up looking at them with the question "Will they, after four years leave us with even more looming problems?" Based on that theory, I was able to address my concerns (really more like fears) to conclude:
    !. Will the flag of the UN be the flag of our nation
    2. Will everyday citizens be forced out of their homes because they live in a Biosphere Man Free Zone
    3. Will they take the very water I drink from me
    4.Will they take from me one of the greatest gifts all Americans share, our National Parks
    5.Will my family live in fear because I can't protect them from criminals
    .Now I'm starting to have flash backs to my childhood and realize that this once great nation, has been hijacked by the Progressives so I've decided to vote for the three legged, one eared, blind dog that WON'T do these things to me. We all know Obama wants One World Government, communist rule of law, etc. I'll choose anyone that isn't on the Agenda 21 sign up list. God Bless this great nation and help keep us free.

  • DrBukk

    I believe that Newt will flame out because he's bipolar, easily angered and will continue to make bombastic statements like the moon colony. Santorum is the smartest and best-looking guy in the room by far, but he needs to shut up about gays and abortion. Newt and Santorum combined were 1 point behind Romney.
    The fecal matter the left would throw at Santorum could possibly backfire. One can still hope for a good NONMitt outcome!

  • http://frontpagemag.com Francisco Bravo

    Islam is a mortal threat to America. Newt quote

  • WilliamJamesWard

    We need a military leader in the White House, one with and understanding of
    the perfidious villany of Islam and it's encroaching threat to America and what
    is becoming the un-free world…………………..I have no faith in our current crew
    of politicians and believe they will drag America down to chaos and destruction.
    William

  • waterwillows

    I do not see how America can commit herself to appoint a leader who willingly follows the dictates and rules of a man of 37 wives.

    Nothing good came out from Joe Smith in his lustful quest of female acquisition and nothing good can possibly be bestowed upon a nation who elect leaders whose core is deceit.
    It that too simple for people to understand? It is what is in the man's heart that will trump all of his choices and decisions. I don't believe that a follower of Joe Smith has a right heart.