Is there some kind of idiocy that makes a certain kind of politician poison the wells from which we on the right must drink. If Rick Santorum truly believes the issues he thinks are of Class A importance are the urgent issues of our time, he is so out of touch it is unbelievable to see him get this far. But you tell me who this is supposed to help, besides himself, of course, and there too he is beyond deluded.
An agitated Rick Santorum on Sunday called Mitt Romney ‘the worst Republican in the country to put up against Barack Obama’ even as it appears the former Massachusetts governor is on pace to clinch the party’s nomination in June.
Santorum later lashed out at reporters, using a profane word as he accused them of ‘distorting’ his speech.
Santorum told voters that Romney is ‘uniquely disqualified’ to be the GOP’s presidential pick and urged his supporters to stand with him even as he faces an increasingly improbable pathway to the nomination. Santorum said ‘the race isn’t over until the people of Wisconsin sing,’ and urged them to give his underfunded, underdog campaign a chance to derail Romney.
‘Pick any other Republican in the country. He is the worst Republican in the country to put up against Barack Obama,’ Santorum said at an evening rally near Racine.
When I hear such things, I start to think there must really be something to this projection stuff Dr Freud used to talk to us about.
I have never been able to understand why the Romney welfarists are so dead-set against a market competition for the nomination.
By the way, how exactly does Santorum’s ballsy fight to the end hurt Romney? Are there millions of potential refugees from Obama who’ll be scared off by what he says? Really? They were this close to Romney but if Rick says he’s no good, that’s it – they’re outta here?
100 percent bullshit.
C.L.
26 Mar 12 at 4:00 pm
Not sure what you are trying to make of this. Romney has always had to carry the baggage regarding Romneycare. Santorum pointing it out isn’t exactly earth shattering.
Makes it difficult to campaign on healthcare when you were the systems architect.
Makes it difficult to campaign on economic management when you are financially backed by the same banks that are backing Obama.
Making the road to the election easy for Romney is not the job of the other candidates.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 4:02 pm
CL
I think the problem is that they’re worried it may not give Romney or whomever enough time to start a serious campaign theme against the Kenyan.
look a good decent primary fight is a good thing. I think it helps harden up the candidate. However I think if it’s left too long it may present the issues I suggested.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 4:03 pm
The Yanks should’ve incorporated a version of the Act of Settlement into their Constitution.
Peter Patton
26 Mar 12 at 4:06 pm
CL: because it’s time for a nominee to be selected and for him to start prosecuting the Obama Presidency.
This Primary has been dragging on and on and on. Yes, Santorum has done very well to come this far. Who would have thought he’d be the last man standing against Romney at the start of the campaigning? Having said that, this needs to end soon.
If I were god, I’d give Santorum April to turn things around and then hit him with a (metaphorical) lightning bolt. I’d have zapped Gingrich yesterday.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 4:17 pm
Still a long time to go in this. The GOP designed the process to run the full length, so trying to call it early is counter-productive. Santorum is rightfully concerned as he’s losing the primaries he had to win (Illinois) to Romney, and losing the caucus states to Ron Paul.
It will be interesting to watch over the next few weekends as Romney and Santorum’s delegate numbers get revised down.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 4:18 pm
No, the healthcare issue will be nullified in an Obama v Romney matchup. Obama will raise it at his peril. There’s a very simple Romney response to anything Obama could throw at him regarding Obamneycare. The people of MA wanted something akin to Romneycare, they elected Romney, and he gave it to them. Romney didn’t inflict an unpopular healthcare law on an unwilling constituency. Obama did. There’s a big difference there.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 4:22 pm
Newt is great value, so why would you zap him? He plays with the Kenyan’s head like no one else. He frazzles him.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 4:22 pm
……and the other huge difference about Odumbocare is that the Kenyan lied about the cost and Romney has promised to repeal the unpopular measure.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 4:23 pm
Thank God James in in with patients at the moment, Steve. I could imagine that if he read this, he’ll have to use a defibrillator on himself.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 4:26 pm
I don’t mind this contest going till the end of April, but after that Santorum must get out of the way and give Romney a clear 6 months against Obama.
Santorum will lose nearly every state in April anyway, so hopefully his campaign will run out of money and/or his officials will throw in the towel and force him out.
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 4:27 pm
If they don’t have a clear candidate on June 5th, it goes to the Convention. After the Convention, there are only 8-9 weeks to run against Obama, which, as we’ve seen from history, is a certain loss.
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 4:29 pm
From the race, JC. He needs to drop out. He’s not going to win and he’s just hindering the process. He needs to give Santorum a chance to test his hypothesis that Gingrich’s supporters will switch to Santorum.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 4:30 pm
Romney can also call it a State’s rights issue FTW.
.
26 Mar 12 at 4:30 pm
I’m really in two minds on this. Santorum should feel free to do what he fucking likes, but he needs to also realize that the Kenyan is bigger enemy here.
I can sympathize with Santorum in a way as he knows this may be his last shot even if it is a hail Mary pass.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 4:34 pm
Santorum will never be President. Once Romney has knocked the April stuffing out of him, he needs to quit. It is embarrassing that a candidate requiring 70% of the remaining delegates still has delusions of viability.
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 4:38 pm
Romney is within the MOE in Texas, a proportional primary with 150-something delegates up for grabs. He will take California with its 170-plus winner-takes-all delegates. Santorum is doomed. DOOMED!
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 4:40 pm
Let him have April. I am not as unsympathetic to the guy as I have been in the past. I think he’s done fantastically well to have come this far. OK, so there are a lot of big state primaries coming up. If he can’t make up serious, serious ground in April – and in fact falls further behind – then he needs to accept the reality of his predicament.
It would be possible to actually test his claims about the fickle nature of Romney’s support base if Gingrich were out of the race. Gingrich is now running on pure self-indulgence. If Santorum has a poor April and he doesn’t drop out, he will be too.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 4:42 pm
Gingrich’s whole campaign was self-indulgence.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 4:49 pm
Kates just continues to skate the fine line on anti-catholic bigotry, I see.
Kates hero Mittens published in USA Today:
What’s the distinction between making quality, affordable insurance available to everyone and forcing everyone to purchase a state-approved plan by mandate?
Ya know, like in Massachusetts?
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 4:51 pm
So what. He kept whacking the Kenyan.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 4:52 pm
Er…James, it seems you answered your question in the blockquote. You even bolded the relevant part.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 4:55 pm
That’s true JC and it’s been fun. And he can keep doing that ’til his heart’s content. But he needs to drop out of the race. Like, yesterday.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 4:56 pm
He certainly kept whacking.
It is an inordinately good thing it stayed limited and didn’t progress further.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 4:57 pm
SO you don’t think Newt offered any positives to this primary, Drift?
JC
26 Mar 12 at 4:58 pm
Well I’d vote Mittens ahead of Gingrich (although Gingrich is gifted and I love hearing him unlike snoremitten) but basically Santorum is correct.
Team Obama is salivating at the prospect of Mittens asz James Carville indicated.
Why should they be afraid of someone who can’t challenge the Dem status-quo on mandates, government-run healthcare, denying the Catholic Church religious exemption, abortion or anything else?
The community organizer versus the financier.
The 0.0001 percent!
Team Obama is quaking in their collectivist boots.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:00 pm
To the primary, yes. To the presidency, no.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 5:01 pm
If nothing else, he showed Romney how it’s done in debates and also forced him to grow some stones in them, which will come in handy for the main event.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:01 pm
Gee you should explain Oco.
That would be honest
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:02 pm
Well yea, I’m talking about the primary. Newt has been absolutely terrific in whacking the MSM and the Kenyan.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 5:03 pm
No no, he will be lucky to take a single state in April. ROMNEY has got April sewn up. Santorum will do well in May if he decides to keep his DOOMED campaign going. But April will be a massacre.
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 5:07 pm
Bullshit. One day there’s a “leak” that Dem insiders are terrified of a Romney candidacy. The next day, a Dem operative like Carville claims they’re “salivating at the prospect”. Such contradictory claims are part of a wider disinformation campaign that has a goal of prolonging the GOP primary to the maximum extent.
Privately, I’d say the Dem inner circle are shitscared about their prospects, regardless of the GOP candidate. It really is drover’s dog time for them.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:07 pm
Appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday, White House senior adviser David Plouffe also made a point of tying Romney to the president’s health care plan.
“Mitt Romney’s the godfather of our health care plan,” Plouffe said.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:08 pm
As long as it stays in the primary, I’m happy to indulge his indulgence.
I’d be far more interested to see Santorum drop out. I have a deep seated dislike seeing religious belief faked for political purpose.
Gingrich at least is what he presents to be.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 5:09 pm
dot is right. There is a HUGE difference between a single-State mandating health insurance, and even subsidizing some of it, compared to the federal government doing so for the entire country. The US States are a lot more independent than ours. If 1 state out of 50 chose to go down that route, the other 49 can take notes, and see it as an experiment. This is one of the pluses of a US-style federation. And as OCO said, the people of Massachusetts wanted this. I think JC has said before that Romneycare only affected 6% of Massachusetts residents anyway.
Peter Patton
26 Mar 12 at 5:09 pm
Happy to, JamesK. Although it’s disappointing you can’t figure it out for yourself, as it’s rather obvious. Hence why I didn’t spell it out – nothing to with honesty.
He’s taking a federalist approach. States can approach healthcare in their own way. Romneycare was a popular initiative in MA. If the good denizens of MA like Obamneycare, they can keep it. As long as they pay for it.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:10 pm
Good thing about April is we should get results for North Dakota (1st) and Colorado (14th).
Am looking forward to seeing the MSM explain those…
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 5:12 pm
Yep, more disinformation. They’re running scared.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:12 pm
Hang on
I mean MT
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:13 pm
Democrats Have No Fear Of Romney
Obama’s campaign and its allies laugh, sneer at the likely Republican nominee. “He’s just the tallest dwarf.” Confident, or cocky?
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:14 pm
No, that’s Montana. I do mean MA
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:14 pm
James, that’s the same article you lifted the Carville quote from. It’s one article.
Disinformation. If they are genuinely dismissive of Romney, they’re even stupider than I give them credit for. But I doubt they are.
I think they’re just bricking it in general when they think of November.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:16 pm
Yes, Mass. was 94% insured and Romneyare took it up to a whole 96% or so when Romney left office.
Odumbocare is 30% and does nothing to lower costs.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 5:19 pm
Why?
I repeat:
Mittens in his own words in USA Today:
“What we need is a free market, federalist approach to making quality, affordable health insurance available to every American” except those Americans in Massachusetts that Mittens mandated?
Show me once again where I answered my question Oco
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:19 pm
Oh, I would love to hear them elaborate on this. These people are fuckwits, James. They have the strategic nous of a lemming. I don’t know why you give anything they claim any credence.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:21 pm
Really?
Are you sure it wasn’t from this?:
Carville: Obama weak, can be beat
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:24 pm
JamesK is very angry about Mitt Romney. But he will be shocked to discover, come end of April, that Romney will be the unbackable favourite. He will be the nominee.
I hope he isn’t giving anyone an endoscopy when that reality finally dawns on him.
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 5:25 pm
A federalist approach is not the same as a federal approach. The bit you highlighted is the bit that clarifies the difference.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 5:29 pm
Sigh. Now you’re just being deliberately obtuse, James.
Romney’s quote was:
Your question was:
Easy. Romney said, if elected president, he would work to “mak[e] quality, affordable insurance available to everyone” via free-market, federalist means. That means, available to all Americans.
When he was government of MA, Romney introduced a popular healthcare law which you say “forc[es] everyone to purchase a state-approved plan by mandate”. Yes, everyone in MA. Not everyone in the US.
This is Romney’s federalist approach. There’s a clear, clear distinction between “making quality, affordable insurance available to everyone” as Romney today proposes, and “forcing everyone to purchase a state-approved plan by mandate”.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:29 pm
Don’t be a fool Oco.
I believe it and have done for many months.
As I’ve indicated many times over here to ur indignant ‘horreur’, if I recall…..
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:29 pm
James, that’s a different article on the same damn story, as you well know. More than one media outlet wrote about Carville’s comments.
Stop treating us like mugs.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:30 pm
I hardly think James Carville is one to be trusted. I once watched him get beaten in a debate by Billy Madison.
Infidel Tiger
26 Mar 12 at 5:32 pm
O puleeeaase!!!
Who’s being obtuse, Oco?
Are you now arguing that folks from Massachusetts aren’t Americans?
I’ve reduced you yet again to the absurd.
Don’t you ever get tired of this?
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:33 pm
You are an idiot, JamesK. I feel embarrassed for you.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:33 pm
Even then, it was only relevant to about 6% of MA residents. Those who refused were hardly hung, dragged, and quartered. I think they were merely denied a tax-rebate of a few hundred bucks.
Peter Patton
26 Mar 12 at 5:34 pm
JamesK, you are out on a limb the girth of a piece of straw.
So do what you always do. Double down on stupid.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:35 pm
JamesK is a real dummy. He doesn’t even know what federalism is. What a thicko!
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 5:35 pm
I do get tired of it, JamesK. I’ve already demolished your position at 5.29pm, and thus I have nothing more to say about this to you.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:36 pm
No it’s not.
Stop making sh1t up Oco.
That latter reference is all about Carville and his speech.
The other story is principally from and about Team Obama with the quote from Carville thrown in.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:36 pm
You’ve demolished nothing except ur already tattered repuation Oco
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:37 pm
Back in his time – KKKlinton administration – he was quite a performer. Is still married to that same gel; a Republican strategist. Gawd knows how they manage that!
Peter Patton
26 Mar 12 at 5:39 pm
No James.
You are wrong, you are not talking to idiots.
.
26 Mar 12 at 5:39 pm
JamesK needs to go away and stop derailing threads with his abusive manner.
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 5:39 pm
What a class act u ar Fisky.
So bright.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:39 pm
When you say I’m wrong dot you’ll need to do a little better and endeavour to be honest.
Be precise and point to the wrong specifically and then explain why it is wrong.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:41 pm
Ladies please. No nails or hair pulling.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 5:44 pm
It all comes from the same spin factory, James. Apparently, you are so credulous that you can’t figure this out.
Do you really think the Dems are feeling cocky and confident about November, regardless of who the GOP nominee is?
OK, great, my reputation is tattered in your eyes. You’ve just exposed your exquisitely illogical and confused political perspective. I guess I should take that as a compliment, then.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:44 pm
JamesK, get a wriggle on and top up my morphine please, my sides are in serious pain.
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 5:47 pm
And knock back a couple of benzos yourself while you’re at it, James. You seem tense. Very tense.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:50 pm
So James Carville who worked for Hils Clinton in ’08 and is a frequent critic of Obama just before addressing the American Apparel and Footwear Association convention telephoned Team Obama and was party to Team obama’s leak to Buzzfeed reporter axcross the country
Is it’s all a vast left-wing conspiracy Oco?
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:51 pm
It looks like JamesK has been caught recycling Democratic talking points. This is a strictly no-bullshit blog, JamesK. Trying to sneak enemy propaganda in here only invites derision from the regulars. Do you really want to be lumped in with Steve and m0nty, JamesK?
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 5:52 pm
Don’t waste your time, dot. I tried that and he disregarded it and instead nitpicked over a non-sequitur. This passes as a sound rebuttal in the JamesK House of Debating.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:54 pm
JamesK, have you considered attending any of Dale Carnegie’s seminars?
Infidel Tiger
26 Mar 12 at 5:55 pm
Wow James you’ve been busy backfilling your knowledge gap again!
You don’t think the Dems are engaging in a misinformation campaign?
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:55 pm
You are in utterly deranged territory now Oco.
Take a deep breath and re-read would be my suggestion.
Then explain how mittens wants every American to have liberty except those (presumably) non-Americans in Ma. that he Romneycare mandated.
And JC that’s not 6% of Ma. mandated.
That’s 100%.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:55 pm
Wikipedia and Google News- JamesK’s best friends
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:57 pm
Ah right, sorry I gave too much credit to JamesK’s intelligence. He isn’t really an enemy agent, just so naive he’ll believe anything the Democrats tell him.
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 5:57 pm
Stop spamming the thread Oco.
Although at least ur need to confuse everyone as much as possible is rational.
Unlike any of ur arguments thus far.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 5:58 pm
JamesK still hasn’t figured out the difference between Massachussetts and the Federal government? Oh dear me, how can we possibly help him?
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 5:59 pm
James you dunce. IT WAS A POPULAR PROGRAMME. I believe it still is. If people in MA really don’t like it, they can move states! Hence competitive federalism.
Seriously, get a fucking clue. You are just embarrassing yourself now.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 5:59 pm
Yeah but it’s true, isn’t it, James? You know it is. That’s where you disappeared for 10 minutes…madly doing your research after the fact.
Just like you did in the Vietnam War thread. Don’t think I didn’t know what you were up to then, either.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 6:03 pm
Right, I’m out. Getting bored now.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 6:04 pm
Yes, this is no fun. JamesK keeps running out of the room.
Fisky
26 Mar 12 at 6:05 pm
I understand.
u can’t leave the strawman alone Oco.
Again – rational if dishonest.
It might be ur only chance to waylay attention from the obvious contradictions of ur bs so far.
$345 billion of federal funds went to Ma for Romneycare thanks to Mittens mate Teddy.
Even so the the ‘non-Americans’ who populate Ma pay much more than folks elsewhere in the Union for a poorer service that doctors have been exiting in droves:
Massachusetts individual health premiums highest in Nation
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 6:06 pm
WTF?
Mass has 6.6 mln people out of 320 mn.
It has run for six years almost.
10000 per person per year in Federal funds?
If that was the average spend for all items, the Federal budget would be 3.2 trillion.
Nah. This can’t be right James.
.
26 Mar 12 at 6:10 pm
James. You mixed up federal and federalist. Get over it.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 6:11 pm
Romney Thanks Ted Kennedy For Procuring Federal Support Of RomneyCare (Video)
Romney: “Together we pitched the secretaries on our vision to insure all our citizens, and on the need for federal support to make the vision real.”
Reason:
One other thing to note is that Romney praises Kennedy for helping make the case that federal support was necessary to fund the state-based coverage expansion. Romney likes to criticize President Obama for cutting Medicare and raising taxes in order to fund ObamaCare. But of course, as a governor, Romney didn’t have the option to cut back on Medicare, a federal program. So, with the help of Sen. Kennedy, he convinced the feds to kick in another way, with expanded Medicaid funding that ended up paying for half of the program’s publicly budgeted cost.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 6:15 pm
New Study: Romneycare Cost Massachusetts 18,000 Jobs
By
The Beacon Hill Institute study found that, on average, Romneycare:
• cost the Bay State 18,313 jobs;
• drove up total health insurance costs in Massachusetts by $4.311 billion;
• slowed the growth of disposable income per person by $376; and
• reduced investment in Massachusetts by $25.06 million.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 6:19 pm
Santorum is a nutter to put it bluntly, speaking as an Aussie. He makes Abbott and Rudd look like infidels. I can handle Rudd or Abbott on this point but if it was a choice between Santorum and a Green I would actually pick the green.
kelly liddle
26 Mar 12 at 6:21 pm
I’d vote for Santorum and if possible investigate if the Green is ineligible to hold office.
.
26 Mar 12 at 6:23 pm
Santorum vs Obama would definitely have me exercising the US right not to vote.
Quentin George
26 Mar 12 at 6:24 pm
I’d ban you for that idiocy.
Infidel Tiger
26 Mar 12 at 6:24 pm
Well that’s just fucking stupid, Kelly.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 6:24 pm
Snap, IT.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 6:24 pm
Hey dot, once you are baptised are you a RC till death do you part?
Peter Patton
26 Mar 12 at 6:25 pm
IT sounds like you would be Santorum’s right hand man, if he had is way I wouldn’t put it past him to stop non christians from voting.
kelly liddle
26 Mar 12 at 6:27 pm
Listen wrong way Corrigan, in the choice between a communist and conservative, one never chooses the fucking commie unless it’s with a telescopic site.
Infidel Tiger
26 Mar 12 at 6:29 pm
Lawrence O’Donnell, MSNBC host: “Alright, come on. Come clean. You were in the room with President Obama discussing healthcare reform and you did in fact work with the Romney administration in Massachusetts. Come on Professor, you’ve got to tell us the truth.”
Jonathan Gruber, MIT professor: “The truth is that the Affordable Care Act is essentially based on what we accomplished in Massachusetts. It’s the same basic structure applied nationally. John McDonough, one of the other advisers,who work in both Massachusetts and advised the White House said ‘it’s the Massachusetts with three more zeros.’ And that’s basically a good description of what the federal bill did.”
Gruber says Massachusetts received some federal funding for Romney’s healthcare reform, meaning all U.S. taxpayers chipped in to fund RomneyCare.
O’Donnell: “And Massachusetts had a pretty good rate of coverage before you even went to the mandate. Romney makes a very strong point about the Obama bill is full of taxes to pay for it and the Romney bill did not have tax increases in it to pay for it.”
Gruber: “Yeah, that is just technically true but intellectually not really straight forward. Basically, in Massachusetts, the financial for our bill came half from the federal government and half from an existing tax that former Governor and presidential candidate Michael Dukakis had put in, in 1988 to finance care for the uninsured. You see, we didn’t have to raise taxes in Massachusetts because money was already there.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 6:31 pm
Kelly’s doubling down on the idiocy.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 6:32 pm
I wouldn’t suggest execution Kelly, but you should be placed in a fucking rack for that comment and left there for a week allowing the village kids to throw rotten food at the village idiot.
From now on you’re getting dunce cap awards for stupid comments as it’s gone on for long enough.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 6:33 pm
The Federal Government Has Been Bailing Out Romneycare, but Who Will Be Available to Bail Out Obamacare?
The Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University (BHI) attempts to fill the gap by calculating the effect of health care reform on state and federal governments and the private health insurance markets, including employee contributions to their private insurance plans. We find that, under health care reform:
• State health care expenditures have risen by $414 million over the period;
• Private health insurance costs have risen by $4.311 billion over the period;
• The federal government has spent an additional $2.418 billion on Medicaid for Massachusetts.
• Over this period, Medicare expenditures increased by $1.426 billion;
• For a total cumulative cost of $8.569 billion over the period; and
• The state has been able to shift the majority of the costs to the federal government.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 6:35 pm
WTF are you on about Patsy.
Have you ever met a Catholic? You sound like a virgin expounding about sex.
.
26 Mar 12 at 6:38 pm
One of the great ironies of Ted Kennedy’s interventions was that he was responsible for universal health care being defeated in the 1970s. Who wrote the bill to instate federally-backed universal health care? Why, Richard Nixon. Jimmy Carter also abandoned it coz of Kennedy’s opposition. Kennedy didn’t oppose the idea. He sent the whole thing down because it wasn’t enough. There should be a lot of anger from Democrats over Kennedy’s making the perfect the enemy of the good.
Peter Patton
26 Mar 12 at 6:39 pm
dot, it was just an innocent question, honestly!
Peter Patton
26 Mar 12 at 6:40 pm
Who was it who called Richard Nixon the last liberal President?
Ok, I guess that was uttered before Obama took office, but still…
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 6:40 pm
He is only conservative in a social sense in fact way to conservative but when it comes to fiscal matters he is not, he voted for a doubling of the federal budget for the department of education a complete socialist failure under Bush.
kelly liddle
26 Mar 12 at 6:40 pm
He is only conservative in a social sense in fact
way to conservativebut when it comes to fiscal matters he is not” I don’t know how those words got in there must be the XXXXkelly liddle
26 Mar 12 at 6:43 pm
James
Everyone here agrees that Odumbocare needs to be repealed. All the candidates do and even Romney does have an argument to put forward too.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 6:47 pm
You’re drunk on Monday afternoon on XXXX? I don’t know where to begin.
Infidel Tiger
26 Mar 12 at 6:47 pm
STFU Kelly and sleep it off.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 6:48 pm
nasty
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 6:49 pm
IT
Hopefully will have a cab in a few weeks then have to reduce the drinking.
kelly liddle
26 Mar 12 at 6:50 pm
Good. That’s a good thing.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 6:55 pm
And posting, mercifully.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 6:57 pm
Nate Silver’s calculator in the NYT is worth boookmarking as it is adjustable.
At present trajectory (GoP website delegate figures) with a 15% margin of error Romney has ~90% chance of achieving a delegate majority.
Santorum has only 1%
If Santorum gets less than 50% of delegates from here it drops of quite dramatically although he’ll still have the lead.
If Gingrich gets out it wil chnge the calculations again.
The last GOP nominees in this situation was Nixon who won at the convention ‘cos Rockefeller wouldn’t agree to support Reagan.
And the rest they say is history.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 7:07 pm
And I believe him JC.
But that’s not the point.
Santorum is right.
The GOP are in a typical GOP brainfreeze moment where they are with the help of states will and can only have only a negative say in Nov are seeing to it that the worst possible Republican candidate is likely to be the nominee.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 7:12 pm
I said above James that I think Gingrich should get out of the race as soon as possible – like now – to give Santorum a fair shot as primary opponent. He has no hope of winning so he should stop being petulant and go.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 7:12 pm
And then, if it’s Romney vs. Santorum in April and Romney wins, then it’d be time for Santorum to follow Newt.
Newt’s become a spoiler now. Time for him to make his exit.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 7:14 pm
No Oco.
He’s helped Romney up until now.
From here on in he helps Santorum and himself and gets in Romney’s way.
Now I want him to stay in.
And Paul, Romney’s little friend.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 7:15 pm
Really? Do explain.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 7:17 pm
Why is me who has to educate you all the time Oco?
And ur such a poor student!
The game now is to prevent Romney attaining 1144 delegates.
They preferably want to keep him below 50% of delegates.
Although he has recieved nowhere near 50% of the vote he has over 50% of the delegates so far.
If Gingrich exited 1/3 of his likely vote will go to
Romney making 1144 more likely not less.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 7:22 pm
I really think it depends on perspective, James.
Romney’s coalition would obviously be different to Santorum’s.
I think Romney could win NY for instance, but I don’t Santorum can.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 7:29 pm
Blow it out your arse, James. You are the one who has made a fool of himself on this thread. And notice that you’re the only one who thinks you didn’t, as well. Funny stuff.
Maybe.
Still don’t understand why “now” is the crucial tipping point. I think you’re just making shit up for dramatic effect. Or you could post another article which no one bothers to read. So anyway, as you were.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 7:31 pm
That may be true JC.
And you and I both think the dam might burst and support for Obama fall away precipitously close to the election.
But even if that were to happen NY, Ma, Il, and Ca wil almost certainly be in the Obama column.
I agree NY might be more favourably disposed to Romney over Santorum but idf that were to become an issue the GOP candidate has already won the Presidency handidly.
In the swing states Santorum does better over Obummer than Romney over Obummer now.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 7:40 pm
Pop a valium Oco.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 7:41 pm
It’s not funny if I said it to you first, James.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 7:42 pm
James explain your costs.
$345 bn of Federal money for Romneycare?
You cannot be serious man.
.
26 Mar 12 at 7:42 pm
Okay, I see what you’re suggesting. Outside of the swing states the vote, give or take, is pretty well a done deal. So within acceptable tolerances you shouldn’t much care what happens in other states other than the swingers. Fair point.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 7:45 pm
Because of the delegate count and rules.
Romney shamelessly lied to Puerto Rico and got 21 delegates, Santorum told ‘em the same rule Romney will follow and Santorum lost.
Santorum won Louisiana by 23% and gets 19 delegates and mittens 1 cos he got 26% of the vote rather than 24% of the vote as Gingrich is fading fast.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 7:47 pm
In some swing states, I think that should read.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 7:48 pm
OK James thanks for your version of education.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 7:50 pm
James is right.
The GOP won’t win with etch-a-sketch. In fact, Obama could actually call him “Mr Etch-a-sketch” in speeches and TV ads, and how can Romney recover from that. Romney has no credibility.
He was for Obamacare before he was against it. And hey, spare me all the complicated talk about how it’s a state program, and hell those lefties up in Massachussets love that shit. It’s Obamacare. Deal with it.
So he’s got no credibility. plus the only reason he’s doing so well in the primaries is that he’s outspending all his rivals. Well, that’s fine for the primaries when you’re up against small-time operations.
But what’s going to happen when the primaries are over and he’s up against a guy who he can’t outspend? When he has to compete against the monster Democrat funding machine, who will match him dollar for dollar every step of the way? Yep, that’s right. You know exactly what’s going to happen.
daddy dave
26 Mar 12 at 7:53 pm
No, Daddy, because Obama is not a formidable campaigner, pace accepted wisdom. And his team are not a bunch of geniuses – they are dolts who are at least partially responsible for the affirmative action baby’s ham-fisted term in office.
And the monster Democrat funding machine? Nup, don’t see it. Not this time ’round. There’s a huge enthusiasm gap afflicting the Democrat rank and file, and I doubt Wall St is going to be lining up to write big cheques.
I don’t think Romney’s a great campaigner, but he’ll do. Largely, Obama’s going to lose the election – for the most part, Romney won’t win it. He can help the process along somewhat with some well-timed observations and astute campaigning to jog people’s memories, but Obama will ultimately be judged on his record. Which ain’t hot.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 8:01 pm
Dads
The polls are not showing Romney doing badly and you’re assuming Romney will be unable to counter any of the shit the Kenyan’s team will dish out.
He’s pretty battle hardened too, you know and he’s no patsy.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 8:01 pm
Also, there were a lot of historical/contextual reasons in 2007/8, which very, very much favoured not so much the Democrats, but Obama specifically. That halo was blown away quite a while ago.
Peter Patton
26 Mar 12 at 8:08 pm
In fact, Obama could actually call him “Mr Etch-a-sketch” in speeches and TV ads, and how can Romney recover from that.
Well, recovery implies some kind of knockout, which I doubt. It’s a weak line that would go nowhere. Or could easily be turned against Obama. Actually, if Obama started using it it could be a great campaign ad for Romney. I can see it now – repeal the PATRIOT Act, close Guantanamo…who wiped these promises away after he was elected? Hey, it would be perfect to showcase that infamous graph the Obama team released of the predicted unemployment rate with and without the stimulus – then draw in the actual rate which was of course much higher than both.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 8:10 pm
True. But the GOP have been by and large treating each other with kid gloves and so the punters haven’t been exposed to Romney’s weaknesses. Look what happens the moment someone levels real criticism, a serious attack at Romney? It’s tears all round. “Waah! I’m a republican, you’re not allowed to do that!”
Well, sorry guys, get used to it. And frankly I don’t think Romney will be able to counter Obama’s attacks. He’ll flounder and sink, just like McCain. He can’t cope with flak from Santorum, he’s toast.
Keep in mind too, all the same establishment guys who wanted McCain, well, they want Romney this time.
OCO: I don’t think Romney’s a great campaigner, but he’ll do.
Yeah, see this kind of faint praise has got me worried. Everyone’s saying, “I personally don’t really like him, but I think he’ll fool that guy down the road.”
Nope. If you don’t like him then the guy down the road will probably feel the same.
daddy dave
26 Mar 12 at 8:10 pm
Obama’s attacks on McCain? When? At the entirely inconsequential Presidential debates? I don’t think so. McCain was sunk by the GFC, not by Obama’s mediocre-at-best campaigning. And what do you mean, “he can’t cope with attacks from Santorum”?
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 8:14 pm
Nope I don’t accept that Obama’s attacks on anyone were particularly effective. Hillary should have made mincemeat of him but she kept her 6 shooter holstered because of the constant spectre of being branded racist. This won’t matter so much this time ’round. Obama will have to take full responsibility for his time in office; stuff which is on record.
Barring events, dear boy, events, basically the GOP needs a competent campaigner to win.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 8:17 pm
No it read they way I wanted it read.
That’s why I didn’t say ‘all’ swing states.
Romney isn’t a bad guy he has several millstones
1. It’s percieved he has no core and he’ll say whatever the present audience wants him to say and he’ll say whatever it takes
2. He still defends Romneycare and the mandate going into an election in which Obamacare should be a wedge issue.
3. He supported bailout of Wall St but opposed bailout of the auto industry in the state where the “trees are the right height”
4. The unions hate him but like Santorum
5. The working class hate him but like Santorum
6. The South hate him but like Santorum
7. Evangelicals don’t trust him but support the catholic Santorum.
8. He ‘s the richest candidate for President ever and all his wealth isn’t from his wealthy father who ran for President but from the financial world.
He’s the 0.00001% and as his income is interest on investement he pays a much lower percentage of tax than Warren Buffett’s secretary.
9. He’s a leftists’ wet-dream opponent
Now not all of the above is his own fault.
Far from it.
But seriously……
Why do you clowns think Santorum will lose and Romney win against Obummer?
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 8:17 pm
Because it’s about the independents, not the base, and I think Santorum will scare the shit out of them.
The GOP base is itching to vote against Obama. They’re on board, Romney or Santorum. Independents are polling really badly for Obama at present. I think Santorum would turn this around.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 8:21 pm
Try telling the polls
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 8:22 pm
Conservative social issues, which Santorum has long prided himself on as being the only GOP candidate to champion, are at best of no interest to most independents. Others would be turned off by them. Evangelical social conservatism like Santorum espouses is a niche market these days, and non-believers aren’t into it at all.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 8:23 pm
Romney can’t win the election but will win the nomination.
Paul would win the election but won’t win the nomination.
Neither Santorum nor Gingrich, thankfully will or could win either.
They’re screwed.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 8:26 pm
Which polls? Both sides have polls that support their arguments.
However, the fact is that full-throated social conservatism doesn’t fly with most independents. It would be dead easy for the Obama campaign to caricature Santorum as a puritan nut hell-bent on saving America from moral ruin.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 8:26 pm
Dad , I not buying that. Romney is not exactly an unknown quantity. He was governor of a decent state, he ran in the previous election and i think people pretty well know he’s an awkward WASPy Doofus.
You’re also assuming he won’t be able to frame the election theme. At some stage while the Kenyan trying to roast Romney people are going to asking about how he’s been doing and in the long term arrow pointing up or down.
He not going to lose.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 8:26 pm
American Spectator: The underdog’s big win in Louisiana renders ridiculous Romneyworld’s demand that he step aside.
“The problem, as both Santorum and Gingrich have pointed out, is that Romney keeps winning Republican primaries by piling up votes in areas dominated by Democrats and in states that will almost certainly be carried by Obama in November. And whenever any of his conservative rivals appears to pose a threat to his lead, the more moderate front-runner exploits an advantage he certainly won’t have in the fall campaign by burying his GOP opponents with a big-money blitz of attack ads. In the most recent example of this phenomenon, Romney won the Illinois primary Tuesday by outspending Santorum 7-to-1 in advertising, with a 21-to-1 margin in the Chicago market. This helped Romney add to his lead in delegates, but does anyone seriously believe that Romney will beat Obama in Illinois in November? Does anyone think Romney will be able to outspend Obama 7-to-1 anywhere?”
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 8:26 pm
That’s flat out wrong. It shouldn’t mean jack shit anyway.
Infidel Tiger
26 Mar 12 at 8:26 pm
And that really would be electoral poison.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 8:27 pm
Bullshit.
Polls are showing close space between the Kenyan and Romney. 12% of the likely voters are still undecided. Undecided always, always break against the incumbent.
It’s Romney’s election to lose.
JC
26 Mar 12 at 8:29 pm
I actually think Santorum has a better chance but I think GOP nominee will win.
Santorum is a far better campaigner than Snoremitten
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 8:30 pm
JamesK: Santorum’s win in LA was hardly unexpected. After April’s over, it’s likely that will Romney have another 7 or 8 states under his belt, and that argument’s simply not going to fly. There aren’t that many states that are blue ribbon Democrat, after all – the number is actually quite small. They’re populous, but relatively small in number.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 8:31 pm
James,
Can you please explain this costing. Thanks.
.
26 Mar 12 at 8:31 pm
It isn’t.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 8:31 pm
Being roasted by Obama is like being savaged by a sheep (thanks Keato).
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 8:32 pm
‘million’ dot as was obvious in my subsequent posts
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 8:32 pm
Richer than Kennedys, Rockefellers, and Roosevelts? Romney is a peasant in comparison.
Peter Patton
26 Mar 12 at 8:34 pm
James K – apart from being a arrogant arsehole of the hiugfhets mangnitude, you a re also a real thicko.
I can name 6 men to run for President who were or are wealthier without even googling: Forbes, Perot, Kerry, Koch, Washington and Jefferson.
I’d imagine Hoover might have been also. Then we must consider the Kennedy fortune.
Now apologise at once you insolent c**t or I will embarrass you in front of the neighbourhood children.
Infidel Tiger
26 Mar 12 at 8:36 pm
I think you’ll find 23% margin wasn’t.
Some pundits even thought mittens might win La and that would terminate the Gingrich and Santorum campaign.
Snoremitten campaigned hard in La.
He even tried their idiom once and immediately apologised.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 8:36 pm
This is how I am tipping the election
http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate_u6.jsp
The lower or higher than 14% to me is a sign of GOP or Dem victory in the election sweep.
Massively below 14% = huge Obama win.
Just above 14% = marginal GOP win.
etc…
.
26 Mar 12 at 8:38 pm
Yes, I guess it depends if you’re talking about nominal or inflation-adjusted numbers.
For example, Bill Gates is worth much more than old man Rockefeller ever was, but in today’s money Rockefeller’s fortune would make him a trillionaire – or thereabouts.
Any which way, it’s a crappy talking point that won’t go anywhere against Romney and will just buttress accusations that Obama’s a class warrior.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 8:38 pm
Please be careful next time James!
.
26 Mar 12 at 8:39 pm
JC – it’s what the polls show. But of all the candidates, Romney would lose the most support in a campaign.
Who knows, he could win. Extend and pretend, close your eyes and hope.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 8:39 pm
Why?
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 8:40 pm
Romney may even hold the place together through 2016, and leave the collapse for whoever comes next. The end result is uglier that way, and may mean a few more wars in the meantime.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 8:43 pm
Exit polls have continually shown that ~90% of primary voters will vote for whoever has the R next to their name no matter what.
Infidel Tiger
26 Mar 12 at 8:43 pm
Would Mitt Romney be the richest president ever?
Was Steve Forbes or Perot a nominee?
Forbes did not even come close to winning the GOP nomination.
Neither did Trump.
Kerry was a richer nominee if you include his wife’s wealth
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 8:43 pm
Because his support is the softest. There is no enthusiasm behind it. He’s just the inevitable choice.
He generates no interest from republicans and even less from democrats.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 8:45 pm
And you think 5% doesn’t matter?
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 8:47 pm
Romney is probably the richest self-made candidate. But I would have seen that as a plus, next to a bum like Gingrich.
Peter Patton
26 Mar 12 at 8:47 pm
Listen fucktard, we must go back to your original claim:
We have proved you wrong conclusively. Don’t be embarrassed, you weren’t even expected to be competitive. I’ll have that apology now, you unusually angry pissant of a man.
Infidel Tiger
26 Mar 12 at 8:48 pm
JFK’s dad didn’t die before his son.
Otherwise JFK might have become the richest President right at the end of his second term.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 8:48 pm
Okay…. nominee then mouthfoamer
u fvckn moron.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 8:50 pm
Gingrich is too much of a beltway boy. Kind of like Bruce Hawker or Mal Colston.
.
26 Mar 12 at 8:51 pm
There’s nowt more fun on a balmy Monday eve than arguing over minutiae that’s less important than the tittle on the letter i in the word shit.
Infidel Tiger
26 Mar 12 at 8:53 pm
Hey!
I apologise to combover boy Trump.
I just didn’t envisage him as a “Presidential candidate” either but he was in mouthfoaming-land
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 8:54 pm
Gingrich is no beltway boy.
They hate him.
That’s one of his pluses
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 8:56 pm
He uses that schtick but it’s a crock. He was the speaker FFS.
.
26 Mar 12 at 8:58 pm
They also fired him
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 9:08 pm
Gingrich, despite or possibly because of his lack of a conscience, is bloody good at what he does.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 9:11 pm
Paid $1 million p.a. to be an “historian” for state-mortgage outfits – the Fannies. What a hypocritical flake.
Peter Patton
26 Mar 12 at 9:13 pm
SANTORUM: ROMNEY ‘UNIQUELY UNQUALIFIED’ TO TAKE ON OBAMACARE
Speaking at the Defending the Dream Summit in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Rick Santorum stated that Mitt Romney was “uniquely unqualified” to take on Obama over Obamacare.
Uniquely?
Think about that.
He has a point.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 9:13 pm
For whatever reason, him making that (obvious, old) point has Steve in a lather. Go figure.
Driftforge
26 Mar 12 at 9:18 pm
Exactly.
Even if that were true (and it’s not), it wouldn’t matter a great deal. As I keep saying, Republicans will be falling over themselves to vote against Obama. They will vote for whoever is the GOP nominee; in droves. You watch GOP turnout – with any nominee – bet it’ll be huge.
This isn’t normally a major concern for a GOP candidate, who is generally more interested in atttracting independents. Romney has far and away the best shot at this, as opposed to evangelical social conservative Santorum.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 10:04 pm
No, that’s not true. He’s very much a beltway boy. Which is why he could work as a lobbyist (sorry, historian) after he was bundled out of Congress.
Oh come on
26 Mar 12 at 10:08 pm
Rubbish.
And Santorum isn’t evangelical.
He is a faithful catholic.
JamesK
26 Mar 12 at 11:28 pm
I know he’s catholic, but you’re wrong because the word evangelical can be used in non-religious contexts. He most definitely is an evangelical social conservative.
Oh come on
27 Mar 12 at 12:16 am
No sh1t?
And a very long record in public life as well.
Point to evidence for your rather incendiary and nonsensical adjective Oco.
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 12:24 am
Figure it out yourself, genius. Shouldn’t be too hard seeing as though you’re so smart.
Oh come on
27 Mar 12 at 12:26 am
Here’s a hint to get the synapses in that great chess club brain of yours sparking: considering that Santorum has remarked repeatedly over the course of the primaries that he’s the only GOP candidate out there talking about SoCon issues, I suspect he’d accept the description “evangelical social conservative”.
Oh come on
27 Mar 12 at 12:30 am
Actually I’m certain ur wrong.
So long record in public life and nada.
We get the picture Oco.
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 12:33 am
Well he’s certainly been evangelical about social conservative issues in this primary.
If you’re still having issues over the use of the word ‘evangelical’, I suggest you consult a good dictionary.
Oh come on
27 Mar 12 at 12:36 am
So was Daniel Patrick Moynihan evagelical Oco?
DOG + whistle
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 12:38 am
Have you lost your conkers?
Oh come on
27 Mar 12 at 12:43 am
Why do you say that Oco?
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 12:45 am
You seem confused, JamesK. You’re rambling incoherently. I’ll make this easy for you: go to http://www.dictionary.com – I think you’ll find the relevant definition of ‘evangelical’ there.
Oh come on
27 Mar 12 at 12:45 am
Now, do try not to be quite so condescending particularly whilst ur spraying bs left, right and centre, Oco.
So Danny boy was ‘evangelical’ (in the strictly non-religious sense of course) in Oco-world?
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 12:48 am
Just for the record, if Mittens’ supporters are interested in the truth, Santorum was specifically talking about ObamaCare when he made that remark”
Video.
Santorum has literally called bullshit to a New York Times reporter who repeated the lie and then stood there and enjoyed the fun of lying.
These are the people backing Romney.
——————————————
And let’s be positive about one thing, at least. Romney has been admirably definitive on George Zimmerman, pronouncing him a murderer on national television.
So on health-care and race, the evidence suggests Romney is to the left of Eric Holder.
That’s something.
C.L.
27 Mar 12 at 1:58 am
Look, worse comes to worse, the GOP will still have the House and the Senate. He won;t be able to move a muscle.
JC
27 Mar 12 at 1:59 am
More on this now proven bullshit story:
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/26/santorum-calls-bs-on-nyt-question/
C.L.
27 Mar 12 at 2:00 am
Excellent smackdown from Santorum. Good to see a pollie stand up to the media’s lies and distortions.
Gab
27 Mar 12 at 2:08 am
I hope Steve K posts an update and distances himself from this plainly manufactured lie.
I’ve never backed Santorum for the job but I’m beginning to think he’s worth a serious look at a brokered convention.
He fights.
Romney is a flip-flopping yellow-belly…
He’s even ashamed of Ronald Reagan:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yg4iWPXDojY
C.L.
27 Mar 12 at 2:17 am
IMO Santorum is unelectable at the presidential level, and the US intellectual Left would never accept him as a legitimate president even if he won every electoral college vote.
perturbed
27 Mar 12 at 4:07 am
From Mark Steyn:
“Seeking respite from the disappointments of the Republican-primary season, I have been in Australia — where, upon every TV or radio appearance, I get asked about the Republican-primary season. News does not travel well; it gets winnowed to its essence. Rick Santorum is a crazed, stern-faced theocrat who wishes to impose a Christian version of sharia law on America and round up gays and single mothers. “That’s certainly why I’m supporting him,” I say. ….
Let’s take it as read that Rick Santorum is weird. After all, he believes in the sanctity of life, the primacy of the family, the traditional socio-religious understanding of a transcendent purpose to human existence. Once upon a time, back in the mists of, ooh, the mid–20th century, all these things were, if not entirely universal, sufficiently mainstream as to be barely worthy of discussion. Now they’re not. Isn’t the fact that conventional morality is now “weird” itself deeply weird? The instant weirdification of ideas taken for granted for millennia is surely mega-weird — unless you think that our generation is possessed of wisdom unique to human history. In which case, why are we broke?”
Ellen of Tasmania
27 Mar 12 at 9:47 am
Ellen’s link.
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 9:53 am
More of that Steyn article:
“As Congressman Mike Pence said a year or two back, “To those who say we should simply focus on fiscal issues, I say you would not be able to print enough money in a thousand years to pay for the government you would need if the traditional family collapses.”
But Pence’s doomsday scenario is already here: What “traditional” family? Seventy percent of black children are born out of wedlock, as are 70 percent of the offspring of poor white women, as are a majority of Hispanic babies. Forty percent of American children are born outside marriage; among women under 30, a majority of children are. Well, so what? It’s the same in Scandinavia, isn’t it? Well, not quite. Our progeny are fatter, sicker, riddled with childhood diabetes. Dennis Prager wrote a couple of years ago that Obama saw the United States as a large Sweden. A large Sweden is a contradiction in terms, and out there in the Dependistans of America we’re better at being large than being Swedish.
Well, okay, say the Santorum detractors, but you guys are supposed to be the small-government crowd. Why is this any business of the state? A fair point, but one that cuts both ways. Single women are the most enthusiastic constituency for big government: A kiss on the hand may be quite continental, but statism is a girl’s best friend. One can argue about whether the death of marriage leads to big government or vice versa, but simply raising the topic shouldn’t put one beyond the pale, should it?”
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 9:57 am
also from the Steyn article…
daddy dave
27 Mar 12 at 10:03 am
Yes Mark Steyn: I suppose President Santorum’s wife’s 6 year de facto relationship in her 20′s would set an excellent model to encourage young people into matrimony instead of a de facto relationship?
(Actually, Mormon family values appear to be the best example if you want to set an example for matrimony from the top.)
steve from brisbane
27 Mar 12 at 10:14 am
My condemnation is slow to arrive. Come on, I don’t have all day…
steve from brisbane
27 Mar 12 at 10:25 am
ooh, you came armed with the anti-Santo talking points. I’m glad to see you lifting your game, Steve. You’ve been in a bit of a slump of late.
daddy dave
27 Mar 12 at 10:29 am
‘Why do you call Senator Santorum a fake conservative?”
“Because he is.”
Driftforge
27 Mar 12 at 10:29 am
So Snoremitten is a ‘true’ conservative whilst Weird-Wick is a “fake conservative” Drifty?
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 10:49 am
Exactly. That’s what you want.
The the US intellectual Left (!) is comfortable with Romney, though.
C.L.
27 Mar 12 at 10:58 am
We’re seeing the same impatient calls for Santorum to get out of the race that Hillary Clinton got during her primary against Obama.
She didn’t retreat or bow out for the good of the party. She slugged it out to the end, and so should Santorum.
daddy dave
27 Mar 12 at 11:21 am
Bullshit?
Santorum: ‘Real’ Republicans Have ‘Cursed Out’ NYT Reporters
Since the original exchange, Santorum sent out a fundraising letter with this plea: “A subscription to the New York Times cost approximately $30. That’s how much I am hoping you will be willing to contribute to join me in my fight to become the next President of the United States.”
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 12:05 pm
This is whining squared. You’re all dumping on the guy that has continually outpolled a sitting president before the nomination is settled and you’re backing the comments of this loon?
Sheesh.
Alex Pundit
27 Mar 12 at 12:15 pm
Alex
I’m open on this as all I want is the Kenyan out of the White House.
I sound like Romney with regards to the candidates. I was for him, then against him then for him again and against him.
I just want a candidate who has a shot at taking out the Kenyan and Romney has really worried over time and I saw more of him.
My ideal candidate is Romney socially liberal agenda and Santorums economic policies (with a tiny bit of tweaking.)
Let them fight it out to the end.
JC
27 Mar 12 at 12:19 pm
lol… Fuck’em. They hate us anyway. Better to have someone they hate and go deranged over than someone they laugh at behind his or her back. Never give these fuckers one single inch of ground.
JC
27 Mar 12 at 12:21 pm
Since when is saying “bullshit” cursing or cursing out?
Dick Cheney to Democrat Patrick Leahy, on being harrassed with Halliburton conspiracy theories at the annual Senate photo shoot:
C.L.
27 Mar 12 at 12:25 pm
Hah, and whilst we’re on the subject, a couple of Democrats argue why Romneycare is not an albatross, but an asset for Romney.
Link
Nixon goes to China.
Alex Pundit
27 Mar 12 at 12:31 pm
Even I succumbed to the leftist media somewhat and was suspicious of Eeeevil Dr Dick but the guy is a hero.
Amd telling the utter nasty fvckwit Leahy to fuck himself …. why…. that brings a trembling tears to mine eyes.
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 12:37 pm
Fme Alex if anyone buys a single word of that pile of excrement they’d need to be committed.
Ur not nuts, ar u Alex?
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 12:40 pm
I can’t imagine how you could tell Leahy to go fuck himself. it would be considered poor form not to.
JC
27 Mar 12 at 12:41 pm
oops… how you could not..
JC
27 Mar 12 at 12:41 pm
I’ve always balked a little at the whole “it took Nixon to go to China” idea. Why? Because he shouldn’t have gone to China. It was weak.
C.L.
27 Mar 12 at 12:42 pm
[Mark, No. Sinc]
.
27 Mar 12 at 12:45 pm
Why doesn’t it shock anymore the head of the IMF was running a hooker service.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/26/dominique-strauss-kahn-charged_n_1380828.html
No wonder the little fucker was big on the stimulus.
JC
27 Mar 12 at 12:45 pm
No James, I suggested nothing of the sort.
It’s a quote from the debates that pretty much sums Santorum up. There’s nothing real about him.
That’s not to say Mittens is better; But then he’s not the reference point this election.
Driftforge
27 Mar 12 at 12:47 pm
Rightfully so, I have been moderated.
My thoughts on Steve from Brisbane’s perverted little mind attacking any public figure for what their wife did in terms of relationships two decades ago -
“In Brogues” – the most famous scene was written about you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xB7BWvD5B5Y
.
27 Mar 12 at 12:54 pm
It sounds like a quote from a typical Romney attack ad.
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 12:55 pm
I think those that are trying to throw the election away are nuts.
Alex Pundit
27 Mar 12 at 12:58 pm
I agree.
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 1:01 pm
Fuck off, Steve. Nobody likes you, or your shitty forays into trolling.
Oh come on
27 Mar 12 at 3:19 pm
CL: people aren’t allowed to change their minds? And seriously, that clip’s not exactly new – I saw it at the start of the primaries.
But how much attention should we pay to it? Now, if he’d said that two or even 5 years ago, you might have a point. But almost 20 years ago? Shit, if you’re going to hold people to that kind of long-term standard, you’d have to tar many regular Catallaxians as socialists due to their former beliefs which were abandoned decades ago.
Oh come on
27 Mar 12 at 3:29 pm
Jamesk: I’m committing to civil discourse today. Actually I get your point about Santorum. I don’t agree with you, but we’re generally on the same side, so I’m going to play nice. Pax?
Oh come on
27 Mar 12 at 3:34 pm
Obviously.
steve from brisbane
27 Mar 12 at 3:40 pm
Not with you, Steve, you odious turd. You should know that by now.
Besides, civil discourse is wasted on trolls.
Oh come on
27 Mar 12 at 3:44 pm
Step:
James has been the model of civility today. That however never applied to you.
JC
27 Mar 12 at 3:46 pm
OCO We are all socialist here but believe socialism is excessive in Australia at the moment and would prefer a more lean socialist system like China’s current system.
kelly liddle
27 Mar 12 at 4:20 pm
I think you’re all communists.
.
27 Mar 12 at 4:24 pm
Nah I like my democracy even though people keep voting for increased socialism as it makes them happy but they might learn one day when we have a serious collapse.
kelly liddle
27 Mar 12 at 4:28 pm
Nah. Someone like Romney can’t make that call credibly. He’s too similarly compromised.
Driftforge
27 Mar 12 at 4:36 pm
Okay howza ’bout: it’s precisely a Romney attack ad.
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 8:41 pm
Palin: Santorum Cursing At Reporter Showed His “Good, Strong” Character
Sarah Palin: “Santorum’s response to that liberal-leftist, in-the-tank for Obama press character really revealed some of Rick Santorum’s character. And it was good and it was strong and it was about time because he’s saying enough is enough of the liberal media twisting a conservative’s words, putting words in his mouth, taking things out of context and even just making things up. And when I heard Rick Santorum’s response, I was like ‘Well, welcome to my world Rick and good on you.’”
JamesK
27 Mar 12 at 8:43 pm
I think that’s a reasonable assessment.
Oh come on
27 Mar 12 at 8:45 pm
Honestly, Santorum is right, just treat the NYTimes people like shit, as that’s all they deserve.
JC
27 Mar 12 at 8:46 pm
As originally commented, it’s a quote from the debates. And not Romney; the quote is of Ron Paul.
Driftforge
27 Mar 12 at 11:08 pm
Romney ads often say Santorum isn’t a “real conservative”
JamesK
28 Mar 12 at 1:35 am