Then there’s the question about Gingrich: Does he stay or does he go?

I say the Welfare Queen goes. Winning one state demonstrates he is an epic failure and does not deserve tax payer provided Secret Service protection. The only thing to protect is Callista's bling and her cheap dime-store wig.

...the perception from Super Tuesday was that Romney continues to win when it matters, but that he also continues to be unable to put the GOP race away,...

This is just the narrative that the left wing media wants to sell. Santorum needed to win Ohio yesterday and he did not. Romney did well enough to put the nomination away. The difference between this race and previous ones is that this time there are Super PACs propping up candidates that would have otherwise run out of money a long time ago.

SI

Santorum has spent the least of all the candidates and Romney has outspent them all - and yet Santorum is still breathing down Romney's neck.

As much as I want Romney to win over Santorum, you have to give Santorum credit - he appeals to a huge segment of the Republican Party.

The "conservative backlash" is going to destroy the conservative movement if it keeps up. Voting for unelectable candidates is suicidal. Romney is their best chance against Obama, but some voters would rather base their decision on a few narrow issues.

Activist, no question about it, Santorum defeated himself. One has to wonder if he had kept some of his extreme right wing thoughts to himself would the outcome been different. Clearly Romney is not a 'hot' favorite.

Thought Gingrich won So Carolina, too?

The "conservative backlash" is going to destroy the conservative movement if it keeps up. Voting for unelectable candidates is suicidal. Romney is their best chance against Obama, but some voters would rather base their decision on a few narrow issues.

And not just few issues, social issues. We have bigger problems at the moment than abortions, birth control, or any other right Frothy wants to strip from women.

But he'd rather blabber about those issues than discuss major hurdles our country is facing: like the economy, Iran, the budget, etc. All I have been hearing is that "Obama is doing it wrong." Okay. That's fine, now tell me how we should be doing it, and your plans on bringing those means into fruition. I have yet to hear the latter in any logical platform from the GOP candidates.

As much as I disagree with some of Obama's actions, I can't vote for anyone else at the moment because they either don't have solid opinions of their own, or in the case of Mr. Ayatoll- I mean Frothy, he just wants us to be a Christian theocracy.

You want me to not vote for Obama? Give me a better alternative. Because right now the GOP candidates are scaring the sh*t out of me.

Dr. Ron Paul has been fighting to at least audit the Federal Reserve...many people of the USA think that the Fed is owned by us, not so and has never been. The Fed is owned by European banks, some in which are the ones we fled. People this country did fine from 1776 till 1913 when they came in the back door when it was unlocked. Our founding fathers had it setup for the congress to be the only ones to contol our monetary system, they are bringing us down. Thomas Jefferson said he feared someone else controlling our monetary system more than he feared any standing army. That speaks volume folks, if you have an enemy control your money how well would you be doing? Anyhow Dr. Paul wants them gone and this makes sense to me, he will have my support as he is the only one running that cares to truly change things, and this IS nothing new for him.

Ruken: No kidding.

Activist, no question about it, Santorum defeated himself. One has to wonder if he had kept some of his extreme right wing thoughts to himself would the outcome been different. Clearly Romney is not a 'hot' favorite.

The problem with Santorum, Gingerbread Mamma, is that he has a god complex and is incapable of shutting his yap. That's just ONE reason why he'd make a terrible president.

He's defeating himself with his lack of self control...very dangerous for a would-be Commander-in-Chief who has already threatened he'd attack Iran.

Maybe it's that deep seated longing he has for Armegeddon. In your dreams, Ricky.

There's such a sameness coming from some conservatives this morning--it's the media writing "fluff", it could not possibly be that the GOP candidates are all severely flawed and thus, it is the candidates who are unable to put the fight to rest--it's the media's fault; and most humerous--the liberals are scared and worried. Seriously, the media reports what the candidates do and say, they do not give the candidates the words to say nor tell them what to do. It's up to the candidates to sell themselves, the media merely reports their efforts and on First Read, offer their opinion of how it went and speculate on what it means. It is up to us to decide whether we agree or disagree. That is the point of First Read--our hosts post the articles and we express our views and debate each other.

I see the collapse cowards are out again. Free speech and the First Amendment to them means silencing those who say something they don't want to hear. No, I do not collapse posters; I let their words stand on their own regardless of how I feel about those words.

1. Just drop out Santorum! Most Americans DO NOT want the Christian Taliban running the USA!!!
2. Your cause is hopeless - there's no way to catch Romney in delegates!!!

I guess it's true that you can't buy an election... turns out that it still comes down to people casting votes based on whatever caricature of a candidate they choose to believe.

The headlines should read today "Romney barely beats the guy who forgot to file his paperwork to receive delegates". LOL What a group of cracker jacks these candidates are. Newt didn't vote in the VA primary, because he didn't get himself on the ballot. Can't remember when I've ever seen such a together, on the ball group! LMAO

TO: Bill, Fairfax VA who wrote:

"You have not failed. You have a president who has failed you."

So much for hypocritical Republicans who one moment demand LESS government, and the next moment demand MORE GOVERNMENT. Republicans CLAIMED to love gridlock in government, so they sent the Teabaggers to stop government from functioning; now they imply that President Obama isn't doing enough!

What happened to Republicans' claims that "business" is what matters most, NOT government?

If Republicans truly want LESS GOVERNMENT, then quit making more and more demands of President Obama, and quit demanding that President Obama do more and more. Be independent and take of yourselves, the same way you insult other needy people about.

Obama / Biden 2012

@Ruken... we have a better choice...Ron Paul.I think Ron Paul would actually make a difference.He may not be able to get alot done but it would send the message that the American people want real change.Nothing will change if Obama or Mitt get there chance.These guys are complete puppets and hacks. I can't tell the difference between these idiots except for Obama being smarter and a way better liar.This illusion of difference between parties is destroying our country. As long as we continue to vote for democratic or republican hacks our country remains a dictatorship.They all say one thing and then do the bidding of banks and corporations.This vicious cycle needs to end.The massive corporate media never even mentions Ron Paul, even if he comes in second in a primary. They'll talk about every single other candidate.Please people step outside the box vote Ron Paul or any other party other than democrat or republican. Don't let them trick you into thinking they are different.You Tube" how to get fired from fox in 5 minutes". Great piece by judge Napoliotano. his last on that network. VOTE RON PAUL

Teabaggers scream at Dems calling them socialists, then scream "leave my Social Security and medicare alone." Obama wants to save , protect Soc. Security and Medicare and improve them , and the Teabaggers vote for republicans who openly say and vote to privatize both which will kill both. How's that workjing for ya Teabaggers? Repubs vote against stopping subsidies for big oil, vote against giving tax breaks for American companies keeping jobs in U.S., voted against taking away tax breaks for companies who sent jobs overseas, voted against giving 911 responders health coverage now that they are dying because of their rescue efforts, voted to hold America hostage with more tax breaks for the billionaires and millionaires, started 2 wears without paying for them except for saying taking oil from the Iraq oil fields to pay for them. How's that working for ya repubs? Did the oil filelds in Iraq pay for the thousands of deaths and wounded American soldiers? Voted against ending speculating on oil which would lower gas prices Did it pay for the no bid contracts Bush/Cheney gave to Haliburton and other war profiteers? Banksters, wallstreeters crash economy And you want to vote for republicans to do more of the same?.......Hello hello hello...anybody in there there there.......

Then there’s the question about Gingrich: Does he stay or does he go?

Instead of desert maybe Newt should of gave up his bid for the GOP Nomination for Lent...

This primary season has been like watching a train wreck in slow motion. Oh, but I do love it so! I for all their lock step gibberish and talk of being a devout disciple of St. Ronnie they sure aren't showning it.

Mitt Romney wants to 'threaten' Iran by moving a carrier group out of the northern Arabian Sea and sending it to the eastern Mediaterranean Sea.

Romney got the idea because Presdent Reagan sent a carrier group to the eastern Mediterranean when he sent the marines into Lebanon three decades ago.

Apparently nobody told Mitt that Lebanon has a 100-mile coast on the eastern Mediterranean Sea, while Iran has a 300-mile coastline on the northern Arabian Sea, and is 500 miles from the Mediterranean at its closest point.

Duhhh, which way did they go?

Would somebody please buy Mitt a map, before we all end up tied to the roof of a car and throwing up?

Romney's less-than-stellar performance in the primaries is a harbinger of November, when GOP voters choose to stay home and watch Hoarders rather than vote for someone who cannot inspire them to get off their fannies and drive or walk to their local polling station.

If Gingrich drops out, Santorum has a clear path to the nomination. He has leads over Romney in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and just 2 points shy of California. Gingrich won't get any of those three. Those three staes, the southern states, which Romney cannot win, and momentum will give Santorum the nomination. The only thing that can stop this is a subborn Gingrich.

If Santorum Drops, the bare majority will go to Gingrich, leaving a Gingrich clinch before Tampa in doubt. If Gingrich drops, 90% - 100% of his support goes directly to Santorum. Newt only path to nomination at this point is a brokered convention.

Ron Paul has been working dilligently to insure the majority of delegates are favorable to him, so when the first ballot election fails, the delegates are free to vote for whomever they choose.

Conservatives - you have to sew up the nomination first - then tackle the election - Newt can no longer sew up the Nomination.

Ruken - I feel the same way. And you know, a lot of independents do too.

Repubs want to end the Post Office by creating bill that forces Post office to pay workers benefits out to 75 years. There are no companies that do this or think of doing it. They did this to privatize mail to raise prices for more greedy billionaires. Small towns and their businesses will not get mailservice. How you going to get your social security checks, etc? How will you keep your business afloat? You really want to end the Post Office? You voted for repubs that openly say they want this. Voting bills all over the nation to stop the elderly, the poor, and minorities from voting by saying it will stop a non existing voter fraud. You really want to vote republican to lose your right to vote, to lose the Post Office?

I think if yesterday demonstrated anything, it's that Santorum really has a narrow band of support. He is the candidate of the religious, non-mormon, conservatives. Religious Mormons go overwhelmingly for Romney. But voters more concerned with actual governmental responsibilities, things like the economy and foreign policy, are not picking up what Santorum is dishing out. They see him as just a religious candidate, and they are breaking for Romney.

Santorum's economic pitch was written specifically to play in states like Michigan and Ohio, and it isn't working. He's only winning in states where there's a strong enough evangelical anti-Romney (read, anti-Mormon) vote to put him over the top. He's one dimensional, and his support base is not big enough to get him to the nomination. He probably keeps winning midwestern and southern states, but even if he takes PA too, that's not enough. His only real chance of getting on the party's ticket this year is to become Romney's VP pick.

@theactivist

I think you made a very astute observation of this primary. The republican party appears to be totally ignorant as to the type of candidate it is going to take to beat Obama. Even if I felt the country needed a republican in the oval office(which I may or may not feel). I don't think any of the Republican candidates have a clue about the issues facing everyday working class Americans. Nor do I think they really care.

devie,

Got a good chuckle out of your statement regarding Mr. Gingrich giving up the GOP nomination for Lent.

Any one of these "bozos" would be a better choice than the dirt bag that's trying to act like a leader. No one seems to have a very good memory on these posts. This is politics! Anyone remember Hillary and the Socialist pig that was running a slam bang battle a few years ago? I love how so many people say Romney and Santorum are going to kill each other and the GOP. No they're not, again, it's politics. I also love how the headlines of this massively liberal network instantly shift to: "Romney bruised" when he added a bunch of delegates. Everyone's trying to make a story out of nothing...it's a presidential race and this crap has been going on for hundreds of years. I'm glad he's not completely running away with it, that means whoever the nominee is has an excellent chance of pulling in the opposition votes in the major election. Where the hell did the logic go in this country?

NO AMERICAN THEOCRACY! - now this is worth fighting for!!

(Women are you really ready to go back to Victorian times????)

All I hear from Ron Paul supporters is "we want change". None of them seem to have the foggiest clue about how their candidate's policies would actually affect this country.

Hey, kids - "change" for the sake of change is not necessarily a good thing. Hitler was a "change", too.

Ah, yes, Ron Paul. The one who wants to dismantle the EPA, FDA, Department of Education, FCC, etc. etc.

Coming soon to an America near you - SOMALIA 2!

@ American Girl

You need to get off the surface and dig into some education a little bit. Less government means getting rid of giant tax funded organizations that overlap each others jurisdictions and authorities creating massive redundancy and massive wasteful spending. It also means getting rid of some of the huge government agencies that do nothing but take lobbyist money and hinder the progress of American businesses.

Right now more than half of the imported oil could be eliminated if we switched trucking fleets to natural gas (which runs about $2.25 per gallon). Do you think that would bring down the cost of oil? The reason we're unable to do it is not because the trucking industry doesn't want to because they do, but because our huge regulatory government agencies are standing in the way. The same agencies that are put in place and constantly propped up by your messiah. He says he wants energy independence but if he did he would have pursued that path. Instead he spends (our) billions on technology that isn't ready yet. This is here and now and would take a matter of a couple of years to implement it plus it wouldn't have to be funded federally. He's a complete con-man and that's just one very small example...I could give you a thousand of them. If you think I'm full of it (which I'm quite sure you do) just do a little research, what I'm stating here is fact, nothing less!

As far as wanting him to do something? If someone has a bad idea, it's a bad idea. Just because barack wants to do something doesn't make it a good idea and I'm sure as hell not going to support a philosophy that will assist in the deterioration of this country. The Tea party got involved to stop the bad ideas from getting through. They have helped but haven't stopped the moron from side stepping the constitution when he couldn't get his way. (he's a frickin' crybaby) He knows what's best for you, you don't know squat as far as he's concerned. We (the people) want him to get off his self-righteous arse and attempt to make a couple of decisions that will actually put the country in a better position. We want him to stand up and attempt to lead something instead of simply passing the buck or worse, ignoring lots of situations that need attention and simply trying to transfer this country into the "marxist" society that he was brought up and taught to believe in. Again, look it up if you don't believe me, read his writings, read michelles writings. These are spelled out truths.

You and those like you are sheepishly buying into the same crap that he and those like him spew at you. He says the border is in great shape so that justifies him not doing anything about it...you buy it. He says that millions of jobs have been added to the economy when the fact is that most of what he spews is accounting tricks to sway the stats...you buy it. He apologizes to a bunch of animals and continues a downward slide of the image and strength of our Country and then claims that he's saving lives...you buy it. He's a panty waste, spineless, useless president. There's a giant difference between government and BIG government...if you took some time to educate yourself you might know that. The federal government has a job to do and the federal government has no business doing most of the things they're trying to do. He doesn't care about the things the federal government is supposed to do and he continues to grow the federal government to enormous size in all the areas that it has no business being in.

Are you getting this or are you just rolling your eyes because in them your messiah can do no wrong? I've said it before; the biggest divide in this country is coming from the lack of capability of baracks followers to actually criticize anything he does. You refuse to look at him and say "man it would be nice if he actually did this or didn't do that". But you and those like you don't and it's just another perfect example of why barack is the great divider.

TO: Ruken who wrote:

And not just few issues, social issues. We have bigger problems at the moment than abortions, birth control, or any other right Frothy wants to strip from women.

But he'd rather blabber about those issues than discuss major hurdles our country is facing: like the economy, Iran, the budget, etc. All I have been hearing is that "Obama is doing it wrong." Okay. That's fine, now tell me how we should be doing it, and your plans on bringing those means into fruition. I have yet to hear the latter in any logical platform from the GOP candidates.

Ruken, if Republicans knew ANYTHING, if they had ANY clue, we wouldn't be where we are today. The fact is, Republicans ripped this country apart so badly it's taking us years to re-group.

The fact is President Obama has been doing EVERYTHING right, but why would Republicans admit it when all Republicans really want is to rule the world and do whatever it takes to make the rich even richer, and to hell with the middle class, our American Senior Citizens, and the Poor?

Republicans decided 3-1/2 years ago that they would create and repeat catch words and phrases and words alone were enough to defeat this excellent President. Again, Republicans are wrong, as usual.

Obama / Biden 2012

Whatever...... I'll be votin Obama come November!!!!!!!

As a christian I cannot support a man who has joined a cult , who wants to be President of our great nation, and I call on all Christians of faith that if Romney gets the Republican nomination to not vote for him, I think it is better to keep someone in office who says is a christian than to put someone in who is a non believer. So all Christians nationwide do not listen to the Establishment of Republicans they are bought and paid for. Do Not Vote for Romney for President

Would somebody please buy Mitt a map, before we all end up tied to the roof of a car and throwing up?

Great line, commonsense!

Mutts Against Mitt!

Mittens needs to rescue America from what/whom?

Looks like Iran is not such an imminent threat ...

Tehran's representative to the UN nuclear-oversight agency, The Times reports, will allow inspectors to visit the Parchin military complex.

and the economy is still trending positive!

Thirty days before the Republican primary, Michigan was considered a toss-up. After the Republican debates and primaries, polls showed Obama with an 18 point lead. The Republicans' problem is that the long dragged out primary process is forcing their candidates to open their mouths. They have apparently run out of notMitt du jours, and are left the choice between the most uninspiring candidate since Bob Dole, a religious extremist who does not agree with the separation of church and state that this country was founded on, a scumbag, and a kook. Any credible Republican candidate has either decided to wait another 4 years when there is not a competent Democratic incumbent, or has been turned off by the take no hostages, never compromise attitude of the current Republican mainstream. While Mitt will undoubtedly be the eventual Republican candidate, by the time he is so everyone will be so familiar with him that even the Republicans will barely able to bring themselves to vote for him, never mind the independents. Obama is assured of a second term, and he will have coat tails. The obstructionist Republicans in the House and Senate will have major problems trying to hang on to their seats. Already ads targeting Mitch (my top priority is making sure Obama is a one term president) McConnell are appearing on television in his home state.

Real Americans First, go ahead and criticize Paul and his supporters for not being able to predict the future or in your words for not knowing how the changes they want would necessarily affect this country. But wait, can you predict with discerning accuracy what the future will bring? No, so your point doesn't mean squat, just sounds good to other idiots. What is important is wether these changes would be good or bad, and in most cases they would be beneficial. Your claim is like telling someone looking down the barrel of a murderer's gun not to remove himself from the situation because he may trip over a crack in the sidewalk while escaping.

You see, Paul himself has been surprisingly good at predicting the future. Case in point would be the housing bubble that he predicted would develop and burst over a decade ago, or the Federal Reserve that he said was going to screw us all over.

So yes you are correct. No one knows exactly how ending the Fed would affect our country, which is a point only an incompetant like yourself would make. The question is wouldn't this effect be positive? A reasonable person would ask how it would affect our country if the Fed reserve remains. It is almost always better to make a slightly un predictable change as opposed to maintaining the status quo that is known to have a negative future impact.

Only a paid poster would suggest that well-intentioned change is bad because we can't predict the future.

Almost nothing brings as much joy to my heart as watching the GOP destroy itself, leading to them going the way of the Whigs... Buh-bye Fascists!

blahblah (appropriate handle) -

You can't get there if you don't know where you're going.

Sorry - you can run your own country by the seat of your pants. Like I said, Somalia is a good warning.

Rightwingwad:
-Wow, you said a mouthful. I haven't seen so much crap come out of one person since Ronald Reagan said Supply-Side economics would benefit all!

. Less government means getting rid of giant tax funded organizations that overlap each others jurisdictions and authorities creating massive redundancy and massive wasteful spending.

-Oh come on wacjob, not being bias here are we? Less government means getting rid of programs that benefit the poor and the middle-class. Is that what you meant to say genius. And lets talk about "Massive wasteful spending". How many people in the 50k to 100k are responsible for the national debt? Did you get that? Here let me say it again: HOW MANY PEOPLE MAKING 100k OR BELOW ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR DECIDING THIS NATION SHOULD GO INTO DEBT?
-If the rich have gotten us into this mess, then they can be the ones to pay to get us out.
-Rich people benefit from the debt but when it isn't paid, well then it's EVERYBODY'S debt, right? Freakin' stupid. No risk involved there huh?

It also means getting rid of some of the huge government agencies that do nothing but take lobbyist money and hinder the progress of American businesses.

-Oh look, I get to play teacher today. Just what I wanted to do...
-So, Wacjob, ever stop and wonder why our government is getting so big? I'm thinking you don't. Just one more thing to complain about right? Well you are in luck because I'm going to tell you:

Our government is so big because it keeps hiring people.

It keeps hiring people why?

Another easy one genius. The government keeps hiring people because people keep applying for government jobs.

Well why would they do that?

I'm glad you asked. People keep applying for government jobs because they offer better benefits and pay the civilian jobs.

Well that doesn't make any sense to me, why doesn't the civilian jobs pay more?

Because they are too busy paying CEO's 30 million dollars for a year of work. Our government doesn't give the president that much. Not even close. They don't pay as much as government jobs because they can't afford to after they hand out profits to everybody but their dang workers. Simple stuff huh? :)

It's simple really. If government jobs did not pay as well or offer as good of benefits as civilian jobs, then people would be going for civilian jobs and the government could not possibly get bigger. Republicans are crying because they want their cake and eat it too. They want to pay their employees in peanuts so they can maximize their profits to rich CEOs and high-end financial institutions. The only way they can continue to make people work for peanuts is if that pesky government quits hiring. So, here we are, every other word that comes from a republican's lips is, "No more big government!"
Personally, I think if they don't like the USA government, go find another country to live in. Send us a postcard and tell us all how that works for you. No other country would put up with the crap rich republicans get away with here in this country. If you are smart you know that. If you are not, then there really isn't reason to complain about the size of our government now is there.

Right now more than half of the imported oil could be eliminated if we switched trucking fleets to natural gas (which runs about $2.25 per gallon). Do you think that would bring down the cost of oil?

-Oh come on, really? Are you thinking we are that stupid or are you just that stupid and you don't realize it?
I have an even better idea, how about we switch everything to natural gas and then oil will be free for all!!!! The oil industry is all part of the free markets. They will charge what they can get. Hell they could charge 10 bucks a gallon right now and people would have to pay it. Not like we are going to stop driving. The price of oil is no different then the worth of the dollar bill. Hell, we stop using petroleum OPEC may raise the price just to insure a better future. And if they do it, rich American oil barons might as well too, right? Have to price it to maximize profits correct?
Even if we "DRILL, DRILL, DRILL" the Earth is not made of oil. All we would be doing is taking money from rich Arabic leaders and handing it over to rich American crooks. Neither spend much money in America.

The reason we're unable to do it is not because the trucking industry doesn't want to because they do, but because our huge regulatory government agencies are standing in the way.

-This is just an outright lie. Yeah, what truckers really want is for them to put in a pipeline so they don't need truckers anymore, right? So stupid. How many truckers does it take to run a pipeline through the states? I bet the truckers know the answer to that :)
-I know, government regulation are just horrible in this country. I mean, you see house sliding down hills or earthquakes ravishing entire cities in countries that do not uphold the standards and regulations this government does and what? You wish your house was as unsafe as theres. Are you like claiming the side of mother nature?
"Wow, Look at that house sliding down that mud bank. Looks like fun. Wish that was my house!"
-Perhaps you are wanting to eat hacked-off fingers in your hamburger? Gives it flavor? I mean the reason you don't is because of government regulations right?
-The regulations are there because they need to be. It's not like the President and Congress woke-up one morning and said, "we need to make commerce in America tougher, lets just regulate stuff for the hell of it!" Of course that would have to be followed shorly with the Supreme Court saying, "Hell yeah! Sweet!"

As far as wanting him to do something? If someone has a bad idea, it's a bad idea.

-Funny you should bring that up :) I bet you are the authority on "bad ideas".

The Tea party got involved to stop the bad ideas from getting through. They have helped but haven't stopped the moron from side stepping the constitution when he couldn't get his way

.
-Wow, you really get dumber as you go along, don't you. No really? When I started reading your little post/article I though, "Man that has got to be the dumbest thing I've read." Then, I continued reading....so little did I know.
-The Tea Party has done nothing but polarize an already polarized society. Fortunately, not many share their stupidity, I mean ideology, . A bunch of Reagan worshippers that think the rich should not pay taxes and that will make the deficit go away. The people who make the most should pay the least. That will cause magical fairies to drop from the sky and pay the national debt for us.

You and those like you are sheepishly buying into the same crap that he and those like him spew at you.

-HAHA, again, funny you should mention that :) Tea anybody?

Are you getting this or are you just rolling your eyes because in them your messiah can do no wrong? I've said it before; the biggest divide in this country is coming from the lack of capability of baracks followers to actually criticize anything he does

.
-Disrespect much? Sad that you are so polarized you can't, at least, show any form of respect for that office. Doesn't matter who sits in the chair. A Tea Party member calling President Obama polarizing is almost funny. No really, it is. At least President attempted, and even succeeded in giving republicans some of the things they wanted. What has the Tea party done for liberals? Offer them a ride on the new yacht they just bought. "Want to go for a ride? The mop is right there and there should be some paint down by the water tanks."

You refuse to look at him and say "man it would be nice if he actually did this or didn't do that".

-Mindreading, not your thing?
-I wished President Obama would have gone a LOT further with health care. He had it right the first time. The government should have started a health care system.
-Funny thing is, that completely stumped Republicans. Funny stuff. They would complain, "But we can't do that because we want the rich to become richer, oops, I mean because we..um..uh..we won't be able to pick the doctors we want." Then President Obama came out with his plan and said,"No, you can keep your insurance plan. You'll pay the same amount and keep any doctor that policy allows you to keep. No change whatsoever!" So then the republicans, in their wisdom, shoots back, "Well, that's true but it's not fair. We can't have just anybody getting what rich people have. Um..WE CAN'T AFFORD IT! Yeah, that's it. Can't afford it, too bad!"

I guess republicans want America's motto to be: "When Americans set their mind on it, they can do anything. Except make healthcare affordable to all. We can't have that"

You have to forgive RIGHTWINGWACKO .......he slipped on a bar of soap awhile back.......since then everything he says and does is always just the opposite of what is really good for him.

Asimplecity1......nice job of explaining facts to the poor lost soul.......hopefully others will learn to pick up the soap right away if they drop it on the floor.

Rightwing - You say this tearing each other apart is politics as usual, but even long standing Republican pundits have been vocal in how derisive the tone has been in this primary. It goes beyond the current primary - the Republican Party has been guided by elements that now threaten it's future relevance in the American mainstream. It may not worry you, but it worries them.

While Mitt will undoubtedly be the eventual Republican candidate, by the time he is so everyone will be so familiar with him that even the Republicans will barely able to bring themselves to vote for him, never mind the independents.

I think your analysis is spot-on, someotherguy.

The more familiar voters become with Romney, the more reasons they will find to be contemptuous of him.

...and he has that 'Mormon problem' with Evangelical Christians ...

Here is the basic problem with GOP candidates right now: none have suggested any concrete goals to help the economy! I know, I know, I will hear a lot from righties here about their specific plans but the truth is they all boil down to a few things: Reduce taxes, reduce regulations and step the hell out of the way! Frankly, that is not enough. Frankly, that is nothing more than Bush did! And it left the economy in the crapper!

Now, they all say, let the free market take its course. The "free" market is exactly why we are here right now. It is not free! It has so many government controls and government-sanctioned exemptions that it isn't free right now. Either get rid of them all or start tuning them to allow real entrepreneurs to take over. I don't hear anything about that from the Republican party. In fact, all I hear is more of the same: the same thing that led us to a crashed economy in the first place! NO!!!

Let's look at Mitt Romney's economic plan. It has already been evaluated by independent agencies and found that it would increase the debt! Romney's response:

I haven’t laid out all the details of how we’re going to deal with each one of the deductions and exemptions, so I think it’s kind of interesting for the groups who try and score it because, frankly, it can’t be scored because those kinds of details are going to have be worked out with Congress.

So WTF good is it? Translation: Sorry, it is going to be the same old sh!t the same old way! No thanks, I think I'll keep what we have! Give me something new! Then maybe I will vote Republican!

FRH changed her tag, lol

Bev, Mitt is not the only person being remote controlled, lol

So much time before Nov, it will be interesting how the economy and Iran will play out.....

I pray for peace and an improving economy, even if it means Obama gets elected. It will not be with my vote, I have never seen a president that has encouraged division such as Obama. Both right and left are blind by their own agenda that the only way they see compromise is if you agree with them totally= "I see stupid people and they do not even know that they are stupid"

Have a good week..........;o)

Hey Asimplicity1:

Here's your response: you're smoking crack and you're almost too stupid to respond to but I can't resist (like you with your crack pipe). So for the sake of the intelligent readers I will. I must have hit a sensitive nerve for you to spend so much precious time on such an ignorant fool like me. What are you trying to prove? I'll answer that; You're trying to prove that you know whats going on but you obviously don't know squat. You can call all the names you want and if you'd like to play the name game my play book runs really deep and I'll play all day long...but not yet. You're massive amount of typing is a waste of time, you nullified yourself with ignorance in the first couple of lines. Funny but you didn't actually state any facts throughout any of this, you just stated some really thin opinions.

----HOW MANY PEOPLE MAKING 100k OR BELOW ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR DECIDING THIS NATION SHOULD GO INTO DEBT?

How many people do you think making 100k or below are in debt up to their eyeballs because of their own doing who are now looking to the government to get them out of it?

---------------Oh look, I get to play teacher today. Just what I wanted to do...

The only thing you taught anybody here was that you are so unbelievably stupid that you think the government somehow makes money to pay all of the employees. That logic is beyond comprehension. Where does the money come from to pay them you dip@!$%#? Oh yeah, the rich people....unbelievable.

• Opinions on natural gas?...dude read a little.
• Opinions on how the economics of commodities and international trade works?...I won't even try on that one because it's obviously way above your intelligence level.
• Your statement about big government being about the poor is blatantly wrong.
• I have no frickin' clue of what you're talking about with the truckers...I think you need to take a course on comprehension. Do you even know what natural gas is? Nothing you stated even makes sense in regards to what I wrote...please put the pipe down and get out of crack land.

--------The house sliding down the hill.

Again, it's all about comprehension my special needs friend. That's something they started teaching early in elementary school, perhaps you should go back and brush up. I'll repeat the concept for the genius that you seem to be. The federal government has a job to do but extending it's reach the way your messiah wants is unconstitutional and that can be proven with the actual constitution. Those are facts of which you obviously know noting about. What you just mentioned (the building codes) is the job of the state government by way of protecting us against negligence and not the federal governments job. But you are too frickin' stupid to know that so you attempt to look smart by stating something that is irrelevant to this conversation. The federal governments job is not to employ the country as you would have ignorant or gullible readers such as "Starsailing" think. If you would like that to be the case please move to Greece, you will be much happier there. Speaking of which, since you obviously know so much, i would love to hear you do a speech on what's caused the Greek financial crisis. That could run on NBC as a comedy hour (more like minute), hell I'd almost pay to see that.

"Disrespect much?"

Uhhh, yep. I've got respect for that office, I've got zero respect for the jack ass that holds it and I'll admit it all day long. Unlike the hypocrite you are. Based on your rantings I do believe I could go back into your vocabulary and pull out a hundred or so Hitler comparisons (or worse) to George Bush. So sit on your high horse and once again pretend you're something that you're not to make yourself and the gullible readers think you're all righteous. (I'm shaking my head in disbelief)

-----Because they are too busy paying CEO's 30 million dollars for a year of work. Our government doesn't give the president that much. Not even close. They don't pay as much as government jobs because they can't afford to after they hand out profits to everybody but their dang workers. Simple stuff huh? :)

What are you 12? Oh my God! That's one of the most pathetic arguments I've ever read. Seriously this is how you think it works? Go back to your occupy sit-in. I don't even have the will power to correct you because there are so many moronic levels to this one. "Simple' is a perfect word for you. I'll just use simple words; public unions, liberal party donations, union kickbacks, government control. Again you nit-wit, where is the money coming from? You're point about the president is pretty funny because if you ever paid attention to what the political system in this country is supposed to be or looked at the Constitution (which I know you haven't even come close to) you might see something about public service. Then compare that with pelosi flying around in her taxpayer funded jet every week...anyway screw this, your too stupid for me to even try on this one.

Did you even know that there's a U.S. Constitution available for your reading? Do you even know what the word "constitution" means? "Simply" put; you're dumb as a stump as us "rednecks" like to say.

As far as healthcare goes...I'm in the business and man you have no chance in hell of debating me on that one. I've made it my business to study that bill up and down and if you want to open that can of worms please, please, please do because I would so love to show the readers of this post once again that you don't have a clue of what's going on. That bill is a financial doomsday bill for both private companies, American jobs, and the financial well being of the country. Go ahead...bring the debate, I'd love to go there with such a simple minded fool like you. The problem is that it wont be fair because AGAIN I will be using factual information and you will be ranting far left opinions based on whatever pinheaded brainwashing and ignorant economic mentors you've had.

I'll wrap it up with this;

You wrote a lot, you didn't convey much and what you did write was really not very good. It comes off like a pissed off 22 year old liberal spouting off the illogical and unsubstantiated garbage that so often comes from people of your limited knowledge. It's okay though, we all need to witness a little stupid in our lives so thanks for bringing me my viewing for the day. You know, there are some good arguments in some of these posts that represent the opposite of what I do and although I think those people are misguided I have respect for their opinions because they have a bit of knowledge behind them. But your rantings are ridiculous at best...they're actually just empty little tirades and juvenile name calling (yep I stooped to your level, but it was fun) and it all makes you irrelevant.

Like I stated, the reason I'm taking time is to let the readers enjoy a bit more of the circus. You try to act all knowledgeable when if anyone actually reads the words you wrote you're about as fictitious as they come. Is your blood pressure up a bit. I hope I did my part...next time post a picture so I can see the veins popping out of your pathetic little ignorant forehead as you try to type something logical. Come after me with that BS again...I welcome it...you're easy.

In response to any of you crybabies who constantly bitch and moan about the "rich republicans". If you truly believe that republicans are all the rich folk...maybe you should all become republicans so you too can be rich folk.

Starsailing

Where were the "Facts" you spoke of. Bring them please and make sure they're facts. Because when I bumped my head I must have missed all those facts that were brought to light.

You and Assman make a lovely couple.

Katherine

Right after barack won in 08 Time ran the cover that read "death of the GOP". Then two years later they overwhelmingly took the house and almost the Senate. "They" that you're talking about are so afraid of barack having a second term because it will be no holds barred for his socialist movement, that "they" bite into everything the media says hook line and sinker.

If you look back at this time in the 08 campaign Hillary was actually smoking barack in many of the races and neck and neck with him in the rest. The rhetoric was huge, she was insulting to him and he even more so to her. Yet nobody in the media was talking about them tearing themselves apart.

It's all how it's painted in the media and when the smoke clears from the primary's the left will still be calling Republicans all sorts of names and getting away with it. The right will start to rally around the candidate because the choice will be clear and it will be politics as usual. Stop believing people who say the GOP is doomed. Think of it this way; barack is the greatest president in history right? I mean that's what so many on the left say. So if that's the case shouldn't he beat any republican hands down? So why does it matter so much to the left? But that's not the way they spin it...they say that if barack wins it will be because the GOP had a loser for a candidate. Well which one is it? The people who hate barack will come out and vote for whoever the candidate is. Then the people who like the candidate will come out and vote and the people who love barack will vote for him. Politics as usual.

Rightwing - I think what we will find (and what I am hoping for) is that we will find the two parties are much more willing to work together on issues this go round. And I think we are already seeing that. Eric Cantor released a statement touting President Obama's support for his job bill. He never would have taken such a concillatory stance even six months ago. Once the issue of trying to get rid of this President becomes a nonissue,it becomes much more attractive to show you can work with the other side of the aisle and get things done. Across the nation, Congress rates worse than Obama. And politicians are figuring this out -if they want to be reelected they gotta get something done.(of course you can see how I'm assuming my guy will win - sorry 'bout that,can't help it) ;~)

And it's not just the liberal media that are saying this slug fest has gotten too ugly - even conservative pundits -George Will, Jeb Bush and Karl Rove, are worried about what this will do to their party. In '08 I went from supporting McCain to Clinton to Obama, and honestly - I do not remember anything like this. I am upset by all of this. I worry about the Republican Party. Say what you will about two party politics, but we need two strong opposition parties and strong candidates - that's how our country works best.

Okay - off my soapbox. Sorry it was rather long.

Katherine; long? I'm the king of long. Here's the way I've seen it play out so far. I've used this before so forgive me it it gets a little silly but it makes my point.

I've got an idea...you and I are going to form a business. We will agree that we have to agree on all business decisions. Okay, I'm going to recommend that we open up as many credit cards as are sent to us and then max them out as fast as we can. Do you agree? Next I recommend that we leave all the lights on in our business all night, every night so people can see into our windows at any time. Do you agree with that? Next, we need to have our delivery truck chrome plated so it's the shiniest truck on the road. How about that? Oh yeah, we'll hire a manager right off the bat even though there's not enough work to justify it, and we'll pay him a salary of $200k per year, full bennies, and we'll max match a 401k for him/her. Are you in? No? Why not? Are you kidding me? Man you are a do nothing Obstructionist, I can't believe how uncooperative you are.

Well I’m not going to help out around the shop at all, instead I'm going to go out right now and tell all of our would-be customers that our company would be growing and doing so much better if it weren't for my do nothing obstructionist partner, so there!

Sound familiar? I find it amusing that simply because congress won't go along with bad ideas that they are obstructionists. The House has had dozens of bills that were written and sent over to Reid and he stopped them in their tracks on baracks orders. So why isn't there criticism both ways? Why is barack great and the congress is bad. His philosophy is detrimental to the Constitution and therefore the U.S. The US population overwhelmingly was against his healthcare bill but he played unconstitutional tricks and stuffed it through.

That was when the tea party got it's feet and said enough's enough. They put a stop to his radical agenda and that's the way the government is set up to work. He had full control of congress and he could have passed anything he wanted so why didn't he? Many things he attempted after the midterm election and then cried because it wouldn't get passed. But anyway, we have a system of checks and balances...the problem right now is that he is actually starting to side step those checks and balances and people are blind to what's going on.

I want things to get done as well, but I don't want his ways because they are built on a Marxist platform and that is not a theory, that is documented time and time again if people would just wake up and read some of his own philosophy's. As far as the guys you mentioned...they are the ones who are jumping on board the critical train for God knows what reasons. I agree the GOP is full of boneheads, just like I believe the DNC is full of elitist control freaks. I'm actually a Liberatarian leaning conservative but the GOP is the closest to what I believe so that's where I'm casting votes until something comes along that's better and actually has a chance.

The media plays us (including members of the GOP) like fiddles and a person is smart but people are stupid and the news knows how to bait the traps so that people like you and I get in these posts and get all flustered about it.

Anyway, unlike my previous adversary in this thread I wish you the best. One things for sure; whoever is in there next year better do some drastic things or God help us all. Good luck to you.

You know I don't agree with a bit of your premise Rightwing :~), but you were gracious about it. In these times that's gotta count for something,eh?

Peace - Kat

Wacjob-Wow, that's kinda funny on so many levels..this should be fun :)

I must have hit a sensitive nerve for you to spend so much precious time on such an ignorant fool like me.

-LOL, yeah, I think people will read my post, then your post and think, "Gosh, that Wacjob sure hit a nerve!"
-I mean I can literally see you huffin and puffin as you type that drivel, no really, I can.
"I'm going to show that Asimplicity. I'll make an even longer post and accuse him of doing drugs, being a young age, call him stupid, dumb, a hypocrite, special needs, etc. Oh how the list goes on and on. Good stuff!
-Um, you do realize that when people read my post and come to the conclusion that I am not the things you just ramble on about, it makes you just look silly don't you? I'm thinking you don't. Oh well, lets move on with your silliness:

You can call all the names you want and if you'd like to play the name game my play book runs really deep and I'll play all day long...but not yet.

-I see that. Look at all those fascinating names you came up with. It's as if you have your own little language going on there. Can't prove a point just start fussing and cussing huh? Kinda like a baby maybe? I didn't mean for you to cry. The truth hurts sometimes I know. Poor guy...

You're massive amount of typing is a waste of time, you nullified yourself with ignorance in the first couple of lines. Funny but you didn't actually state any facts throughout any of this, you just stated some really thin opinions.

-Lol, massive amount of typing? I can't believe you actually called me a hypocrite. You are like the KING of Hypocrites. Need "facts"? Look at the length of your post..Wow, you are so blind it is actually amazing, and I do mean that.
-Yeah, I noticed, through all your name calling, that your little article there is just loaded with facts. Just oozing from ya.
-What exactly is a "thin" opinion? Or better yet, what is a "thick" opinion? Would you say your opinions are heavy? Over-easy? Well-done? Babish maybe? Wow, NAILED IT! You have a babish opinion, so take that! :)

How many people do you think making 100k or below are in debt up to their eyeballs because of their own doing who are now looking to the government to get them out of it

-Really? Are you serious? Your tactic is to just answer another question I didn't ask in hopes that, oh I don't know, I'm be so upset from all your name-calling that I would just resort to calling you names back? Oops, that would be you, sorry.
-I'm afraid I can see through your smokescreen. Sorry buddy. I never once asked about people and their person debt. I asked how many people making under 100k are responsible for the decisions made that would cause this country to go into debt. I then went a step further to explain that if it is the decisions of the rich people that have gotten us into this mess then they should be responsible for getting us out. Guess we'll have to wait for an answer on that one huh? I won't be holding my breath :)

The only thing you taught anybody here was that you are so unbelievably stupid that you think the government somehow makes money to pay all of the employees

-So you didn't realize our government has employees or you didn't realize those employees of the government get paid? I'm really confused here. Or is it you that is confused...very, very...um...confused.

That logic is beyond comprehension. Where does the money come from to pay them you dip@!$%#? Oh yeah, the rich people....unbelievable.

-Well, lol, according to you, it doesn't come from anywhere because government employees don't get paid. Or was it there are no government employees?
-Yeah I forgot. Only rich people pay taxes. Bet that will go over real big with the middle-class reading this. Even better if they find out Romney only paid 14 percent of the 23 million dollars he hauled in last year huh? Poor guy had to pay all that dang money in taxes. Even better now that he's trying to pass a bill that will allow him to pay even less. No doubt he's republican!

-The next part has you fuming about something. Who knows! About half your post is like piecing together a puzzle except most of the pieces are not even there. Much like your thinking I'm sure :) I mean, why else would a poor or middle-class guy vote for republicans who only real agenda is to make more money for the rich. That money is not magically coming from outerspace. They give those tax-breaks to the rich straight from the pockets of the middle-class. That's why the wealthy 10 percent already ownd 93 percent of the wealth in this country.
-And again. When you say stupid things like, I don't understand that and then follow it with a bunch of name-calling the reader is not magically going to not understand it too. He is going to read your comment and think, "well, I understood it just fine" and then wonder why you didn't answer it nor even act like you could understand it. Just trying to help you out buddy.
-The tactic of, "I'll tell him he's not making sense, then call him names, then accuse him of calling me names, then act like his typing is so stupid that he must be only 12 years old" doesn't really work when people can clearly see that I am not 12 years old and can simply scroll up to see who is doing all the name calling. Kinda makes you look, foolish. Very foolish now that I scroll back up there and read your drivel again.

Uhhh, yep. I've got respect for that office, I've got zero respect for the jack ass that holds it and I'll admit it all day long. Unlike the hypocrite you are. Based on your rantings I do believe I could go back into your vocabulary and pull out a hundred or so Hitler comparisons (or worse) to George Bush. So sit on your high horse and once again pretend you're something that you're not to make yourself and the gullible readers think you're all righteous. (I'm shaking my head in disbelief)

-Ok, well let me..um.."go back into my vocabulary" and see how many Hitler comparisons I have made. Hmm. I don't see any.
Is this another one of your fits or just a tactic? "I'll say he said that, and everybody will believe me!"
-Again, do you not understand there is a scroll button on the side of the screen that anybody can simply go back and read what I wrote? Lol, I honestly don't know if you know that. If it's just you throwing a baby fit, well, again, I don't know how helpful you think that is for your cause but I for one am glad you call yourself Republican :)

Again, it's all about comprehension my special needs friend. That's something they started teaching early in elementary school, perhaps you should go back and brush up. I'll repeat the concept for the genius that you seem to be.

-Um...thanks, I think! Let the stupidity begin!

The federal government has a job to do but extending it's reach the way your messiah wants is unconstitutional and that can be proven with the actual constitution.

-Any proof of that genius? No? Prove to me that he has broken the constitution, like you say. Now can you prove it, and he will face charges or are you full of crap? I know the answer but would love to see you man up and admit it.
-You do realize Constitutional Law was what President Obama practiced before taking office don't you?
-Maybe it's President Bush you were talking about? Sorry, but he was republican. Here is a good read for ya:

George W. Bush is following in the footsteps of his predecessors, but may have left more tracks. For starters, invading another country on false pretenses is grounds for impeachment. Also, the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution essentially says that the people have the right to be secure against unreasonable government searches and seizures and that no search warrants shall be issued without probable cause that a crime has been committed. And the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) requires that warrants for national security wiretaps be authorized by the secret FISA court. The law says that it is a crime for government officials to conduct electronic surveillance outside the exclusive purviews of that law or the criminal wiretap statute. President Bush's authorization of the monitoring of Americans' e-mails and phone calls by the National Security Agency (NSA) without even the minimal protection of FISA court warrants is clearly unconstitutional and illegal. Executive searches without judicial review violate the unique checks and balances that the nation's founders created in the U.S. government and are a considerable threat to American liberty. Furthermore, surveillance of Americans by the NSA, an intelligence service rather than a law enforcement agency, is a regression to the practices of the Vietnam-era, when intelligence agencies were misused to spy on anti-war protesters—another impeachable violation of peoples' constitutional rights by LBJ and Nixon.

Did you even know that there's a U.S. Constitution available for your reading? Do you even know what the word "constitution" means? "Simply" put; you're dumb as a stump as us "rednecks" like to say

-Well said. It's kinda funny really. Well, silly is probably a better word. Somebody as stupid and dumb as you claim me to be, and yet look at all that typing you had to do just to answer my post. You didn't reply to other posts that way. You know, the ones like, "Duh, hey me think Obama is good. Me voting for him!" No, you decided to bless me with your ball-baby fit. Not that I mind really. I enjoy it when republicans blow-up :) Even better when they say they are in the tea-party. It's like two birds with one stone, lol.
-Anyways, when I see "stupid, dumb, hypocritical, special needs, 12 year olds on drugs" saying stuff I don't agree with I typically just ignore them. Why didn't you? Perhaps you know I'm right and hate that fact. I mean a baby doesn't throw a fit if he knows he's going to get the cookie, right? A student doesn't throw a baby fit when he/she got an answer right at school.
-I have seen many people mad at me for showing them the truth but I have never, honestly, seen anybody mad at themselves and take it out on me simply because they want to ignore the truth. Simply amazing, and I actually do mean that.

To wrap things up. Yes, Republicans are the voice of the rich. They want tax-breaks and they want the middle-class to play for them. Any party that would suggest that we need to pay-off our debt, and in the same breath of air, suggest we need to do it by cutting taxes on the people who have the most money is serving a different agenda. They serve the rich and that is not what America is about. No matter how many baby fits you throw, I'm afraid this time you won't be getting your way.

Wow, Rightwingwad again:

In response to any of you crybabies who constantly bitch and moan about the "rich republicans". If you truly believe that republicans are all the rich folk...maybe you should all become republicans so you too can be rich folk.

-Actually the richest folks are democrats but I don't have a problem with them. They don't complain about paying too much taxes. They are happy to help out Americans. In fact, I believe you'll even find them asking the government to raise their taxes if it will help Americans out. Bet you'll never hear a greedy republican say that!
-Lol, here is another thing you'll never hear a "rich republican" say: "Well trickle-down economics didn't work. Lets try trickle-up economics now and see how that works!" lol
-No, by far the majority of republican's are not rich. They are people who do not understand that they are voting for a party that doesn't have their interest in mind. Usually because that is what mommy and daddy did when the republicans use to stand for something more then just "More money for the rich".
-You are an excellent example why people do not turn republican and I want to thank you for that :)
"I'll hit them with my MSNBC forum ego. That'll show them!"
-Helping us Democrats one post at a time. Keep up the good work!

Whoa, Rightwingwad again: Still helping the Democratic cause. Hey don't let me stop you. You go guy!
I'm with you Rightwad: GO OBAMA!! 2012!! WOOT!!

Where were the "Facts" you spoke of. Bring them please and make sure they're facts. Because when I bumped my head I must have missed all those facts that were brought to light.

-You need to settle down or I'm thinking you may have a heart-attack. Hey, there is a fact for you! :)
-Oh come on Rightwad. You don't want any facts. Those just get in your way. You just want to win some type of imaginary game where the last person to post wins some type of imaginary prize. So tell me, do you actually pat yourself on the back when you win your little imaginary game, or are you still able to keep that figuratively?
-Well at least your rules are easy enough. I'm in :)

Asimplicity1 --- I take it all back. I think you're 13...14 tops. You and your lack of logic are definitely not worth arguing with. Honest to God your ignorance on every one of these topics is astounding. Your blind faith, your lies, your lack of any common sense and your uncanny ability to spew surface level crap is actually sad. Obama studied constitutional law...God that's hillarious! With your tiny mentality I'm sure that proves everything to you. Boy oh boy I know when I'm outsmarted. You sure got me on that natural gas argument too (still haven't figured out what natural gas is have you?). Holy cow did you put me in my place by not putting up facts but then telling me I don't really want them...sheesh it's a f#$%&$* circus trying to debate with ignorance as deep as yours.

-Anyways, when I see "stupid, dumb, hypocritical, special needs, 12 year olds on drugs" saying stuff I don't agree with I typically just ignore them. Why didn't you?

I actually mentioned not typically responding to someone like you but again, and again, and again, you've demonstrated a kindergartners ability for reading comprehension, and that's giving you credit. So you've actually said something that I can agree with and I'll take your advice. Ignore you? Nah, you're not even worth that much effort...you don't even exist. Enjoy your stupidity.

Rightwingwad: You know why I love replying to you? It's because you are so easily proved a liar and yet not man enough to admit it. You just start calling names and acting like a baby. Ever thought of comedy? lol

You and your lack of logic are definitely not worth arguing with.

-See there. Funny stuff. Perhaps you could have said that before you typed-out those two books above. So freakin' stupid. Rightwad: "Duh, oh yeah. Forgot everybody can see that."
-It's like you sit down to a table and eat a heaping plateful of food. Then another and then another. After the third plate you actually look down at what you've been eating and yell, "Wait a minute! This is horse crap. It's just not worth eating!" then you take two more bites and walk out of the horse stable while cussing at the horse that crapped on your plate.

Obama studied constitutional law...God that's hillarious!

-Here we go again. You are a liar and how many times do I have to prove it before it sinks through that rock you call a head?
-He didn't only study it, he taught it brainiac.
Here you go smarty:

Wikiapedia:

He was a community organizer in Chicago before earning his law degree. He worked as a civil rights attorney in Chicago and taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1992 to 2004

From the school itself:

UC Law School statement: The Law School has received many media requests about Barack Obama, especially about his status as "Senior Lecturer." From 1992 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004, Barack Obama served as a professor in the Law School. He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004, during which time he taught three courses per year. Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors, although not full-time or tenure-track. The title of Senior Lecturer is distinct from the title of Lecturer, which signifies adjunct status. Like Obama, each of the Law School's Senior Lecturers have high-demand careers in politics or public service, which prevent full-time teaching. Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined.

-So yeah, you make this so easy it's funny. Like I said, ever thought of comedy? You'd make an excellent clown. Sitting around getting beat on all day. I wouldn't pay to watch it though. Free to see it right here.

. Holy cow did you put me in my place by not putting up facts but then telling me I don't really want them...sheesh it's a f#$%&$* circus trying to debate with ignorance as deep as yours.

-I know, I know. Always talking about facts and have nothing to offer. I keep putting facts up and you don't see them. I bet you wish everybody reading these replies were the same way.
"Wow, Asimplicity put another fact up there. Ok, this time I'll say he didn't and everybody won't see them again!"
-I wish the world worked like your little brain. Every time a bill comes in the mail you just close your eyes and it magically disappears, right? lol

Nah, you're not even worth that much effort...you don't even exist.

-After receiving the pounding you got here, I'd probably wish Asimplicity didn't exist either. Say, did the government ever find those employees they didn't pay? Perhaps you can tell them in your "thin opinion" they never existed! Now close your eyes and this will all go away. That evil Asimplicity never existed......Must....get...tax cuts...for...the...rich.....

That is another great number Dennis! Good for us....the country :)

ROMNEY STRUGGLES WITH THE BASICS IN IRAN ~ "...At the most recent debate for the Republican presidential candidates, Mitt Romney wanted to show off his understanding of international affairs, and told the audience that Syria is Iran's "key ally" and Iranians' "route to the sea."

Iran, of course, has 1,520 miles of its own coastline -- and doesn't share a border with Syria. In trying to demonstrate his foreign policy acumen, most notably regarding Iran, Romney helped prove he hasn't even looked at a map of the region in a while.

And yet, the former governor continues to feign expertise on the subject matter. Today he has an op-ed in the Washington Post, calling for Iranian sanctions (which Obama has already imposed); backing Israel (which Obama has also already done); and shaping a U.S. policy towards Iran that's "the same as Ronald Reagan's."

Um, Mitt? The Reagan administration sold Iran weapons, in violation of an arms embargo, in order to help illegally finance the Contras in Nicaragua. Reagan also sought a check on Iranian power by cozying up to Saddam Hussein after he used chemical weapons against his own people.

A Romney administration's approach to Iran would be "the same as Ronald Reagan's"? Seriously?

Ed Kilgore was unimpressed.

If this all sounds a bit like foreign policy as it would be conducted by a seventeen-year-old boy with an addiction to energy drinks, that is almost certainly intentional. If the chronic liberal vice in foreign policy is excessive faith in international organizations, the chronic conservative vice is the belief that America must perpetually prove its willingness to kill instantly and remorselessly. Romney's handlers want to make sure conservatives are reassured he fully shares that vice.

For his part, President Obama responded to an NBC News question at a White House conference this morning that referenced Romney's criticism on Iran. Obama rejected "the casualness with which some of these folks talk about war," adding, "This is not a game -- and there's nothing casual about it."

The president went on to say, "If some of these folks think that it's time to launch a war, they should say so, and they should explain to the American people exactly why they would do that and what the consequences would be. Everything else is just talk." .

Mr. Romney, I think he was talking to you..."
via: http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/06/10593691-romney-struggles-with-the-basics-in-iran

Mr. Romney cavalierly advocates, warships to threaten Iran, yet has no apparent clue what is being done in terms of sanctions and who we back in this very dangerous situation. He has no exposure to any decisions ever made on foreign policy, he being so busy firing people. It might be time for him to take a cram course in the geography and history of the Middle East before he makes any further knee jerk off the cuff statements and makes a further fool of himself. As of now he is out of his league...way out.

Gingerbread Mama -

Thanks - I missed the last debate, so I wasn't aware of Romney's geographically-challenged comments about Iran and Syria. Then again, I'm not surprised. Yesterday Romney said “I will station multiple aircraft carriers and warships at Iran's door.” Okay.....and then what? It's like his overly simplistic comments about how Iran will have a nuclear weapon if President Obama is re-elected, but good old Mitt will show 'em we mean business. Never mind the details.

The President was EXACTLY right in his press conference yesterday. This is not a game, and there is nothing casual about it. I personally can't wait for the REAL election debate to start.

Gingerbread Mamma

This might be the best post I have ever read on FR. Not just your best - THE BEST.

Must be the nice weather we are having down in Florida!

'Morning JoAnne, Romney is a Johnny one note candidate, the economy, however, as the economic news continues to improve, that note is becoming off key. His background shows no interest in foreign policy, and when it comes to the presidential debates, he will be at a severe disadvantage because he is very uncomfortable when not in control or he feels challenged, and he will be.

They should be worth a bucket or two of Feisty's gourmet popcorn. Have a beautiful day.

GB Mama, most excellent analysis! I love how you cited your source, included a link and then gave us YOUR opinion on it. Very professional.

I point this out because I note in the thread above where the MeFirster reposted an entire "thought" he had yesterday and then only today revealed it was based on someone else's thoughts, yesterday. See some would call that an inappropriate citation or potentially plagiarism. So it makes me wonder? Was he FOR lifting someone else's original idea before he was against it? Or, the most likely scenario, it isn't lifting when someone else comes up with the ideas that EXACTLY mirror his own? I guess the REAL take away on it is that we have all known all along he hasn't had an original thought or idea - now we know where some of his 'pearls' come from. Can someone say Dittohead?

LMAO!

But where are they?

Thanks, Belfast. you are very kind. Peace

... Romney is a Johnny one note candidate, the economy, however, as the economic news continues to improve, that note is becoming off key. His background shows no interest in foreign policy, and when it comes to the presidential debates, he will be at a severe disadvantage because he is very uncomfortable when not in control or he feels challenged, and he will be.

I join the others in thanking you for that beautiful comment about Nit's foreign policy 'acumen'.

I'm planning to organize a 'Mutt's Against Mitt' rally in my town if Mittens becomes the GOP's Chosen One.

Just imagine how fun it's going to be to watch Willard debate President Obama! I can see Mittens getting all pissy and making himself look like a rich a$$ who can't defend his position on anything!

Dennis, terrific jobs news.

Gingerbread Mamma, excellent post. I couldn't bring myself to watch that last GOP debate so missed the comment but it does not surprise me that Romney is so uninformed when "winging it". It should make people think twice about choosing someone who is debating foreign policy without awareness of the basics of the countries being discussed.

Gingerbread Mamma, I agree completely. Excellent post.

I know some were upset when the press conference pre-empted their soaps, I was delighted because my wife records that soap so I got to watch it last night!

GBM -- Outstanding!

Hey Dennis---I count on you to keep me up-to-date on Rush Limbaugh---what is the latest count of advertisers who have dropped him?

The count as of this morning stands at 43

Good news for the US economy and bad news for the GOP who we know is rooting for the economy to tank again.

Obama/Biden 2012

Gingerbread Mama, What you've said is a clear indicator of what we'd have if Romney was somehow able to win in November The guy is completely out of touch with the real world.. Not only does he absolutely no grasp on foreign geography but, I have no doubt that our relations with the rest of the world governments will go back to $hit just as they were under Bush II.Secretary Clinton has done a phenomenal job repairing the damage done by the Bush administration. All Romney is doing is showing that he will set our nation up as the world's thug once again and lead our sons and daughters into harms way once again. As for me, I think we put it all back on Russia, India, China and other nations purchasing Iranian oil, by telling them that we will no longer conduct trade with them as they are using Iranian oil in the production of their goods. Then we get all the other nations supporting the embargo to do the same. I'm quite confident that these nations will see very quickly that it's in their best interests to stop buying Iran's oil than loosing a bunch of trade as it would be a loss of BIG BUCKS. Hit them all in the pocket and I'm sure Iran will follow suit. Perhaps Mittens should be preaching this instead of sending our kids off to another wasteland fighting a war over oil. God knows, it won't be his kids going.

Sounds like the advertisers aren't as stupid as the republicans who just can't seem to stop defending their hero Rush.

Rush's intent was that all women who take birth control are sluts. It appears that both Romney and Santorum agree with Rush as they certainly have said nothing differently.

Republicans, do you still think women are going to roll over and just play dead as you try to make women into second class citizens?

Yeah but the leftist God Bill Maher calls a vice presidential candidate a F%$#@%$&, F%$#&$, C%$#T, and it's cool with all you guys. It's also cool with barack to take money from him. Rush pointed out that anyone needing 3k in birth control for two years must be a slut. Don't see the problem with that until the playing field is leveled. Don't give me this crap about "he's a comedian" either. First of all that's subjective and secondly Rush is a talk show host, nothing more.

Did barack call Palin to make sure she was okay when people in the media called her every name in the book? I Didn't think so. This is a baited situation from Pelosi and Rush took the bait and now the left is in delight because they've got a story about nothing more than name calling. We have become a nation of thin skinned jack asses. Led by the thinnest skinned jack-ass of them all.

As a christian I cannot support a man who has joined a cult , who wants to be President of our great nation, and I call on all Christians of faith that if Romney gets the Republican nomination to not vote for him, I think it is better to keep someone in office who says is a christian than to put someone in who is a non believer. So all Christians nationwide do not listen to the Establishment of Republicans they are bought and paid for. Do Not Vote for Romney for President

Your name says it all.

Right wing Whack job:

I thought the gist of Ms. Fluke's testimony was to point out that a friend of hers, who happened to be a lesbian, needed to take birth control to help with a medical problem involving her ovaries.

Rather than acknowledge that certain methods of contraception are helpful to a woman's health, your doppelganger, Rush, went straight for the "pay for sex" angle and wanted video tapes.

Honestly, do you see nothing wrong with that? Or, is your only defense that other people use inappropriate language too?

Good name, by the way - suits you.

Thank you all for your very kind words. I believe foreign policy will be Romney's biggest Achilles Heel, he has a few others including Healthcare.

If I was paranoid, I'd say Mitt's sabre rattling was a clever election strategy: create uncertainity regarding possible war in the middle east, leading to speculators bidding up oil futures contracts, driving up the cost of gasoline, then try to blame the high cost of gasoline on Obama. However I'm not that paranoid, nor do I think Mitt's that clever.

You know what? This is all a smoke screen anyway! It is the economy, stupid! Either deal with the economy or get the hell out of the race!

Plenty of time to deal with that crap (and it is crap!) after the economy is stabilized! Right now, Obama is doing just fine: jobs are being created, we are steadily (if slowly) making progress, why uin the hell would I want to vote for a a change in social mores? GOP, you have lost your focus!

I kind of feel sorry for Romney, too...and then I remember, he is an empty suit, playing a part, he has been groomed for, for the last 20 years! And, he's NOT playing it well, at all!

He comes across, as smug, and fake, like he practices in front of the mirror, yuck...

Much like Obama, don't you think?

Jo-An-4354969

Amen!!!!

Optomyst-

Anyone who watched both Pres. Obama's press conference and Mitt Romney's speech yesterday saw a clear difference.

The POTUS answered random questions (including at least one from FOX news) in a clear, concise, intelligent manner and refused to get pulled into "name calling".

Mitt Romney had difficulty repeating his standard stumplines even with the help of a teleprompter and looked annoyed when choreographed applause made him lose his train of thought.

A striking difference IMHO.

He comes across, as smug, and fake, like he practices in front of the mirror...

For a guy who has been in the public eye for as long as he has and is supposed to be intelligent he sure doesn't show it. What a stiff suit he is.

Much like Obama, don't you think?

No, not even close! I don't know what your jaded eyes have been looking at...

Mitt Romney had difficulty repeating his standard stumplines even with the help of a teleprompter and looked annoyed when choreographed applause made him lose his train of thought.

Exactly! Please stop cheering me on. You're making me lose my place!

Much like Obama, don't you think?

Sounds like wishful thinking on your part, Optomyst. Remember the debates between Obama and McCain? McCain's inability to sell his agenda and connect with people cost him the election. And McCain could beat Romney in a debate with ease. The thing is, Mitt doesn't believe a word he says - he's sort of politically agnostic; just says what he has to to get what he wants. That isn't exactly the formula for a winning campaign.

LOL! Not even in the same class!

OBAMA 2012

Obama is incompetent! You are too stupid to see it. Let me guess? You like him because he is "black?"

Anomy Mous 1 - if Obama is incompetent, then Mitt, Ricky, Newt and Ron are at an intelligence level of -90! President Obama is an excellent President, helping us dig out of the morass that Bush left! And, I'm guessing you DON'T like Obama because he's black? Truly makes no difference to me what color he is - purple would kinda be a favorite! I just want someone who likes this country (doesn't have their funds offshore); likes women (leaves Santorum out); doesn't like women too much (leaves Newt out); and is still in touch with reality - sorry Ron.

SeekingSanity:

I am not white. However, the problem that I see is that people are either unable to speak up because the fear being politically incorrect i.e. speaking out against the black man. I agree that Bush was not fit to be POTUS. I also see that Obama is actually worse.

Take the case of the green energy companies that combined received over a billion dollars from the Government and then went bankrupt. Don't you think Mitt Romney would have vetted their proposed business model with more scrutiny instead of doling out the money?

I can tell you who is worse than Obama: Rick Santorum and New Gingrich.

Romney is the best guy we have at this juncture. If you don't like his record after four years, then kick him out. What you shouldn't do is reward Obama for his failure. I would have been overjoyed if Clinton can run again but that is only a dream.

'Morning Ideo.. Very well said. One has to wonder why Ron Paul stays in, he is pretty well funded, but as the primaries continue his attraction to the voters drops. I have to wonder if Gingrich and Paul were to drop out, what percentage of their voters would transfer to either Romney or Santorum. These are interesting times, and I cant wait to watch the machinations and bruised egos work in Tampa.

Ideo -

Speaking of Virginia.....am I the only one who finds it interesting that even in a southern state with the two competitors who would have the presumed most appeal not even on the ballot, Romney could still barely manage to get 60% of the vote? Or that the only other states where he got over half were Idaho and his home state of Massachusetts?

I realize it's all about the delegates - but I think it would still be interesting to know what the total combined popular vote has been in the primaries so far. Would Romney still look as "inevitable" if it WASN'T all about the delegates?

Ideology,

Hate to say it, but start tuning up that violin. I think this group (or at least 3 of them - and Ron Paul will be one who sticks, I believe) will hang all the way to June. Why? Unless Romney gets the magic number in delegates, this give the others a say at the convention, and negotiation power. Also, it keeps Santorum front and center for 2016. (Maybe as the heir presumptive?)

Will Romney, even if he loses the first ballot at the convention be the nominee? Yes. But, Dems, he will be tough to beat. So don't just sit back and snicker about the GOP primary season. I guarentee you that those in Chicago are planning for a long, hard general election fight - so should you.

JoAnne in PA

I also found Virginia most interesting. That was an anti-Romney vote, not a pro-Romney vote.

Phine, I don't see Paul as having anything to negotiate for. The GOP will not give him anything on his major stances. As to some cabinet position, he would be a constant thorn. His youth vote drawing ability will disappear in the General Election as he will not even be VP.

Ideology,

Paul just likes being there. Maybe to start some kind of base for his son? Don't know. But, he does appear to be the type that will hang in there just to be stubborn. And to promote his message that he is adamant about. Sensible, no, but that is just how he appears to me. Remember, also, this is his last chance to promote this message himself, he will have to pass it on for future campaigns, he is 76 now. AND he owes nothing to the GOP establishment.

I am not sure why you say that Ron Paul "... to bow out was writ large in North Dakota".

I entirely disagree. His following, despite not being on mainstream media like the others, is immense and loyal. Most American citizens do NOT want the US Constitution done away with, and us put under a dictatorship, nor the US used as a tool of the UN.

Your comments sound not only unrealistic, but far from reality. The "mainstream media" backs those they are told to. Voter fruad has been in every election held for the 2012: voting machines are "malfunctioning, and not on the side of Ron Paul. Those who are running the polls, who are supposedly "keeping them honest" have not "kept them honest" - again not in favor of Ron Paul. The software for polling was also "malfunctioning" - again not in favor of Ron Paul. Then the companies that this information goes thru before being tallied has also been found not being honest or correct - again NOT in favor of Ron Paul.

So you want one of those guys being put into office by someone other then American voters? Because that is what is happening. If you want that, why bother to vote, let them assign the person.

But please go to another nation for that - here, we are Still America, Land of the Free under the US Constitution despite the attacks on it by those domestic enemies within the three branches of OUR government. But we will arrest them, hold them for prosecution while we replace the domestic enemies within the judicial branch, and prosecute them when that is done.

America is a Constitutional Republic. A Constitutional Republic has some similarities to democracy in that it uses democratic processes to elect representatives and pass new laws, etc. The critical difference lies in the fact that a Constitutional Republic has a Constitution that limits the powers of the government. It also spells out how the government is structured, creating checks on its power and balancing power between the different branches. It puts into writing the protections of our natural rights FROM those who might serve within our government.

Plus, didn't you find it "funny" that TSA very visibly went against Rand Paul, Ron Paul's son, when TSA does not do anything visibly (ask the many cell phone users who had theirs confiscatedfor taking pictures of TSA abuses) unless ordered to do so; a highly visible threat to RP against his son?

phine,...I read your line

the HAIR presumptive,...lol

cracked me up.

Phine ... I agree that the general will be a long, hard (and thanks to Super Pacs money) UGLY fight. The debates will be pivotal, and I hope the moderators handle them in a more professional manner than we've witnessed up to now.

Knine

Tell me what you mean by "immense" as in Ron Paul's following and perhaps a realistic conversation can be had; devoid of conspiracy theories of course.

TOG,

I know there are three debates scheduled. Any info on when, and who will moderate them? Mitt will NOT be able to get away from answering questions, then. And when will Romney finally start taking questions from the press (maybe even an appearance on MTP or Face the Nation)? Or, will he keep up with avoiding the press ala Sarah Palin?

Clara, hmm, he does seem to have "presidential" looking hair, no? LOL!!!!!!

Wow, Knine. What a theory. Love to hear what you say about the grassy knoll! Seriously, the CIA is not spying on you from your GFI plugs in your kitchen and bathroom!

What are people's thoughts on Ron Paul running as an independent? Of course, that would upset the Republicans but he seems like he's the kind of guy who could care less. I'm not sure that he appeals to me personally but at least I respect him for sticking to his principles. Much like the late Paul Wellstone here in MN. He was way too liberal for my liking but he never wavered from his principles.

Ron Paul is NOTHING like Paul Wellstone.

As a third party candidate, Ron Paul will bleed votes away from the GOP and he will completely ruin any chance of a Republican victory in November. For that reason, I wish he would announce his intention to become an independent candidate. To do so requires a lot of money, however, and I don't think Paul has the resources to attempt such an endeavor. Stranger things have happened, though, and given the hilarity of the GOP primary race, it is still possible that Republican donors as well as voters would prefer to distance themselves from the crashing-and-burning GOP during the last phase of the election race and go with Paul as an alternative.

Phine: "Also, it keeps Santorum front and center for 2016."

Come on, phine, the rest of America deserves what they get if they vote for this guy, but Steeler Fan and I and our fellow Pennsylvanians have suffered enough already - have mercy! Besides.....by 2016 he'll have been out of the Senate for ten years and instead of being known as the guy who lost conservative Pennsylvania by 18 points, he'll be the guy who couldn't even beat Mitt Romney. As Dana Carvey used to say in his best Bush 41 voice, "Not gonna happen"......

Ron Paul is NOTHING like Paul Wellstone.

Wellstone was extremely liberal from what I can remember.

Shellie-657180

Ron Paul is NOTHING like Paul Wellstone.

Really? They are very much alike. Neither of them wavered from their principles. I never said their principles were alike. Just because you are blinded by your affiliation to the Democratic party doesn't mean that other people cannot look at things objectively. That's the problem w/ people today is that you refuse to respect anyone who has a different opinion than yourself. I have no problem respecting someone for being passionate for what they believe in (as long as they do not hurt someone) w/out agreeing in their position. That allows me to respect both Ron Paul and Paul Wellstone despite the fact they could not be further apart on the political spectrum. I don't agree w/ either one of them.

Sorry, JoAnne, but the GOP does have a tendancy to pick the runner up from the previous cycle to be the next nominee. How else to you explain Romney?

L and L:

Good points. My wife is a dyed in the wool Democrat but is impressed by Paul sticking to his convictions. But, if he goes 3rd party, he may split the Republican vote and hand Obama his second term. That's what happened to George HW Bush by way of Ross Perot in '92 - and what Nader did to Al Gore in '96. All Ron Paul needs to do is take about 2% of the Republican vote. And he may be just stubborn enough to do it.

longdin - I think you're exactly right. Ron Paul as an independent would be disastrous for the Republican party. I think it seals the deal for Obama, which is why I have to believe that the party will find a place for him on a cabinet or throw him some kind of bone so he doesn't go that route. Of course, his own son is a died in the wool tea party so have to believe he'll also try to talk him out of it. I also agree that Paul may still tell them all to stick it and run anyway...he does have a rabid following that would probably take even more than 2%.

My two cents:

Rachel Maddow explained how Gingrich's sugar daddy Sheldon Adelson keeps funding him because Newt bleeds away enough votes to keep Santorum from besting Mittens. Adelson could handle a Richie Rich POTUS but he couldn't stomach Santorum.

I also wonder if little Ricky isn't biding his time and staying true to his religion in hopes he'll be the VP pick. Mittens is going to need a far right sidekick since he's way too moderate to appeal to the lunatic fringe (aka the GOP base).

Ricky might figure if he's picked for VP in 2012, he'll have a shot at the presidency down the road.

*shudder*

Ricky might figure if he's picked for VP in 2012, he'll have a shot at the presidency down the road.

If Frothy is VP or the nominee, I will have no choice but to vote Obama.

phine -

I can explain the infield fly rule. I can explain what's in scrapple. I can explain the meaning of "2001: A Space Odyssey". (okay, no I can't, but I loved it all 14 times I saw it anyway).

But you're right - there's no other explanation I can offer for Mitt Romney.

It's his turn. So fine (or phine, as the case may be) - I've already got the bumper sticker ready:

"Santorum 2016 - Four Years Crazier Than 2012!"

Right on all counts, Kaybeetoys. Whether he likes it or not, Newt is a stalking horse for Mitt. Romney has more delegates than the other Republican hopefuls combined. That gives him the nomination on the first ballot unless Newt pulls out and throws his support to Santorum. I cannot imagine Newt's bloated ego allowing him to do that.

If Frothy is VP or the nominee, I will have no choice but to vote Obama.

Ruken, my advice is to vote for Obama no matter how the GOP circus plays out. Given four more years with no worries about re-election, Obama will be able to push through a lot of meaningful legislation and bring the economy back to life. He's a sound, reliable leader.

Romney has more delegates than the other Republican hopefuls combined. That gives him the nomination on the first ballot unless Newt pulls out and throws his support to Santorum. I cannot imagine Newt's bloated ego allowing him to do that.

Agreed. The Newtster stays in the game for the $$$ and the press. One thing you can always count on with Newt is his ego.

Does anyone support Newt these days?

As far as I am concerned, Ron Paul is in it for nothing more than what he can gain for his son. Newt Gingrich hopes this is actually a way back into political power; after being ousted 14 years ago as a total sleazeball, he hopes that this is a way back. Deny him that!

Tired Old Guy

I guess Sarah's vote (and support) didn't help Newt much in Alaska. But never fear, she's still holding out hope for a brokered convention where she'll swoop in to save the day

Yea, she will to fly him and Claissta to the moon. They all belong out of this world. Of course, they are already out of this world; they just don't know it.

Beverly ... I've often wondered what the weather was like in their galaxy.

I am looking forward to the movie this weekend,...Julianne Moore is a good actress and I can't wait to see what she does with the 'material'!

I've often wondered what the weather was like in their galaxy.

A constant state of heavy, dense, fog.

I am looking forward to the movie this weekend,...

Me either! I saw Steve Schmidt say the movie was extremely accuarate!

How's that for a kick in the pants to the McCain campaign train wreck? lol

*popcorn*?

Jody ... I think it's because of that warm and "fuzzy" feeling that they get when they talk about dropping bombs on another country.

Correction ... when "our" sons and daughters are dropping those bombs.

Jody, Iowa

More Fuzzy Memory occurred on Morning Joe today when discussing President Obama's press conference comments about the talk of war coming from the GOP presidential candidates

Much more Fuzzy Memory yesterday on Moaning Joe I got a chance to see why Net-n-Yahoo is talking out of both sides of mouth. He does not like my president and wants a republican in the WH.

Crazzzy former Netyahau war monger makes the case why Israel can strike Iran and save the world just like they did with Syria. This nut thinks the world will praise Israel for striking Iran and apply the crippling sanctions after the strike.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/ns/msnbc_tv-morning_joe/#46638741

===================================================================
I trust our President even more so now. What if, providing of course there aren't any nukes, happens then?

Doesn't Benji have a popularity problem of his own in Israel right now? And also, isn't the general population not all that enthused about a war with anyone - especially going after Iran? Thought I had heard something about those two questions.

Jody, I watched these events as you did and came away with exactly the same thoughts, thank you for posting them. I recommend you repost this particular post on additional threads today.

I get so tired of the pundits and talking heads, keep going back in time to make comparisons whether it is on the last general election or on a previous one or candidates. Everything and everyone changes over time, unless they live under a rock.

Technology today, has drastically changed the political landscape in every area, and look at the the voters, we now have besides our vote, a voice here and other blogs. Technology and in the social media is where the Obama campaign shows great strength and how to use it to their advantage.

Bet Limbaugh wishes there wasn't anything such as Facebook and Twitter and through Google, the ability to make our voices heard loud and clear. Mitt could learn how to use them too.

Jody says:

"Democrats had two strong, capable and well liked candidates. Passions for both were powerful but both were recognized as solid presidential material.'

Then why did Hillary attack Obama's readiness for the presidency with the famous ad, showing the phone ringiing at 3 AM?

These lame talking points posted in this liberal fantasy land are laughably weak.

Phine, true, Bebe N, is not that popular in his own country and he does not have the support needed to bomb Iran.

Oh, Bob McDonnell for VP, you have my deepest sympathy on so many levels but mostly because you fail even the most basic test of comprehension, the 3AM phone call ad made no mention of bombing Iran to pieces--well, that and supporting the vaginal probe Governor for VP.

Bob in VA-

So you are saying that an ad which questioned Barack Obama's experience to be the same as ones where Romney and Santorum each question each other's honesty, integrity and character? You REALLY don't see the difference?

Jody--not only is it fuzzy memories but also blurred vision when they talk about the President as "not that good a debater" (like Mitt would win the debates) or "aloof". I heard these both on Morning Joe for the brief time I could stick with it. One thing candidates do is go to factories & then talk about the economy. I've watched video and pictures of both the President & Mitt doing this and the President always looks engaged, interested, enthusiastic. Mitt looks bored and out of place. I think their problem is that the President connects with the people and not the politicians and pundits (and after all he's dealt with over the years who could blame him). I've seen no evidence that Mitt connects with anyone other than his family.

Really Jody, perhaps your fuzzy memory has wiped out some of the inflammatory, authority-undermining rhetoric spouted during the democratic primary and campaign trail regarding the violations of civil liberties and that mindset of the bush administration. Yet, here we are and Guantanamo is till open, military tribunals are still the venue of choice, it is now law that infinite detention is ok, and now the AG has said its consitutional to target american citizen without due process of law. When they are a candidate its okay to weaken an opposition commander in chief, but when they become the Commander, boy how their tune changes.

Bob in VA -

Watch the "3:00 am" ad again from the perspective of four years later - Hillary Clinton never once mentions Barack Obama in it. If anything, it plays up her own strengths as knowing world leaders and knowing the military and being ready to answer that phone. Sure, the implication is there - but compared to the kind of stuff Romney and Santorum have been slinging this year, this ad looks - well, in your own words, laughably weak:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yr7odFUARg

antonio, for the umpteenth time, President Obama cannot close Gitmo because Congress would not authorize funding to do it; they blocked every effort to close it. Do not blame President Obama for the failure of our lawmakers. Have you forgotten the GOP cries of terrorists will be released on the streets of our cities and towns? Liz and Dick Cheney out there beating the drums of fear--the world would end if we tried terrorists in civil courts. Democratic lawmakers, too, all behaving as if our maximum security prisons could not possibly keep terrorists locked up.

When the democrats talked about military tribunals and indefinite detention, as well as violations of civil liberties and due process of law, they were discussing specific Bush policies affecting these shores and Americans--they were viable disagreements of policy and deserve to be debated. What I wrote about was that fuzzy memories try to compare the democratic debates about foreign policy to what the GOP candidates are doing today. None of the democratic candidates talked about starting a war in Iran, bombing just because we can. There is no comparison of the "bomb, bomb, bomb" rhetoric coming from the GOP candidates to what democrats said about the same subject in 2008. The fact that you cannot see the difference says a great deal.

JoAnne, excellent point; the ad never mentions Barack Obama.

Really antonio, maybe you have been in a coma and just woke up or maybe you just aren't that good at not making a fool of yourself. The patriot act allowed for infinite detention, pretty much wiped out due process, but you were just peachy with all that during the Bush administration. The current crop of crazies in the house won't allow the closing of GITMO (remember that empty prison Illinois) and you rabid righties were screaming bloody murder at the suggestion of putting "terrorists" on trial in our courts. But I guess all that just vanished from your tiny little brain. However, I will admit, it is entertaining to watch your desperate attempts to find something to whine about while at the same time you are screaming to the world, "look at me, I'm a desperate dimwit"!

I don't think they're desperate at all.

PS - After Romney's "victory" speech last night, if he is, in fact, the GOP nominee, I don't believe that anyone in that party is in any position to evaluate a Democrat in the future as being a snob or being effete or being a wimp.

Maybe they should follow the ol Brooklyn saying - " Throw de bums out!" and wait 'til next year!

Note the *crickets* from the right at the news that Mitt used a (gasp) teleprompter to deliver his speech last night.

DaNoid, you summed last night up nicely. Listening to their speeches required caffeine just to stay focused because they sounded line inane drones.

Steeler Fan, yep, crickets from the right. Gingrich was feeding his crowd last night by saying he'd let President Obama use a teleprompter in Newt's fictional 7, 3-hr debates when he could have poked at Mitt Romney for using one. It's so childish. In my opinion, both Newt and Rick should have used one because they rattled on about nothing for what seemed an eternity. We should call him "Teleprompter Mitt" just to stir the right.

Romney's read from the teleprompter speech is the same speech he has given no less than 4-5 times now. When he uses his dreaded teleprompter (which New pointed out last night) he drones on and repeats the same canned speech he's was provided a few months back. When he goes off the teleprompter and makes up his own speech is when he repeatedly shoves both his feet in his mouth.

Shellie, so true. As long as Romney stays on script, he does fine; it's when he adlibs that he fails. What I find so funny about the right-wingers comments about President Obama using a teleprompter for speeches is that they fail to recognize that he did not use one for the debates, does not use one for his press conferences and the classic was President Obama's appearance at the annual GOP legislative caucus meeting when Obama, without notes and without teleprompter, systematically sliced and diced every question the GOPers had about every issue they mentioned reducing their arguments to rubble. He demolished them--all from memory. This is the fatal mistake the Gingrichs and Santorums make--they believe they can debate President Obama because they believe their own nonsense about teleprompters.

The teleprompter remark started with Rush Limbaugh and the dildoheads are just repeating the master. Name one President since Eisenhower who didn't use one.

Deb C-1357798: I thought I heard this morning that the turnout in OH was up from 2008. Anyone know?

Chris -

Well, since we all know Fox News is the most accurate source: :)

http://www.fox19.com/story/17096974/voter-turnout-low-during-ohio-primary

Thank you JoAnne! :)

Just got home so sorry I didn't get to check the numbers earlier. AP reported earlier today turnout was just over 25% for this primary. 1.9million voted of the 7.7million eligible. In 2008 there were 3.5M who voted in the primary. So turnout significantly less. These figures were provided I believe by the Sec. of State.

Deb C, I hear you about the peace of the phone not ringing. Felt the same way when all 10 or so of them packed up and left the state after the caucus.

It blows my mind how many do not do their own research and follow like sheep getting all their input from the elite, the media. I truly fear for the future of this great land, I found out about the Fed when I was around 45, now 54 and I am amazed that know one really seems to talk or care, never in the media, not many that seem to care.....

Dr. Ron Paul has been fighting to at least audit the Federal Reserve...many people of the USA think that the Fed is owned by us, not so and has never been. The Fed is owned by European banks, some in which are the ones we fled. People this country did fine from 1776 till 1913 when they came in the back door when it was unlocked. Our founding fathers had it setup for the congress to be the only ones to control our monetary system, they are bringing us down. Thomas Jefferson said he feared someone else controlling our monetary system more than he feared any standing army. That speaks volume folks, if you have an enemy control your money how well would you be doing? Anyhow Dr. Paul wants them gone and this makes sense to me, he will have my support as he is the only one running that cares to truly change things, and this IS nothing new for him.

Chaz - Good cut and paste from your previous comment on the other blog. Kinda like using a teleprompter,huh?

lololol

It blows my mind how someone accuses others of not doing the research and getting all their information from the "elite media" which is nothing but a repeat of a talking point you got from hearing it from the "elite media". LOL

P.S. Ron Paul is dead in the water, has been from the beginning and still is. Going no where, and getting there faster every day.

auditing the fed is about the worst thing you could possibly do. in the universe. you wanna see panic and people jumping from rooftops?

Though Romney gives the R's the best chance at winning. I just don't see how Santorum or Newt could possibly beat a sitting President. Romney's advantage is that he appeals more to the independents and center. No matter what the Tea Party people say, they will still vote for a Republican regardless. Santorum scares the heck out of me, personally. I'm very much a Christian but that guy is nuts. There's no way I could vote for him.

If Newt gets his way, you ultra conservatives can colonize his looney moon base and play the vaginal probe game to your hearts content.

Well, Robert, because we aren't the ones advocating a theocracy, or religious fealty as a test for office holders. That would be you guys.

robert popple-1912943

Why don't all you liberal pickle scorchers move to France or better yet Syria. Assad would love to have you

Willard Mittens Romney said he wants people who disagree with him to move to North Korea. I don't know what you've got against France. It's run by a conservative president. I've been to Paris, and I'd rather live there than some places in the U.S. overrun by boorish right wingers and Confederate sympathizers.

robbert popple, well, it's like this, I am an American citizen and have as much right to live in this country as conservatives do. I have as much right to my "liberal pickle scorcher" view as you have to your 19th century ones or whatever they may be. That's why this country is called a democracy--everyone is entitled to their view, the right to speak their minds, to vote and above all to be free to live where we choose. If you don't care for that concept, perhaps you should be the one seeking another country to call home; but, if like me, you like it here--well, it's a free country and no one is forcing you to go because your beliefs differ from mine.

I thought Assad was a conservative.

robert popple-1912943

Why don't all you liberal pickle scorchers move to France or better yet Syria. Assad would love to have you

Translation, I can't get my way because I am part of the tiny sect of dimwited lunatics and all my candidates suck so bad they are practically handing Obama the election so, I'm going to huff and puff like a dimwitted child and scream at everyone to get off my lawn! lol

haha. childish indeed. ahh the love it or leave it crowd. go ahead and try and make me and you'll learn just how much libuhruhls are afraid to use guns.

ps, this tripe didnt work during vietnam, what on earth makes you think it will now? libuhrhls are still here and going no where. then again, you were prolly already a conservative hater old guy during vietnam.

Here's the worst thing: being a free country and all, you have to live with us! Doesn't that just gripe your ass?

Dey is...dey is.....

So to fix unemployment, we should vote in a vulture capitalist?

I fail to see where this is a logical alternative.

alans4

The bum in the white house can't run on pathetic record. 8 % plus unemployment. Actual unemployment is close to 15 %. Vote him in and you are out of your minds.

The 8% unemployment rate is NOT a record. It was up past 10% in 2010. It was also higher than 10% when Ronald Reagan was the bum in the White House.

Ruken I see you like Rick Perry since you used his label for Romney. Some jobs need to be cut, some factories need to be closed for a company to remain profitable. If we tried to preserve every job the ice delivery man, telephone operators, blacksmiths, and many others would still have their old jobs. We need to create an environment for manufacturers to thrive in the U.S. so all of the factory jobs aren't sent overseas. I think a very successful venture capitalist will be better than a community organizer.

alans4, unemployment is going down all over the country and will be below 8% by November. Obviously you don't keep up with current events. What would qualify as being "out of your mind" would be to vote for any of the clowns fielding the GOP field. Romney would take us straight into war with Iran and that's something he could do as Commander in Chief without any checks and balances.

Diamond60

I think a very successful venture capitalist will be better than a community organizer.

Romney was very successful at making money by taking over companies, running them into the ground, and firing their employees. I'd rather have the community organizer. After all, the United States is supposed to be a community, not a corporation. And the American community is a lot better organized than it was four years ago at the depths of the Bush Recession. Not that the Romney wouldn't return a good profit to the corporations that invested in his campaign if he were president. But it probably wouldn't do America much good if Romney let his corporate paymasters suck the US economy dry.

And you know it's 15% because ...?

People always seem to forget that the "community organizer" killed Osama Bin Laden, Closed Iraq war , put date to end of Afghanistan. Passed HCR which is saving billions of dollars for americans, got rid of Dont ask Dont tell . Thats just some of the things a community organizer Did in just 3 yrs!

25 months of consecutive job growth, Dow over 12000 (7500 where GOP left it) GM is # 1 in the world all from a community organizer!

Wow the things we find in a community!!!

Pissed Off Person:

Don't confuse us with facts. I hope you know that none of what you say agrees with Rush Limbaugh. You can't have both sides being right.

lololol sorry

yup, the unemployment is obamas fault... uh huh. all i gotta do is just erase my mind from august to january 2008 and it works out perfectly.

Hahahahaha!

The only reason it is this high is because we voted in a a Republican last time! That's lotsa reason we should do it again!

Fancy, Ever research Voter Fraud? Check out the changes below. RP went down?????

2012 North Dakota caucus fraud: Start - Ron Paul 60, Mitt Romney 09, Rick Santorum 19, Newt Gingrich 01
Later it changed to - Rick Santorum 40% Ron Paul 28%

Actually, you might not be aware of the "Voter Fraud" that has been happening in every state these guys have been voted on in so far (2012).

Fox News Suggests Fraud On Super Tuesday In Ohio and Virginia Election, NBC says voter registration fraud is not "voter fraud".

North Dakota caucus fraud: Start - Ron Paul 60, Mitt Romney 09, Rick Santorum 19, Newt Gingrich 01
Later - Rick Santorum 40% Ron Paul 28% Santorum won with more than 1,300 votes above Ron Paul

How did RP go down from 60 to 28?

WE need to know that whoever gets elected is REALLY OUR choice, and not made for us.

Percentages change as more votes are counted.

So knine, you are saying, or admiting rather, that it is indeed the republicans committing voter fraud? Boy , this just keeps getting better and better. The desperation is such that now they are acusing their own of voter fraud. LOL

So knine, you are saying, or admiting rather, that it is indeed the republicans committing voter fraud?

No, maybe you should vote for the incumbent; who has provided more jobs, economy is improving, things are getting better. Geee, ya know, why would I vote for that?

Sanbo Santorum?
Not "toasted" yet, but he's getting warmer...

Worried about your green energy subsidy? Do you get billions, for producing nothing? Then you must be a government bureacrat or an Obama crony feeding at the public trough.

You're an awesome Newsviner! It's true Republicans do want war not only with Iran, but the Democrats and people who don't agree with them as well. What happen to the good old days when we were all united as Americans? I hope it doesn't take another 9/11 to bring us together. Of course now the South/GOP is ticked off at the "whiny" New Yorkers over a terrorist attack. I hope and pray civility is NOT dead.

Agreed.

MSNBC gets more ad revenue the more 'hits' the page gets.

Therefore if you want to hurt MSNBC, don't visit their site.

It is fun to visit MSNBC, to see how pathetically biased the Obama-poodle network has become.

Bob in Virginia - No party affiliation here but seriously, do you not see how "pathetically biased" both sides of the political spectrum are? We no longer have the United States, we have red and blue states. Unfortunately, we aren't Americans any longer - we are republicans, democrats, liberals, conservatives, and on and on. Again, no party affiliation. Just an American. I realize you were speaking of MSNBC but really?

Point!

Biased opinions are definitely the bane. A better interpretation is the ballot-crossers. If you've never voted outside your own party lines...your opinions are pretty much worthless as far as estimating an election goes :) Just the 'skinny'

Raizer:

I don't think it's quite that way.

Hey Bob in Virginia -----it is fun to visit Fox to see how pathetically biased the Republican-poodle network has ALWAYS BEEN.

I think it all depends on who the VP selection is. There are some choice that will drag supporters in. I happen to think Ron Paul is setting up his son as a possible Romney VP candidate. Its almost certain to be someone acceptable to the teapartyish people.