The Goat Pen

Dr. Strangelove wrote:I'll answer the question...Santorum and Bachmann were unquestionably more conservative on social issues than Romney. Bachmann was well to his right on economic policy as well. Probably also Herman Cain. Dr. Ron Paul was certainly a stronger believer in free markets.

So in the end, much like McCain, the R's chose the most blandly moderate candidate that was available.

First Wife wrote:As governor of one of the most liberal states in the union, Mitt Romney did something even Ronald Reagan didn't do as governor of California: He balanced the budget without raising taxes.

Romney became deeply pro-life as governor of the aforementioned liberal state and vetoed an embryonic stem cell bill. (Meanwhile, Newt Gingrich lobbied President George W. Bush to allow embryonic stem cell research.)

Romney's approach to illegal immigration in Massachusetts resembled what Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona is doing today, making her a right-wing heroine.

Romney pushed the conservative alternative to national health care that, had it been adopted in the 49 other states, would have killed Obamacare in the crib by solving the health insurance problem at the state level.

Unlike actual Establishment candidates, Romney has never worked in Washington, much less spent his entire life as a professional politician. He's had a Midas touch with every enterprise he has ever run, including Bain Capital, the Olympics and Massachusetts.

The chestnut about Mitt Romney being pushed on unsuspecting conservatives by "the Establishment" is the exact opposite of the truth. The Establishment, by any sensible definition, is virulently opposed to Romney -- and for completely contradictory reasons.

The entire NFM (non-Fox media) hate Romney because he is the only candidate who stands a chance of beating Obama.

First Wife wrote:Most recently, Santorum assailed Obama for saying everyone should go to college by responding: "What a snob!"

No! No! No!

Santorum's response merely reinforces the insane liberal worldview that going to college is the preserve of our betters, a hoity-toity proof of social class, a desirable consumer product like a Louis Vuitton bag.

This isn't the '20s, when only the upper classes went to college. These days, every idiot who can scratch an "X" on his checkbook assumes hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt to make himself less employable by taking college courses in -- for example -- "Lady Gaga and the Sociology of Fame" (University of South Carolina, Columbia), "GaGa for Gaga: Sex, Gender and Identity" (University of Virginia), "Arguing With Judge Judy: Popular 'Logic' on TV Judge Shows" (University of California, Berkeley), "The Phallus" (Occidental College), "Zombies" (University of Baltimore), "Comics" (Oregon State University), "Harry Potter: Finding Your Patronus" (Oregon State University), and "Underwater Basket Weaving" (University of California at San Diego).

My fellow Americans, Meghan McCain has a bachelor's degree.

It's not snobbery that compels liberals to promote college for all; it's a scam to manufacture more Democratic voters, much like their immigration policies.

Is a Valley Girl who takes courses in Self-Esteem at Cal State Fresno (an actual course at an actual college) a finer class of person than a skilled plumber with approximately 1,000 times the earning capacity and social worth of the airhead?

No. But she is more likely to vote Democratic.....

....It was the same thing with Santorum on gays serving openly in the military. Again, Santorum is right -- but he still manages to lose the argument.

Back in October, when Chris Wallace was interviewing Santorum on "Fox News Sunday," he fell into a trap a 14-year-old high-school debater wouldn't have walked into, by agreeing with a quote -- without knowing who said it.

Wallace asked Santorum if he agreed with the following quote: "The Army is not a sociological laboratory. Experimenting with Army policy, especially in time of war, would pose a danger to efficiency, discipline and morale and would result in ultimate defeat."

To no avail, I screamed at the TV: "NO! DON'T AGREE! IT'S PROBABLY A HITLER QUOTE! SAY YOU'LL USE YOUR OWN WORDS!"

Santorum agreed with the blind quote only to be informed that it was a quote from someone arguing in 1941 against blacks in the military. (I didn't catch the segregationist's full name ... Franklin Delano something.)

He still could have recovered by demanding to know if Wallace was suggesting, therefore, that the Army IS a sociological laboratory and a splendid place for social experimentation in time of war, but Santorum just shrugged sheepishly and mumbled something about how that was different.

The problem is not Santorum's conservative positions, it's that he can't defend them.

Dr. Strangelove wrote:I'll answer the question...Santorum and Bachmann were unquestionably more conservative on social issues than Romney. Bachmann was well to his right on economic policy as well. Probably also Herman Cain. Dr. Ron Paul was certainly a stronger believer in free markets.

So in the end, much like McCain, the R's chose the most blandly moderate candidate that was available.

sardis wrote:I've always liked Romney. I preferred him in 2008 over the other candidates. I've been with him from the beginning of this primary. He's conservative from a traditional standpoint. The other candidates jockeyed themselves to be more conservative because that was their only chance of beating him. They couldn't match his credentials and integrity. Newt Gingrich? Seriously? The bankrupt womanizing troll who orgasms when he hears himself talk. Santorum? The creepy looking guy who can't even win elections in his own state? Romney is the guy you hire if you want something done. Hedge fund, state of Massachusetts, the Olympics. No other candidate can touch that resume.

Toemeesleather wrote:Probably the one I cut and pasted from Facebook the other day....

Jungle Rat wrote:So am I

Jungle Rat wrote:So am I

Dr. Strangelove wrote:Romney's people bash the UK govt for being too positive about Obama. When you're a conservative, you're allowed to shit on the "special relationship"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/ma ... NTCMP=SRCH