Category Archives: 2012 Presidential Election

Untitled-1d

Can You Hear Me Now?

In reading all the handwringing and mournful cries about how could we have possibly lost this election, the overriding theme is that there is no overriding theme as assorted pundits cry every which way. We didn’t address social issue enough. We’re too socially conservative. People are still scared to not vote for the black guy for fear of being labeled a racist. We were too soft on Obama. We weren’t clear with our message. And on and on and on.

Despite the multiple gallons of electronic ink that has been poured into the postmortems, one point has been either missed altogether or given short shrift. This stems from the “can’t see the forest for the trees” phenomenon mentioned yesterday. Pundits and political junkies are so overly wrapped up in Beltway thinking they forget that for the vast majority of Americans politics is not the be-all and end-all of their lives. They’d rather think about something else. What little political knowledge they have is far more likely to be of the hand-me-down variety from those who actually do watch the news than watching or reading the news themselves. Simply put, they do not care. The bulk of people in this country do not pay attention to a public political event unless it is catastrophic, one of such power such as 9/11 it can’t help but to be noticed, or is a moment personally affecting them.

An illustration of this from the state y’all love to hate, namely California. Remember when Arnold Schwarzenegger was elected governor in 2003? It was when then-governor Gray Davis was recalled. Why was Davis recalled? Because his ineptitude in handling the state’s electricity crisis led to rolling blackouts throughout the state. But for this, there never would have been a recall. Davis was kicked out of office because an event transpired directly affecting people, namely their power going off and on, under his watch. There was no other reason. None.

Taking this to the just-concluded election, even with chronic deep unemployment and underemployment, massive debt, the looming trainwreck that is Obamacare and a hot mess of a foreign policy most Americans are sufficiently untouched by these things to pay them much heed. Certainly the entitlement class, those who believe that by birthright, be it skin color, inherited economic status (which by the way includes middle to upper middle-class suburban kids who have no grasp of what a work ethic looks like) or what have you are owed a living, are feeling no pain and will continue to feel no pain as long as Uncle Sam keeps cutting them checks. For the rest, while they have a feeling that despite what the filtered media reports they may be catching are telling them things aren’t quite right, there is no sense of urgency; certainly not enough of one to warrant changing presidents.

One can detail the fallacies of the left’s financial policies – the belief “they” have an inexhaustible supply of money and rich people can not only afford to, but pay for everything everyone else needs — until they drop. They can explain the broken window fallacy in action, using government as the hoodlum throwing a brick through the baker’s window, to the nth degree. They can demonstrate how money spent on taxes does not go to create jobs or be spent on goods and services provided by others, but instead stifles job creation and economic growth through free enterprise, all the day long. It will not matter to others until it hits them directly.

Economically, there will continue to be no sense of urgency until either Obamacare’s reality in the form of slashed Medicare coverages starts adversely affecting a multitude of families, the tax burden for all who actually pay taxes becomes onerous or the government stops handing out money. If the first two happen, they happen. The latter is far less likely to take place unless it is forced, and the only way that can happen would be if House Republicans refuse to pass any more appropriation bills, thus shutting down the government, until a genuine deficit reduction program is installed. That said, it’s doubtful the GOP has the guts to turn off the money spigot and shut government down, no matter the pain it causes, until Obama and the Democrats agree to genuine financial reform. However, nothing else short of another massive terrorist attack or full blown war on American soil will get the public’s attention.

One way or another, it’s going to take a storm before the general public listens to reason shouting, “Can you hear me now?”

offended

The Obsession With Offensiveness

Picking up on a point from yesterday’s post, that being the need to monitor the media, an additional thought on the subject needs to be made.

Far too often, when examining liberal media — or any media for that matter — conservatives fail to see the forest for the trees. We become so enamored with waiting for that moment over which we can cry havoc and let slip the dogs of “see I told you they’re biased” yapping we don’t bother actually listening. And that is a pity.

We should monitor the media not to achieve the next triple O of outrageously outrageous outrage, but rather for the overall tone and tenor. Study what they say. Discern from where their talking points arise. Then, respond accordingly, disproving their theorems with knowledge and perseverance. Neither of which, by the way, are byproducts of becoming outraged.

There is an unfortunate obsession with offensiveness on the right. Far too many live for it. More than a few among us make a nice living out of being offended, be it by media failures or personal attacks. How many times have we seen hackles raised, troops gathered and colors flown over poor little so-and-so being called a bad name by some nameless, faceless, meaningless troll? These folk must be living inside Groundhog Day, as their knee-jerk reaction to jerks proclaims that, for them, every day is their first one online and they are utterly innocent as to the Web’s wicked, wicked ways.

The alleged big boys and girls play the aforementioned game. Bit players have their own version, consisting of howling about the unfairness of the big kids retweeting a hundred insults aimed their way while not spending one second on so much as acknowledging the low ones on the totem pole. Not fair not fair not fair.

In both cases, be it from the high rollers or the serfs, the core message is the same: pay attention to me. If you don’t I am going to raise hell; never mind that the resulting flames will burn me far more than they scorch you as I make myself look like either a weakling or a whiner.

Taking offense is as pointless, vapid and meaningless an action as expecting respect for your anger. Everyone with a sliver of common sense knows better than to believe everyone else will kowtow to their whims for the simple reason that they are blowing their top. Why, then, should we expect others to respect our being offended?

Again, this ties in to what I wrote yesterday. To my fellow underlings as judged by the self-appointed Smart Set I say this. Build your community one person at a time; expand your community one person at a time by treating every person in your community properly as an individual worthy of respect and attention. Never become what your profess to oppose. Expect nothing from those whose entire method of operation is shining a spotlight on themselves. Right now they are the equivalent of the point guard on a basketball team that just lost by forty points turning to the starting power forward as they walk off the court and saying, “It’s your fault we lost because you didn’t play hard enough!” Uh, you got your ass beat too, buddy.

A personal illustration. A few years ago, I was fortunate enough to get press credentials to cover a NASCAR race in Southern California. After it was over, I realized I could approach my experience in one of two ways. I could either be upset that I didn’t score some terrific exclusive interview with Dale Earnhardt Jr., or Tony Stewart or Jeff Gordon or Jimmie Johnson or any of the sport’s other superstars. Or, I could be satisfied with being the only reporter I knew of who spoke to Robby Gordon about whether he had any plans for running in that year’s Indianapolis 500, this coming at the prompting of a friend who is a huge IndyCar fan who had heard rumors about this and wanted them checked out. As big or as splashy a story? No. But it meant a lot to the Robby Gordon fans out there.

And to the self-appointed powers that be, given the totally awesome job you did over the past four years winning over hearts and minds to the conservative cause, so successful in this regard that Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan got fewer votes than John McCain and Sarah Palin in 2008, two words: grow up. You want to be the big shots, you accept the potshots aimed in your direction by big mouths with little brains on Twitter and elsewhere. Don’t like it? I’m sure there’s a Walmart somewhere that’s hiring. I, and I suspect many others, are tired of you attempting to manipulate us into feeling sorry for you because you’re getting the very thing you live for and many of you live on: attention. Try making yourself the center of attention by actually accomplishing something other than preaching to the choir and seeking the spotlight 24/7.

Assuming you have the ability to do so, that is.

Let’s lose the obsession with offensiveness. Now.

ADDENDUM: Thanks to The Pirates Cove for the link.

Untitled-1a1

The Needle And The Damage Done

And now that it is over; now that the votes no matter how peculiar have been cast and nothing has really changed, what do we do?

I suggest we look within and ask ourselves some hard questions.

Why do we build phone booth kingdoms and believe they encompass the globe? We dash to and fro our little gatherings, counting the days until and saving our pennies for the next CPAC, FreePac, BlogCon and what have you where we will huddle together, safely ensconced in our belief occupying the hotel bar equals occupying the general public’s hearts and minds. We give ourselves awards, claiming to embody Andrew Breitbart’s spirit when in deed we are fragile shadows of the man. We speak to only each other and only when doing so increases the odds of grabbing a larger slice of a stagnant pie. We argue among ourselves over which of us is the greatest in the kingdom of the Konservative Kool Kidz Klub, all the while firmly believing we are preaching the conservative message to the masses. No, no we’re not.

Why do we claim God’s blessing should be upon us when we not only harbor, but herald those doing the devil’s work? We cherish hardcore pornographers and give grifters emphatic support. We turn a blind eye to adulterers. We speak loud and long about the sins of the other side while either pretending we have no sin among us or excusing the actions of any among us who are on “our side.” But of course. The definition of a brother in arms is one who spits in the face of Christ on the cross provided they also pat us on the back. Gee, who knew.

As long as we glorify ourselves and not the message; as long as we spend far more time helping ourselves to more political ego tripping junk food than we do helping others; as long as we practice the principle of believing our actions, no matter how reprehensible in God’s sight, are sanctified by how fervently we preach to the choir…

… we wonder what’s gone wrong?

Really?

Ah… really?

This failure is ours and ours alone. We were the ones tempted and tantalized by the sweet candy of pride. We were the ones who denied we could ever become addicted even as we shot up time and again, each time seeking a bigger and stronger dose of that which we most craved — power among and praise from our perceived peers. We called it taking back our country. In fact it was nothing other than taking ourselves and placing ourselves above all; making out of ourselves a cyberspace Ozymandias boasting of our great works even as they were revealed to be sand castles in a storm. We were called to speak to others about breaking the seductive bonds of unaffordable entitlement. Instead, we strove to build our own entitlements of prestige and glory in a most unholy mutual admiration society.

Political junkies have no one but themselves to blame for the needle and the damage done.

Untitled-1a

“… perchance to dream”

I had a dream last night. I was a journalist doing a special with the Obamas. In the dream, we talked at great length about our different backgrounds growing up and how they’ve influenced us, discussing our political and philosophical differences in the light of from whence they came. The entire conversation was relaxed, respectful and warm. At the end we hugged each other as friends.

Yes, I am voting for Romney when I get home from work. However, the dream stays with me; the notion of seeing past political differences, the belief that the power of Jesus Christ in a person’s life can overcome unfortunate upbringing and incorrect, even evil influences to turn a person’s heart not necessarily toward conservatism, but toward Him, casting aside all malice and duplicity.

It was an intellectual, gentle dream. I pray today and tomorrow will be the same.

Untitled-2a

I Was Nowhere Near Last Night

I probably should be prepping for a recruiting agency interview I have tomorrow, but before refreshing my memory as to my utter awesomeness and refining my spiel focused on me being genius personified — not to mention painfully modest — a brief comment about an event I didn’t attend. I’m getting pretty good at this sort of thing.

Earlier this week, the Romney campaign along with Republican National Committee chairperson Reince Priebus held a meeting with assorted high flyer conservative bloggers. Presumably to avoid the appearance of collusion (like you could ever get two or more conservative bloggers to collude on anything… but I digress), attendees were requested to keep the meeting contents, as well as the meeting itself, under their fedoras. This secrecy went away faster than summer snow as the Huffington Post and BuzzFeed, neither exactly known for their warm feelings toward conservatives, both reported the get-together.

Since the cat was out of the bag, Stacy McCain saw no harm in having a little fun with the whole thing. Please note he was invited. I wasn’t; a status in which I was not alone. And me with a Romney support icon on my blog since the day Rick Santorum withdrew from the race. Harrumph! But again I digress; back to Stacy’s post.

Now, bear in mind by the time Stacy wrote his post, with tongue planted firmly in cheek, the meeting had everything but a transcript available for all to see. Other attendees, such as Ace, had written about it. Therefore, nothing to get worked up over, right? If the left should try to revive the Ted Nugent tack by attempting to smear Romney by associating him with one or more of the invited bloggers and any outrageous thing they might have said in the past, insinuating Romney supported this and demanding he denounce the blogger in question for being an extremist wacko whatever, it would be very easy to remind one and all that President Obama has met with leftist bloggers and media before, and Media Matters routinely met with White House officials, so do you really want to go there? Bit of a mutually assured destruction scenario, where the only winning move is not playing the game at all.

Nevertheless, this hasn’t stopped people from piling on Stacy as though he broke the sacred seal and/or code of silence, which as already noted worked about as well in this case as the cone of silence. It seems odd to assail someone for talking about something everyone already knew, apparently for the sole reason of it having been initially designed to be a secret, long after the secret has been spilled. But there it is.

I’m wondering if the real reason for people’s high dudgeon is because the invitee’s list left them high and dry.

Actually, I’m not wondering that in the least.

P.S. Maybe next time Stacy should try this approach:

This night never happened
If it’s all right with you
Not a word of our weakness
So much as a clue
There’s a place outside
I’m glad to play no part
The fairest arms can tally up the faintest stars
Wash away my weekend
Shatter my sight
C’mon sweet amnesia
You’re needed here tonight
Take a seat in the shadows
Forget it as it goes
Dissipate in the morning air
All you know
If you find out
You’ll find every lie you might
I was nowhere near last night
Whitewash everything in sight
These suspicions have been long drained dry
Our persistence holds them here
A maze of bars and rented rooms remain
Enough to make you almost look away
This night never happened
If it’s all right with you
Another for the collection of things we didn’t do
That private party is over
Thank God we get new starts
The fairest arms still tally up the faintest stars
When it comes down
In a clear and certain light
I was nowhere near last night
I was nowhere near last night
Whitewash everything in sight…

ADDENDUM: Thanks to Stacy McCain, Zilla Stevenson and Paul Lemmen for the link love.

pl

We’re Yelling About This? Really?

Yup, that's where I worked for fifteen years.

Back in my retail days, a lesson oft taught was what really hurts in terms of losing customers. It wasn’t the chronic complainers and yellers, always ranting and raving about how they’re never coming back and they’re going to tell all their friends (like they have any) to do the same. Annoying to be sure, but despite their loudly voiced threats they always came back. Always. No, it’s the people who say nothing, yet never return, that do the most damage to a store’s bottom line. That’s the truth.

Nothing hits harder than the truth. It knows no agenda, serves no one’s purpose and pays no attention to any side of any given issue. It’s the truth. It stands on its own, unapologetic and unafraid. Either we get with it, or we get lost.

This came to mind a few days ago when Mitt Romney was severely criticized in conservative circles for saying that President Obama was a nice man. Here’s the full quote:

Now I happened to have met him four or five years ago at a dinner in Washington DC where we were both invited to tell some jokes about our respective parties. And I found him to be a nice guy. I think he’s a nice person. I just don’t think we can afford him any longer. I don’t think the American people can afford to have Barack Obama as their President.

Now, he points out he did not cause the recession. But, he did made it worse. And he says, “Well, look; things are getting better.” And I sure hope they’re getting better. Gosh, I hope they’re getting better. But that’s not because of him. That’s in spite of him. He has made this recession harder to come out of.

And for people who say, “Well, why do you say that, Mitt?” Well, you go through his so-called signature achievements and ask yourself which of those that are causing employment to rise right now. Gosh, I hope it’s right. But what are the things that would encourage employment? How about his stimulus? Well, that was three and a half years ago. Remember that stimulus, where he borrowed all that money and said he would hold unemployment below eight percent with that stimulus? Hasn’t been below eight percent since? Thirty-eight straight months? If we’re seeing any job increase now — and I sure hope we are — and a slow reduction in unemployment — I hope it’s coming down — it’s not because of the stimulus that was three and a half years ago. It’s in spite of that stimulus, and it’s thanks to the entrepreneurship of the American individual.

And then look at the other pieces of legislation. Does anyone really think Obamacare has encouraged businesses to hire people? Just the opposite. I go across the country. I get the chance to talk to small businesspeople. The number one thing they mention time and time again is their fear of Obamacare. It’s one reason why businesses have held back on hiring.

Then there are his labor policies. Does anyone think that stacking the National Labor Relations Board with labor stooges encourages businesses to go out and hire people? Just the opposite.

There was much more to the speech, but you get the drift. Romney was detailing Obama’s policy failures. Other than the people in attendance, no one seems to have heard that. The couple of sentences when he didn’t personally demonize Obama? Front page news.

Why?

What possible benefit is there in personally attacking your political opponent? Now, remember that this is something Obama has done in past campaigns, albeit through surrogates and not personally. When he ran for U.S. Senate in Illinois, his campaign managed to convince the courts to unseal his opponent’s divorce agreement. Recently we saw Democratic power player Hilary Rosen say Ann Romney, a stay at home mother of five who raised her children without a nanny or other assistance, had never worked a day in her life. When that backfired big time, everyone from Obama on down ran for cover. There is no reason to think Obama, through his surrogates (i.e. the media), will not personally attack Romney on everything from his religion to whatever else they can invent… er, drag out of the swamp.

Romney isn’t going that route. He’s staying on message, that message being Obama’s policies are utter failures.

So how do conservatives respond?

Correct. Hyperventilation because he didn’t wield a flamethrower with one hand while tossing raw meat into the audience with his other.

Really, people? Really?

Perhaps Romney believes in treating others as he himself would like to be treated, although he did run brutal attack ads on his primary opponents.

Or, perhaps Romney is of the mindset that the Prince of Peace trumps politics every time, and that perhaps if you treat other people properly it’ll assist in reaching them with Christ’s message of salvation and changed lives.

Or perhaps he honestly thinks Obama is a nice guy, which is why he said it.

In any case, why are we screaming about it when 99 44/100% of what Romney said is dead on accurate? Why aren’t we focusing on that? Why are we letting the media drive the agenda by highlighting one thing Romney said, knowing what it would make hit the fan so once again we conservatives can be portrayed as hate-filled knuckle-draggers and in all likelihood raaaaacists?

C’mon, people, Quit yelling. You’re scaring off the shoppers we need to win this election.

P.S. Yes, we did use to go around the store singing this, albeit somewhat sardonically:

Untitled-1b

Random Romney Ruminations

I haven’t discussed politics much here lately. Whether that’s for the better or not is your call. ;-)

Anyway, it’s becoming increasingly apparent that Mitt Romney will be the GOP nominee for President, thus will face Barack Obama this November. I remain firmly committed to Rick Santorum, but barring some dramatic shifts in fortune the nomination is Romney’s to lose.

Much has been said, very little of it complimentary, about Romney by the Republican party’s conservative faction, as well as conservatives who disdain the Republican label, preferring ideological rather than party identification. The main complaints about Romney by conservatives have been his penchant for modifying political philosophies, his campaign strategy of relentless negative attacks on opponents and what is commonly called Romneycare, the statewide health care plan he brought about while governor of Massachusetts. More on the latter in a bit.

There is a growing cry for conservatives to unite behind Romney, although for most conservatives the question isn’t whether we’ll campaign and vote for him should he win the nomination. Of course we will. The actual question is whether Romney will unite behind conservatives and be first a spokesperson for, then if elected champion of, the fundamentals of conservatism: limited government, individual liberty and personal responsibility. He’d better be. If Romney runs in the general election as a moderate, he will lose. He needs to not only run as a conservative, but if elected serve as one.

Back to Romneycare. A great hue and cry has been raised by conservatives about Romney’s stubborn refusal to distance himself from the health care plan he championed while Massachusetts’ governor. A possible reason why he hasn’t denounced the plan despite its unpopularity:

Should Obamacare be overturned in part or whole by the Supreme Court, and Obama attempt to use it as a campaign issue — “see, the Republicans don’t care about you” — might this be to Romney’s great advantage? He can come back and say, “I’m a Republican, and look what we did in Massachusetts. We do care.” Therefore, what is commonly perceived on the right as a weakness, namely Romneycare, could turn out to be a strength. This may explain why he’s not budging on his support of the plan.

Enjoy the weekend, everyone.

mas

Whatever Happened to the Mutual Admiration Society?

You know… the one where conservative bloggers and pundits actually praised each other?

First, this morning there a lengthy and thoroughly unpleasant Twitter exchange between John Podhoretz, editor of Commentary magazine and columnist for the New York Post, and Dana Loesch of Big Journalism fame. It started when Mr. Podhoretz wondered aloud:

I note that a certain anti-Romney tweeter is calling Romney supporters “prog lites.” She supported Romney in ’08. Why was that?

To which Ms. Loesch, she who is loathe to acknowledge supporters but will fight to the death anyone who looks at her cross-eyed, replied:

I made a differentiation that you apparently chose, either by accident or obtuseness, to ignore.

The response:

You mean the distinction between your support for Romney in ’08 and your detestation of him in ’12? I missed that.

And it was on, with Ms. Loesch repeatedly accusing Mr. Podhoretz of name-calling and other assorted crimes against nature for reminding one and all that Ms. Loesch did indeed support Romney in ’08. She, in-between temper tantrums, insisted it was solely because she disliked John McCain so much she found Romney to be the lesser of two evils. Which may well be. But you still supported him, Ms. Loesch.

Maybe it’s me, but I’m thinking a simple, calm “yes I did support Romney in ’08 and here’s why” rather than striking a pose as the put-upon, perpetually outraged, poor poor pitiful me, “I’m just a girl” girl. But no. We must be outraged! We must defend our virtue (no comment)! We must attack! We must maintain our carefully contrived… er, controlled image as the mucha macha sexxxy albeit unavailable sista! Or something.

Later in the day, Ms. Loesch PMS’d with Ace, who has been known to do the same. This time, it was in reference to an interview with Romney. From the looks of it, he misunderstood, or misheard, the reporter’s question in regard to the Blunt-Rubio amendment, which would insert into Obamacare an exemption for organizations whose principals prohibit artificial birth control methods from being forced to provide said artificial birth control methods, through whichever health care plan they offer, to their employees. First Romney said he was against the bill, then said later in the day he was for the bill.

In dashed Dana, flicking spittle every which way as she railed against Romney’s obviously fatal flaw and/or deliberate disingenuousness. Ace, who was on the Rick Perry bandwagon until it finally crashed and burned, then jumped aboard the Romney ride, was quick to defend his chosen one. Naturally, given the two participants it wasn’t long before they butted heads on Twitter.

And I thought I could be contentious.

I’d say it’ll all be better once a candidate is finally selected, but no. The lessons of 2010 about continuing the fight the primary after it’s over by trashing the person the voters in said primary selected (ask Christine O’Donnell how that feels) have not been learned. Regardless of who wins the nomination, or if it comes to a brokered convention who is selected, the friendly fire will continue unabated. And if the Republican nominee loses in November, woe be unto his or her supporters as the rest of the right will vent their full fury against them for, as they will be accused, single-handily condemning us to four more years of Obama.

ADDENDUM: Thanks to Conservative Commune and The Daily Beast for the links.

gunpowder

Romney Derangement Syndrome; Or, Why Mitt Is Most Likely Keeping His Powder Dry

I haven’t spent too much time here lately; been dealing with some things I’ll perhaps mention in a later post. That said, whenever I’ve gone online the past few days I’ve been overwhelmed with the feeling I’m swimming upstream against a torrent of tears shed by those who are utterly convinced all is lost because Mitt Romney won the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary.

Really?

According to these harbingers of doom, the attacks from his own side on Romney over his time at Bain Capital, for which he is being portrayed as the archtypical eeeeevil greedy capitalist foreclosing on the orphanage’s mortgage in the middle of a winter storm, will be the bane of his campaign should he in fact win the nomination. What’s more, anyone who endorses Romney — be it Nikki Haley or John Bolton or Jim DeMint’s people — is immediately cast out of the kingdom, banished for the crime of being a RINO establishment squish. No, really, they mean that. Especially that Bolton guy. He’s been such a marshmallow his entire career… and please tell me you don’t need me to tell you I’m being sarcastic. But I digress.

One of the complaints being lodged against Romney is that his defense of his time at Bain centers on the argument that he did the same thing there that Obama did with General Motors and Chrysler, realizing that in order to save a troubled company ofttimes it is necessary to cut labor costs by trimming the workforce. How can you possibly use that line of reasoning, comes the cry. Don’t you know you’re playing right into Obama’s hands by failing to differentiate between the two of you? Don’t you remember how Obama closed numerous car dealerships, the overwhelming majority of which were owned or operated by businesspeople associated with the Republican party? Don’t you remember how he screwed over the investors in these companies, many of them public and private pension funds, in favor of keeping the UAW’s fatcat unsustainable benefits plan rolling along? How then can you, under any circumstances, compare what you did to Obama’s actions?

Here’s why, and how. (Before I get into it, please not I’m not supporting Romney in the primary. Rick Santorum is my candidate.)

It’s high time people give Romney credit for having both a brain and common sense, each of which tell you that you don’t run a marathon at a sprinter’s pace. The primaries are just that — primaries. They come first. They also have little effect on the general election, which as some have apparently forgotten isn’t until November and to which most people don’t start paying attention until September. Why waste your energy, and spend the finite amount of capital campaign arguments/proposals carry, now? Do enough to win the nomination. Then step on the gas.

Romney is more than intelligent enough to soft-pedal his attacks on Obama until the majority of people are listening, which isn’t now. He is more than savvy enough to wait until a debate with Obama before letting loose with a lethal “but”let, a follow-up shot to his present defense: “Here are the things I did that you did. Now, here are the things you did I didn’t — play political games and reward your friends at the expense of hard-working Americans whose pension funds holders were hookwinked into investing in these companies you bailed out with taxpayer dollars, then cheated out of not only the promised profits from these investments but the initial investments themselves. I didn’t do that, Mr. President. But you did.”

Mitt’s keeping his powder dry until he needs it. Too bad so many are throwing theirs into their self-created river of woe.

P.S. Speaking of harbingers of doom, it’s a line from this classic track by Toy Matinee:

[jwplayer mediaid="4321"]

ADDENDUM: Cross-posted at Conservative Commune.

debate010812

A Brief Early Evening Recap Of This Morning’s GOP Presidential Debate In New Hampshire

I should get some kind of reward for getting up at 6:00 AM on a Sunday to watch a political debate. Instead, all I got was a continuation of a sinus headache that’s been plaguing me the past two days. Ah well. Anyway…

  • David Gregory is as blatant a left-wing shill as George Stephanopoulos, only more obnoxious and abrasive. He’s also more cowardly, visibly shrinking in front of Rick Perry when Perry called him out over whichever lame question he was asking at the time.
  • As usual, questions about issues that matter — the economy, national debt, border security and so on — were either soft-pedaled or avoided altogether. Instead, it was more of the same old gotcha gunk, including the ol’ “so how will you eeeeevil Republicans tell the poor, orphans and widows they’re being thrown out in the snow when you foreclose on their mortgage” bit. Some bit — see Huntsman, Jon — some didn’t.
  • Overall, the best performances were by Rick Santorum and Rick Perry. They stayed on message, didn’t fall into any moderator-set traps and kept their cool. There was the stock issue attempt to trip up Santorum on social conservative issues, which as it always does with Santorum failed miserably.
  • Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney sullied their otherwise solid jobs with needless whining and jabs at each other near the end. Don’t let yourself be played, gentlemen.
  • Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman need to go home. Now.
  • I really missed Michele Bachmann both last night and this morning.

Anyway, the New Hampshire primary is this Tuesday, followed by South Carolina on the 21st and Florida on the 31st. This is half the number of debates remaining this month: 16th in Myrtle Beach (FOX), 19th in Charleston (CNN), 23rd in Tampa (NBC) and 26th in Jacksonville (CNN). Be still our beating hearts.