Tag: Santorum

Santorum won a trifecta of Caucuses last night.

Thursday Night in Iowa: A Republican “Royal Rumble” Without the Front-Runner There (Physically, Anyway)

On By kingsjesterIn PoliticsLeave a comment

thWF5BU64KLast Sunday, the WWE staged it’s annual event, known as “The Royal Rumble” in which 30 combatants enter the squared circle, individually, every 3 minutes, and try to toss each other over the top rope, to see who will headline WrestleMania in a World Championship Match.

Last night’s Republican Presidential Candidates Primary Debate, with the notable absence of the Front-Runner, Donald J. Trump, was reminiscent of that wrestling event.

For those of you who did not watch the Trump-less Republican Primary Contenders’ Debate on Fox News Channel last night, MSN.com provides a detailed synopsis (from the Opposition Party’s point-of-view, of course)…

DES MOINES — The first Republican presidential debate without Donald Trump still took on a Trumpian tone at times, with the seven other top candidates here Thursday night voicing anger, talking tough and vowing to do away with political correctness.

But with the defiant GOP front-runner staging his own counter-program by rallying supporters a few miles away, Trump’s absence left a vacuum on the debate stage and fewer fireworks than Republicans had grown accustomed to.

From the opening question, it was mostly filled by Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.), who has been locked in an intensifying duel with Trump for dominance in Iowa’s first-in-the-nation caucuses, only four days away.

Cruz began by mocking Trump’s reputation for insults: “I’m a ‘maniac’ and everyone on this stage is ‘stupid,’ ‘fat’ and ‘ugly.’ And Ben [Carson], you’re a ‘terrible surgeon.’ Now that we’ve gotten the Donald Trump portion out of the way . . .”

From there, however, little more was said about Trump, few direct attacks were leveled at him and the overall atmosphere was notably calmer than in previous debate. That left Cruz as the top target as Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) and other opponents sought to puncture the Texas senator’s appeal by trying to depict him as an inauthentic conservative.

“The truth is, Ted, throughout this campaign you’ve been willing to say or do anything in order to get votes,” Rubio said. “You want to trump Trump on immigration.”

Rubio and Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) both attacked Cruz for having once supported an amendment that would have granted legal status, not citizenship, to illegal immigrants — though Cruz maintains that it was a “poison pill” and that he has always opposed amnesty.

“He is the king of saying, ‘Oh, you’re for amnesty. Everybody’s for amnesty except for Ted Cruz,’ ” Paul said. “But it’s a falseness, and that’s an authenticity problem.”

Cruz was not the only candidate on the defensive on immigration, however. Rubio also came under fire for his role as one of the Gang of Eight senators who crafted comprehensive reform legislation in 2013.

After giving Rubio a backhanded compliment for being “charming and smooth,” Cruz hammered him for having aligned with President Obama and Democratic Senate leaders Harry Reid (Nev.) and Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.).

The Fox News Channel moderators tried to challenge both Cruz and Rubio by playing archival video footage of the two senators. After showing the Cruz videos, co-moderator Megyn Kelly asked: “Was that all an act? It was pretty convincing.”

In the absence of Trump, Cruz and Rubio had the most to gain or lose in Thursday night’s debate. The two are the second- and third-polling candidates in Iowa, and their strategies are predicated on being the last non-Trump candidate left standing to face off with the mogul in a long-slog primary season.

Both men emerged with scars.

Rubio appeared to struggle explaining why he advocated a hard-line immigration approach as a Senate candidate, then pursued comprehensive reform that included a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, then reverted.

Rubio said he does not support “blanket amnesty” and focused on the need to seal the border with Mexico and improve security there.

Former Florida governor Jeb Bush used the exchange to portray Rubio — his onetime protege when Rubio was a Florida state lawmaker — as weak for having reversed positions on immigration. After noting that he supported Rubio’s work in the Gang of Eight, Bush said, “He cut and run because it wasn’t popular among conservatives, I guess.”

“You shouldn’t cut and run,” Bush said. “You should stick with it. That’s exactly what happened. He cut and run, and that’s a tragedy.”

Rubio countered by saying that Bush had reversed his own position on citizenship and legal status in a book he wrote.

“So did you,” Bush snapped back.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie used the back-and-forth over Senate votes and amendments to show the leadership differences between legislators and executives, and he repeated his call for a governor in the White House.

“I feel like I need a Washingtonese-English dictionary converter,” Christie joked.

Carson, the retired neurosurgeon who once led the polls but has seen his lead falter among heavy scrutiny of his policy knowhow, invoked his medical career as a credential for the White House: “I’ve had more 2 a.m. phone calls than everybody here put together, making life and death decisions.”

The immigration exchange was one of the few moments of direct confrontation onstage between the candidates. The debate lacked a central focus, with Kelly and her co-moderators, Bret Baier and Chris Wallace, asking many one-off questions that focused on the vulnerabilities of individual candidates.

In return, the candidates gave many of the canned lines that have become familiar on the campaign trail, avoiding taking big risks with the Iowa caucuses so close.

The seventh Republican debate of the 2016 campaign cycle was the first not to include Trump, the billionaire mogul whose bombast and showmanship dominated the previous events.

Trump boycotted the debate, escalating his feud with Fox and its star anchor, Kelly, because he believed he would not be treated fairly. He has long harbored disdain for Kelly because of her aggressive line of questioning during the first GOP debate in August, and he has argued that the network was taking advantage of his popularity with viewers to boost its ratings and thus its advertising revenue.

In her opening question, Kelly said, “Let’s address the elephant not in the room tonight.”

Trump staged a competing rally Thursday night on the Des Moines campus of Drake University, where he raised money for and honored veterans.

Much of the debate centered on foreign policy, with the candidates competing to show who would be the toughest commander in chief.

“You claim it is tough talk to discuss ‘carpet bombing,’ ” Cruz said. “It is not tough talk. It is a different fundamental military strategy than what we’ve seen from President Obama.”

Early in the debate, Cruz took fire on multiple fronts. Paul went after him for refusing to show support for a vote to audit the Federal Reserve and for not voicing strong enough opposition to the government’s surveillance efforts.

“I don’t think Ted can have it both ways. They want to say they’re getting some of the liberty vote,” Paul said. “But we don’t see it happening at all. We think we’re going to do very well in Iowa with the liberty vote.”

Rubio, as he has for months, portrayed Cruz as weak on national security.

“As already has been pointed out, the only budget that Ted has ever voted for is a budget that Rand Paul sponsored that brags about cutting defense spending,” Rubio said. “And I think that’s a bad idea.”

The closing days of the race have been nasty here in Iowa. The campaigns and allied super PACs are blanketing television and radio airwaves with attack ads, while the candidates have laced their stump speeches with sharp barbs.

Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who is banking his hopes on the Feb. 9 New Hampshire primary, sought to position himself above the fray.

“We cannot fix things in this country — the Social Security, the border, balancing the budget, getting wages to grow faster — unless we lead as conservatives, but we also invite people in from the other party,” Kasich said. “We have to come together as a country. And we have to stop all the divisions.”

Kasich’s call for unity went unheeded, and he was a non-factor through significant stretches of the debate as other candidates sparred.

As in previous debates, the candidates harshly attacked Hillary Clinton and sought to position themselves as best equipped to lead the Republican Party into the general election against Clinton, whom they see as the most likely Democratic nominee.

“She is not qualified to be president of the United States,” Christie said, drawing loud cheers from the audience. “The fact is, what we need is someone on that stage who has been tested, who has been through it, who has made decisions, who has sat in the chair of consequence and can prosecute the case against Hillary Clinton.”

Bush made a similar pitch.

“This is an election about people that are really hurting,” he said. “We need a leader that will fix things and have a proven record to do it. And we need someone who will take on Hillary Clinton in November.”

So, what was the Front-Running Trump up to, while the rest of the candidates duked it out?

Again, MSN.com has the story (and, please remember, they are hardly non-partisan)…

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Donald Trump opened a Thursday rally coinciding with the final GOP debate before Monday’s Iowa caucuses by telling supporters he would have preferred to be at the debate, but had no choice but to skip it after promising a boycott.

Angry over an escalating feud with debate host Fox News, Trump bowed out of the debate and held what his team called a “Special Event to Benefit Veterans Organizations” at a packed 775-seat auditorium at nearby Drake University instead.

“You have to stick up for your rights. When you’re treated badly, you have to stick up for your rights,” Trump told the crowd. “We have to stick up for ourselves as people and we have to stick up for our country if we’re being mistreated.”

Speaking from the stage at what felt like a cross between a televised fundraising telethon and a typical Trump campaign rally, Trump said his foundation already had raised between $5 million and $6 million for veterans since announcing the event. He said he’s putting up $1 million of his own money and read off the names of wealthy friends he said had pledged major contributions.

Trump repeated earlier statements that Fox “very much” wanted him to attend the debate and said he’d fielded repeated phone calls from the network during the day. Fox News Channel issued a statement saying Trump had offered to appear at the debate upon the condition that Fox contribute $5 million to his charities, which the network said was not possible.

Fox News says Chairman Roger Ailes, in conversations with Trump, “acknowledged his concerns” about a statement the network had made in the days leading up to the debate.

Trump has said he’s not worried about turning off voters who may be disappointed by his decision to skip Thursday’s contest.

“We’ve had other voters that love what I’m doing because they don’t want to be pushed around by the establishment,” said Trump, who is planning to participate in the next debate in New Hampshire.

It was unclear exactly which groups would receive money raised from the event and new website Trump launched for collecting donations: donaldtrumpforvets.com. Contributions to the site will go to The Donald J. Trump Foundation, Trump’s nonprofit charitable organization. The page says: “100 percent of your donations will go directly to Veterans needs.”

Trump representatives had been reaching out to various groups, in some cases inquiring about their programs and finances. Among those contacted were the Green Beret Foundation, which provides care to veterans, and Fisher House, which provides free or low cost housing to veterans and military families receiving treatment at military medical centers.

K9s for Warriors, which trains rescue dogs to be service animals for veterans, received a call from a Trump campaign representative asking if the group was interested in accepting funds from the event, according to executive director Rory Diamond. Diamond said the group is non-partisan but would be happy to accept any contributions.

Two of Donald Trump’s presidential rivals have taken the stage at a rally Trump is hosting to benefit veterans as he skips the Republican debate.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum attended the rally after participating in the early undercard debate for candidates whose poll numbers were too low to make it on the main stage.

Trump was joined at the event by two of his rivals, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum. Both took the stage at Trump’s event after participating in the early, undercard debate for candidates whose poll numbers were too low to make it on the main stage.

Santorum joked that he didn’t want his picture taken with the Trump campaign sign. He quipped that he’s “supporting another candidate for president,” but said he was happy to come out to support veterans.

Huckabee had earlier stressed his appearance should not be seen as an endorsement of Trump. He told the audience gathered at Drake University that he, Santorum and Trump may be presidential race competitors but said “tonight we are colleagues” in supporting veterans.

Every since I graduated high school in 1976, I have followed politics. I had to in college, because I was the News Director of the Campus Radio Station, with a staff of 20 students , who received class credit for producing a 5-minute newscast, once a week.

In 1980, I was privileged to cast my very first vote for the greatest American President in my lifetime, Ronald Reagan.

Since then, I have witnessed a lot of political chicanery, resulting in a lot of harm to the country which I love.

The Muslim-sympathizing, Alinsky-ite Marxist, who currently saunters down to the Oval Office every morning at 10:30 a.m. in his shirt sleeves, on his way to play golf, is the latest and most egregious example.

In every decade since the 1970s, the Media in this country has become more and more Liberal…and more and more subjective in their Editorial Policies and actual reporting.

With the advent of cable television and the 24-hour News Cycle, the Media had to step up their behind-the-scenes manipulation of events, in order to be competitive, and to secure the Cash Cow of their business, high viewership ratings.

What happened last night, was a result of an American Businessman, refusing to play the role of Pinocchio to one of these Modern-day Gepettos.

Per gatewaypundit.com,

FOX News and Google invited a radical Muslim activist, a Bernie Sanders supporter, a Black Lives Matter supporter and a Mexican illegal immigrant to the debate to confront Donald Trump.

Trump found out and, instead of stepping into a pile of…well, you know…he stepped around it, right into more FREE PUBLICITY, while raising money for our American Veterans, whom this Administration has treated so badly.

So, will Trump be hurt by last night?

Hardly.

As of this morning’s Drudge Report’s Republican Candidate Poll, Trump is far outdistancing the pack, with 65.59% of the vote. Sen. Ted Cruz has 16.63%, and Marco Rubio has 6.5%.

Not a scientific poll, I know, but, it could very possibly be a portent of things to come.

The best laid plans of mice and men oft’ times go awry. – Robert Burns

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

Mitt and the GOP Don’t Need Conservatives, Evidently

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

Yesterday afternoon, I was listening to Ben Ferguson, our local afternoon Conservative Talk-show host.  You may have seen Ben on the cable news networks, where he appears as a Conservative Pundit or listened to his nationally syndicated radio program on Sunday nights.

Ben was discussing Rick Santorum’s dropping out of the Republican Primary.  Ben, who has leaned toward supporting Romney during the primary, told how Mitt had visited Memphis twice so far during his campaign, both times, meeting with the local movers and shaker, while ignoring the GOP rank and file.

Will he pay attention to the Conservative Base now that Santorum is out of the picture?  Or will he continue to ignore them, with the presumption of both the Romney Campaign and the GOP Elite being that they will have to vote for him in November?

A casual glance at gallup.com, shows Romney at 42% ballot support among Republican voters.

Ummm…shouldn’t that be higher?  That means that 58 % of Republicans don’t support him.

Outside of the party, now that it’s basically Romney vs. Obama, realclearpolitics.com shows Romney losing to Obama 48.5% to 43.2%, a difference of 5.3%.

Those of you who are inclined to reach for your pocketbooks to send Romney a little sumpin’ sumpin’, hold on.

Foster Friess, the retired investor who spent nearly $1.7 million boosting Rick Santorum’s presidential run, is ready to help Mitt Romney.

“I’m obviously going to be of help in whatever way I can,” Friess told POLITICO Tuesday afternoon, hours after Santorum suspended his campaign for the GOP presidential nomination, cementing Romney’s status as the party’s presumptive nominee.

Friess, who was in Washington to accept an award from the Horatio Alger Association, said he had yet to discuss his planned shift in allegiance with Romney’s campaign campaign or the Washington-based super PAC supporting it.

“I’ve got some plans as to how I might be able to be of help,” said Friess. “The bottom line is, I’m going to be very supportive and I’ll probably have plans to share with you a little later on.”

So, fellow Conservatives, just sit back and watch as the rest of the GOP movers and shakers line up to grease Mitt’s already money-lined palm.

As Rush Limbaugh said Tuesday,

There are no more excuses now. Well, there are. That’s why I guess I want to know what the excuses are gonna be if this doesn’t go the way they have it planned. If this doesn’t pan out to big-time electoral victory the way the establishment has it figured, then what will their excuse be? And I think I know. I think that if this campaign goes on and if it results in Obama winning, I think what the establishment is going to do is blame us. They’re gonna blame us conservatives for once again being too rigid and too demanding and too narrow and unrealistic and all this, and telling us that we’re the reason that Obama won.

“If we’d-a just got behind it,” and so forth… Which, of course, will be bogus.

…I will just say this: If the Republican establishment is not careful, they are going to destroy themselves in the process of this campaign. If they screw this up… We’ve never had a better chance to win than this. If they screw this up, folks…

The problem, Rush, is…they will.  The tone-deaf squishes of the GOP Establishment always do.

The last time they got it right was during a campaign that really came about through circumstances which they had nothing to do with:  The Reagan Revolution.

Per learnourhistory.com:

Through the 1970s, the United States struggled through a terrible recession and government became much more involved in Americans’ lives. Additionally, America showed significant weakness globally, as the Soviet Union flexed its muscles and smaller nations began to lose both fear and respect for the United States. It was clear the country needed a change.

Ronald Reagan was the right man for the job and was elected in a landslide. He swiftly changed the course of the nation, lowering taxes and reducing regulations to stimulate the economy and standing up for America’s principles and beliefs around the world. In addition to his changes to foreign and domestic policy, Reagan was an “American Exceptionalist”, meaning that he understood that there was something special and different about America that set it apart from all other nations. During his time in office, Reagan reduced the intrusive role of the government and helped the nation re-discover its greatness, power and economic growth.

So, why are we facing a Republican Campaign featuring a flip-floppin’ Moderate who has spent the last 6 years bragging about his own state-run healthcare system?

Why isn’t the Republican Party presenting a Reagan Conservative  to run against the socialist in the White House?

Because Sarah Palin refused to run, that’s why.  And who can blame her.

The GOP Power Brokers have been on a mission for years to rid the party of Reagan Conservatism. There is no way in Blazes they would have supported her of their own volition. They would have had to have been forced to do so by a populist groundswell, much like the original Reagan Revolution. That is why they have done their best to neuter the Tea Party Movement.

Like many Conservatives, it now looks like I will be forced to hold my nose and vote for Romney in November, because electing a flip-floppin’ Northeastern Moderate snob to the presidency is preferable to the Alinskyite Anti-American socialist we have as one now.

However, we Conservative Americans never should have allowed ourselves to be ignored by the Party we led to victory in the Midterms.

The Etch-A-Sketch and the “Exaggeration”

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

The GOP Front-runner, Mitt “The Legacy” Romney may have to adopt the  nickname “Pinwheel”, due to all the spinning he’s having to do.

Romney senior adviser Eric Fehrnstrom was asked on CNN whether Romney may be forced so far to the right by rivals Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich in the primary race that it might hurt him if he’s the party’s nominee in the fall. Fehrnstrom responded: “I think you hit a reset button for the fall campaign. Everything changes. It’s almost like an Etch-A-Sketch — you can kind of shake it up and we start all over again.”

That was Tuesday.  By Wednesday, Romney was spinning like Lindsey Lohan’s head after a night on the town.

CNN.com has the story:

Mitt Romney promised Wednesday that he would not change his positions if he wins the Republican presidential nomination, hours after a top adviser compared the general election to an Etch A Sketch toy and claimed that Romney can “shake it up” and “start all over again” in the fall.

That remark – uttered by longtime Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom on CNN Wednesday morning – was pounced on by the Obama campaign and Romney’s GOP rivals, who called it another sign of Romney’s willingness to change his positions for political gain.

The Etch A Sketch quip became such a distraction on the web and on cable that the candidate himself addressed it to reporters after a town hall meeting near Baltimore.

Romney explained that “organizationally,” a general election effort looks very different from a primary campaign. There are larger staffs and more fundraising support.

But he said his positions would remain the same if he wins the nomination.

“The issues I am running on will be exactly the same,” he told a pack of reporters eager for a comment on the day’s conversation-driver. “I am running a as conservative Republican. I was a conservative Republican governor. I will be running as a conservative Republican nominee, at that point hopefully, for president. The policies and positions are the same.”

He then turned and walked back to the curtained area from which he emerged, confusing reporters who were expecting a longer question-and-answer session.

“Actually this isn’t an avail,” Romney responded when more questions were shouted. “It was a chance to respond to a question I didn’t get a chance to respond to.”

Romney’s explanation is unlikely to satisfy his Republican opponents Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich, who both used Etch A Sketch toys as props during the day to accuse Romney of once again shifting his positions.

Santorum spokeswoman Alice Stewart lingered amid the satellite trucks parked outside the Romney event in Maryland, handing out mini Etch A Sketches to reporters.

Stewart said Fehrnstrom’s remark “confirms what a lot of conservatives have been afraid of.”

“He used to be pro-abortion, he used to be pro-gay marriage, he used to be pro-Wall Street bailouts, climate change,” Stewart said of Romney. “You know now he’s talking a different language, but the campaign acknowledges that if need be, if he won the primary, he would go right back to the middle in order to win the general.”

A Conservative?  How can we tell?

Back on October 25th, 2011, ABCnews.go.com published “Romney’s Top 5 Contradicting Comments”:

The Flat Tax

…While Steve Forbes was running for president in 1996 on a flat tax platform, Romney took out ads as a “concerned citizen” that said the flat tax was “a tax cut for fat cats.” In 2007 Romney reiterated his opposition to a flat tax, telling the Des Moines Register that “one person’s flat tax is another person’s unfair tax.”

But as the idea of a simplified tax code gains popularity this election cycle, Romney has toned down his criticism for a flat tax, which institutes one tax bracket for all income levels. The GOP front-runner has stopped short of fully endorsing the plan, emphasizing its tendency to raise taxes on the middle class and lower them on the wealthy.

“The flat tax has positive features,” Romney said earlier this month at an Iowa town hall. “But then again you have to look and make sure it doesn’t raise taxes on middle income Americans.”

At a New Hampshire campaign stop in August, Romney said ‘the idea of one bracket alone would be even better in some respects,” than his multi-bracket proposal, but noted “I want to make sure of this: that we are not going to cut taxes for, if you will, the wealthiest 1 percent.”

Massachusetts Health Care

…While Romney consistently claims that he does not support the state law being implemented nationally, in the hardcover version of his book “No Apology,” Romney writes “we can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country.”

In the paperback version of his book Romney amends that line to say, “It was done without government taking over health care,” a change Romney’s spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom said was made after “Obamacare” was signed.

“They were simple updates to reflect that we had more information at the time the paperback came out,” said Fehrnstrom.

At the Las Vegas debate last week, Romney said, “It would be wrong to adopt [the Massachusetts law] as a nation. “In the last campaign, I was asked, is this something that you would have the whole nation do? And I said, no, this is something that was crafted for Massachusetts,” Romney said.

Abortion

…While running for governor in 2002 Romney said he supported abortion rights.

“I will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose,” Romney said during a debate against his Democratic opponent Shannon O’Brien. “I am not going to change our pro-choice laws in Massachusetts in any way. I am not going to make any changes which would make it more difficult for a woman to make that choice herself.”

During his term as governor Romney, vetoed a bill in 2005 that would expand access to emergency contraception. In an op-ed explaining his veto he wrote that he was “pro-life.”

“While I do not favor abortion, I will not change the state’s abortion laws,” Romney wrote.

Six years later, amid is second presidential bid, Romney clarified is current anti-abortion stance, writing in a National Journal op-ed that he supports overturning Roe v. Wade and defunding Planned Parenthood.

“If I have the opportunity to serve as our nation’s next president, I commit to doing everything in my power to cultivate, promote, and support a culture of life in America,” Romney wrote.

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

…During his 1994 Senate campaign, Romney sent a letter to the Log Cabin Club of Massachusetts, a gay rights political group, asking for its endorsement and praising “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as a “step in the right direction.”

“I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation’s military,” Romney wrote. “That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern, which is a goal we share.”

Then in 2007, while running for the Republican presidential nomination, Romney said he “would not change” the policy.

“It’s been the policy now in the military for what 10-15 years and it seems to be working,” Romney said at a GOP debate. “This is not the time to put in place a major change, a social experiment in the middle of a war going on. I wouldn’t change it at this point. We can look at it down the road.”

Constitutional Amendment Defining Life

…At a campaign stop in Iowa last week, the White House hopeful said he agreed with the premise of a possible amendment, that “life beings and conception, birth control prevents conception,” but said he was “not campaigning for an amendment of some kind.”

But two weeks earlier Romney told Fox News host Mike Huckabee that he would “absolutely” support such an amendment.

Evidently, when Romney wants to appear Conservative, he just shakes his Etch-A-Sketch, and changes positions.

The Republican Primary: Shenanigans in the Show Me State

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

The Republican Primary is turning ugly in the Show Me State, as  shenanigans were on display on St. Paddy’s Day.

Stltoday.com has the details:

Crowds and chaos rattled Missouri’s GOP caucuses on Saturday, threatening to put further scrutiny on a process that was already a national anomaly.

In St. Charles County, which was to have been the biggest single prize of the day, the caucus was shut down before delegates were chosen after a boisterous crowd objected to how the meeting was being run, including an attempted ban on videotaping. Two supporters of presidential hopeful Ron Paul were arrested.

At other caucuses, participants gathered outdoors as the appointed locations turned out to be too small to accommodate crowds or waited for hours as organizers worked through procedural questions.

Even before the day’s events took a rancorous turn, state Republican officials said the winner of the caucus would not be officially known until next month. But with the confusion surrounding St. Charles, and many more delegates available in a pair of caucuses next weekend, the primary picture for Missouri may have only become murkier Saturday.

“It was a joke. It was a complete joke,” said David Nelson of St. Peters, who participated in the St. Charles County caucus.

The state party has not used a caucus to select its choice for presidential preference in 16 years — and the rust showed.

Several caucuses did not start on time as higher than expected turnouts packed the libraries, schools and grocery stores where the events were held.

In Jefferson County, where the caucus started about 25 minutes late so everyone could be registered, Clarence Mason brought a briefcase full of food.

“Any place working with Robert’s Rules of Order, you bring food,” said Mason, 62, of DeSoto. “I like to call them Robert’s Rules of Disorder.”

In Ballwin, participants were shut out of an appearance by White House hopeful Rick Santorum because the City Council chambers had reached its 118-person capacity.

“We have had people who left, elderly who could not find a place to sit,” said Craig Borchelt, a Mitt Romney organizer. “There was a guy out here with a cast — he finally sat down on the grass.”

The caucus was moved outside the building to accommodate the crowd.

Participants in Saturday’s caucuses weren’t actually selecting their choice for presidential nominee. They were selecting delegates who will appear at two larger meetings in April and June, who will in turn select delegates to the national convention in Tampa.

“Clear as mud, right?” said Chris Howard, who helped organize the outdoor caucus in Ballwin.

Nowhere in the state did the process veer more off course than in St. Charles, a key prize for the Romney, Paul and Santorum campaigns.

Because St. Louis County’s caucuses were divided into 28 township meetings, St. Charles County was slated to assign more delegates than any other single location on Saturday. Jackson County, which includes Kansas City, has more delegates, but, like St. Louis city, asked to hold its caucuses on March 24, so as to avoid a conflict with St. Patrick’s Day.

The caucus in St. Charles County, which was held at Francis Howell North High in St. Peters, was adjourned after police said they were going to “shut us down,” according to Matt Ehlen, the Republican activist who was named chairman of the meeting. Police said 2,500 people showed up, although organizers put the number at less than 1,000.

“For the safety and well being of the attendants at the caucus, we had to adjourn the meeting,” Ehlen said.

However, several individuals at the caucus said much of the consternation revolved around Ehlen himself. Ehlen became chairman after a voice vote, but the head of the county GOP organization failed to recognize any other candidate.

“All of sudden he’s the chairman and the place goes nuts,” said Tim Finch, a Paul supporter from Dardenne Prairie. “This is not how it’s supposed to work.”

Some of Paul’s supporters were also irked by an announced ban on video recording, with organizers asking police to help enforce it.

When the objections reached a fever pitch, the meeting was shut down without any delegates being awarded.

“We started speaking about the Constitution. Where’s our rights? Where are our votes? This is fascism,” said Jim Evans, another Paul supporter.

Buddy Hardin, a Romney leader and longtime behind-the-scenes force in GOP politics in St. Charles County, alleged that Santorum supporters and caucus organizers sought to close the meeting after they realized that Paul and Romney backers had formed an alliance to share the county’s delegates.

“Once they realized they didn’t have a slate and they wouldn’t get any delegates, they tanked it,” Hardin alleged. He said the shutdown was carried out “to avoid a Santorum embarrassment and loss.”

Karen Fesler, state director for the Santorum campaign, denied that. “We didn’t give any instructions to shut it down,” she said.

Eugene Dokes, the county GOP committee chairman who said he’s uncommitted, said organizers had been trying to select a slate of delegates that reflected the relative strength of all three candidates.

One caucus participant accused Paul and Romney supporters of “colluding” to make it impossible to conduct the meeting. Adrian Boyd, an undecided Republican from St. Peters, said both groups were so loud they drowned out the public address system.

“It was descending into an Occupy Wall Street type of an event,” Boyd said.

Police said members of the crowd were “verbally aggressive with event organizers and police officers at the scene.” Officers arrested two Paul backers after giving them “numerous warnings” to leave school property, St. Peters police said.

Brent Stafford of O’Fallon, a county GOP committee member and a leader in Paul’s county campaign, and Kenneth Suitter of St. Charles County were charged with trespassing, a municipal ordinance violation, and released.

Now the pressing question for the state GOP is what will happen to St. Charles’ rich supply of delegates — enough to make the difference in a close race. Party brass began immediately deliberating their next step, which could include holding a new caucus or breaking up the caucus into a series of smaller meetings, as in St. Louis County.

“Today’s events in St Charles were unfortunate, and the meeting was adjourned to protect the safety of all participants,” party chairman David Cole said in a statement. “Moving forward, the State Party plans to reach out to all parties involved. We will come to an agreement to ensure that St Charles County is fully represented throughout the nominating process.”

I can’t say that I’m surprised.  Judging from the attempted written intimidation (A vote for Santorum is a vote for Obama!) by Romney supporters, paid and unpaid, on Conservative websites, the Romney Campaign ‘s operatives will do anything and everything to keep the Republican Party’s Conservative Base from having a voice in the nominating process.

Just ignoring Conservatives isn’t working…and they want to avoid a brokered convention at all costs.

A Split Decision on Super Tuesday. A Conservative Light on the Horizon?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics3 Comments

As I sit down to write this blog, Super Tuesday has turned out to be the split decision everyone thought it would be.  Romney won his “home state” (another one?) of Massachusetts, along with Vermont, Virginia, and, barely, Ohio. Santorum took North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Tennessee.   And, Newt Gingrich won his only home state of Georgia, decisively

Per the Associated Press:

Romney won at least 212 Super Tuesday delegates and Santorum won at least 84. Gingrich won at least 72 delegates and Texas Rep. Ron Paul got at least 22.

So far, Romney is winning 54 percent of the Super Tuesday delegates; Santorum is winning 22 percent.

A total of 419 delegates were up for grabs in 10 states Tuesday. A handful were left be allocated.

In the overall race for convention delegates, Romney leads with 415, including endorsements from members of the Republican National Committee who automatically attend the convention and can support any candidate they choose. Santorum has 176 delegates, Gingrich has 105 and Paul has 47.

It will take 1,144 delegates at the party’s national convention this summer to win the Republican nomination for president.

Does any one else see a regional pattern developing here?  Romney is hardly beloved in the Heartland, is he?

While Mitt Romney may very well be “inevitable”, due to his unrelenting support for the GOP Establishment and his never-ending supply of Campaign Funds, he is hardly a “Consensus” Candidate.

Gosh, I wish that there was a candidate out there, who was a Reagan Conservative, who could relate to average Americans, and was so down to earth that they would even stop their campaign bus at a Walmart to pick up diapers for their baby.

Oh, wait…

Stand by for this “live” (last night) interview from CNN:

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Our Paul Vercammen is up there in Wasilla, Alaska. Remember, Wasilla, we heard a lot about Wasilla only a few years ago. Paul Vercammen is standing by with a very special guest – I’ll give you a hint, the former governor of that state. Paul, talk to her.

PAUL VERCAMMEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I will, Wolf. By the way, Sarah Palin says hello. She just voted here in Wasilla. They expect 1,000 people to come through here.

And I think, Sarah, a lot of people are asking, who did you vote for tonight? Who would you like to see emerge as the GOP frontrunner?

FORMER GOV. SARAH PALIN, R-ALASKA: I would not tell you who I voted for in this presidential preference poll. I want to say hi to Wolf, though, and thank you guys for being up here in Wasilla and covering this, because every vote counts, and every district, every state matters. And that’s why I wanted to see this process continue because I want more people to have a say in who the nominee should be.

VERCAMMEN: But while you won’t say who you’re leaning for, are there any trends or is there something that you think is extremely important to the GOP platform this year that you want to see come to fruition?

PALIN: Yes. I want to see the process continue, more debate about who it is who can bust through the Orwellian Obama rhetoric and pandering that we see in the incumbent, who can bust through that with facts, with history, with logic, with common sense, in order for American voters to understand we do have a choice. There is a contrast between the incumbent, Barack Obama, and any of the four on the GOP ticket. Who best can bust through that rhetoric and express their ideas and their solutions to get our economy back on the right track, that’s the nominee I want to see forwarded (ph).

VERCAMMEN: Is there any fear that if this drags on for a long time, you are going to sap war chests and you’re going to cause a situation where the party becomes too divided?

PALIN: I am not a believer in that, not at this point. I do believe that competition makes all of our candidates better. Remember, there are five men running for president, and I think Barack Obama is the worst choice, is the last choice. So the four in front of him, as they duke it out in the arena of ideas and solutions to propose, the more of that, the better.

VERCAMMEN: Sarah Palin for president 2016, is it possible?

PALIN: Anything in this life, in this world is possible. Anything is possible for an American. And I don’t discount any idea or plan that at this point isn’t in my control. Anything’s possible.

VERCAMMEN: But would you seriously consider a run?

PALIN: I would seriously consider whatever I can do to help our country to put things back on the right track. Our economy, the foreign policy, proposals that we have to see put forward in order to secure our homeland, and the Americans, especially our brave fighting men and women who are overseas right now in places that perhaps we shouldn’t be right now. Anything that I can do to help, I will be willing to help.

VERCAMMEN: OK, one more question, from Wolf, if I can hear him. Let me try to relay it to you.

BLITZER: All right, Paul, I know there’s a delay between me and you, but thank the former governor, the Republican nominee for all of us. A quick question for her. I’m just curious how she’s been reacting to this whole Rush Limbaugh controversy with this Georgetown University law student, because there were some vile words that were uttered by some liberal Democrats as far as Sarah Palin was concerned, and I wonder if she wants to weigh in on this controversy.

VERCAMMEN: Wolf wants to know if you want to weigh in on this controversy. He says some vile words were thrown around, some of them directed towards you actually, the controversy involving Rush Limbaugh, contraception and the Georgetown student? Your reaction to some of those words that were used?

PALIN: I think the definition of hypocrisy is for Rush Limbaugh to have been called out, forced to apologize and retract what it is that he said in exercising his First Amendment rights, and never is that – the same applied to the leftist radicals who say such horrible things about the handicapped, about women, about the defenseless. So I think that’s the definition of hypocrisy. And that’s my two cents worth.

I wish we had some straight talk from all of the current Republican Candidates like that.  

It would certainly be refreshing.  And Conservative.

Santorum/Romney: The Country Mouse and the City Mouse

On By kingsjesterIn Politics2 Comments

I’m sick and tired of reading posters on Conservative websites and hearing from contributors on the Cable News Channels, including Fox News, pushing the idea that the Republican Primary is done, Mitt Romney is the winner, and there is no need for any more states to participate in the Republican Primary.

Rush Limbaugh (per usual) had a spot-on take on this on his Wednesday program:

…Oh, no, no, no. It’s not time to put a stop to it, anoint anybody and say that we’re done. Newt’s not getting out. He’s gonna stay in through Super Tuesday. That’s where he’s got all of his money banked. This thing could go on as far as May. Santorum’s not going anywhere. Santorum doesn’t have a lot of money even now. Romney outspent Santorum six to one in Michigan. I mean just some facts about Michigan. Romney won by nine points in 2008. He won by three points last night but got more votes last night than he did in 2008. But the percentage of his victory in 2008 was nine. It was three points last night. Santorum — and this is preliminary, I’ve gotta double-check this all, but this is what I have now — Santorum won 57 out of 83 counties.

As of now, Santorum, who lost the popular vote, won because of the way delegates are apportioned. Seven of the 14 congressional districts, Romney has won six. So that’s seven and six, a total 13 out of 14. One is still too close to call. Now, according to what I’m told, the 28 delegates, of those 28 delegates in Michigan, Santorum will either win 14 or 15, something like that, the way things get apportioned because of the number of delegates and counties, districts, so forth and he won in Michigan. So it’s not winner-take-all. So when you ask me if I should pronounce it over, it’s not my job to do that anyway.

I think the weakness that Romney has is not the conservatives won’t show up in November. They will. They want Obama out, and that will override everything. The problem is with the Reagan Democrats, the white working class that Obama lost in 2008 by I think about eight or ten points. You’ve gotta win that by 20 points, and you can do that. Some of the Republican candidates in theory could do that. Romney is weak with that segment. He knows it. That’s why he tries to do the everything and he keeps tripping over himself. If he wins that constituency, he wins the presidency, but that’s where he’s gotta work.He is just not all that good a candidate. So here are the numbers: Romney won by nine in 2008; he won 41-38 or three points last night.

Santorum won 57 out of 83 counties. That’s an incredible percentage, and it reminds me of the map of the United States, red and blue by county, when you look at that after a presidential race. The whole country is red (signifying Republican) except LA, San Francisco, Seattle, Miami, Washington, New York, Boston, Chicago and Detroit. The Republicans win 80% of America’s counties and lose the White House. Santorum won 57 out of 83 counties. And, as of now, Santorum, while losing the popular vote, has won seven of the 14 congressional districts; Romney won six; there’s still one at least right now (earlier this morning it was one) still too close to call. This means that, of those 28 delegates, Santorum will either win 14 (if the last district goes to Romney) and 16 if Santorum wins the last district.

So the delegate count from those 28 will be either a 14-14 tie or 16-12 Santorum.

The way that the state of Michigan was divided between the two candidates is a metaphor for the political blood bath currently going on between Conservatives and “Mitt Romney supporters” (which seems to encompass everyone from “Fiscal Conservatives” to Ron Paul tin foil hat wearing nutjobs) .

This whole primary battle reminds me of Aesop’s Fable  “The Country Mouse and the City Mouse”:

There once was a mouse who liked his country house until his cousin came for a visit.

“In the city where I live,” his cousin said, “we dine on cheese and fish and bread. Each night my dinner is brought to me. I eat whatever I choose. While you, country cousin, work your paws to the bone for humble crumbs in this humble home. I’m used to finery. To each his own, I see!”

Upon hearing this, the country mouse looked again at his plain brown house. Suddenly he wasn’t satisfied anymore. “Why should I hunt and scrape for food to store?” he said. “Cousin, I’m coming to the city with you!”

Off they went into the fine town house of the plump and prosperous city mouse.

“Shhh! The people are in the parlor,” the city mouse said. “Let’s sneak into the kitchen for some cheese and bread.”

The city mouse gave his wide-eyed country cousin a grand tour of the leftover food on the table. “It’s the easy life,” the city mouse said, and he smiled as he bit into a piece of bread.

Just as they were both about to bite into a chunk of cheddar cheese, In came the CAT!

“Run! Run!” said the city mouse. “The cat’s in the house!”

Just as the country mouse scampered for his life out of the window, he said, “Cousin, I’m going back to the country! You never told me that a CAT lives here! Thank you, but I’ll take my humble crumbs in comfort over all of your finery with fear!”

Conservatives, like myself, can identify with the Country Mouse.

We would rather hold on to our ethics and values, than compromise and elect a Left-leaning Moderate who will “reach across the aisle” to shake hands with Liberals.  

We feel that, if we elect a Conservative candidate, we won’t have to spend time worrying about the knifes that the Liberals are holding behind their backs with the other hand.

Santorum: Obama Has a Different Theology

On By kingsjesterIn Christianity, Politics15 Comments

Republican Candidate for their Presidential Nomination, Rick Santorum,  made some remarks about the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue that have been been the fodder for conversations around office coolers and Sunday after-church lunches for 3 years now.

Reuters.com has the story:

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum challenged President Barack Obama’s Christian beliefs on Saturday, saying White House policies were motivated by a “different theology.”

A devout Roman Catholic who has risen to the top of Republican polls in recent days, Santorum said the Obama administration had failed to prevent gas prices rising and was using “political science” in the debate about climate change.

Obama’s agenda is “not about you. It’s not about your quality of life. It’s not about your jobs. It’s about some phony ideal. Some phony theology. Oh, not a theology based on the Bible. A different theology,” Santorum told supporters of the conservative Tea Party movement at a Columbus hotel.

When asked about the statement at a news conference later, Santorum said, “If the president says he’s a Christian, he’s a Christian.”

But Santorum did not back down from the assertion that Obama’s values run against those of Christianity.

“He is imposing his values on the Christian church. He can categorize those values anyway he wants. I’m not going to,” Santorum told reporters.

A social conservative, Santorum is increasingly seen as a champion for evangelical Christians in fights with Democrats over contraception and gay marriage.

“This is just the latest low in a Republican primary campaign that has been fueled by distortions, ugliness, and searing pessimism and negativity – a stark contrast with the President who is focused everyday on creating jobs and restoring economic security for the middle class,” said Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt.

So, is President Barack Hussein Obama, a Christian?

For 20 years, Obama sat under the teachings of Rev. Jeremiah Wright at the Trinity United Church of Christ .  Let’s look at the background of Rev. Wright, courtesy of freerepublic.com, shall we?

What most people do not know is that Reverend Jeremiah Wright was a Muslim and a Black Activist before he became the founding pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ, a Black Liberation Theology Church.

The rest, you already know.  As a reminder, though, Discoverthenetworks.org gives us the following summation of  Reverend Jeremiah Wright:

  • Longtime pastor and spiritual mentor of Barack Obama
  • Considers the U.S. to be a nation rife with racism and discrimination
  • Blames American racism for provoking the 9/11 attacks
  • “Islam and Christianity are a whole lot closer than you may realize,” he has written. “Islam comes out of Christianity.”
  • Embraces liberation theology and socialism
  • Strong supporter of Louis Farrakhan
  • Likens Israel’s treatment of Palestinians to South Africa’s treatment of blacks during the apartheid era

But, what is Black Liberation Theology?

Again, discoverthenetworks.org gives us the lowdown:

The chief architect of black liberation theology was James Cone, author of Black Theology and Black Power. One of the tasks of this movement, according to Cone, is to analyze the nature of the gospel of Jesus Christ in light of the experience of blacks who have long been victimized by white oppressors. According to black liberation theology, the inherent racism of white people precludes them from being able to recognize the humanity of nonwhites; moreover, their white supremacist orientation allegedly results in the establishment of a “white theology” that is irrevocably disconnected from the black experience. Consequently, liberation theologians contend that blacks need their own, race-specific theology to affirm their identity and their worth.

“What we need,” says Cone, “is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of Black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.” Observing that America was founded for white people, Cone calls for “the destruction of whiteness, which is the source of human misery in the world.” He advocates the use of Marxism as a tool of social analysis to help Christians to see “how things really are.”

Another prominent exponent of black liberation theology is the Ivy League professor Cornel West, who calls for “a serious dialogue between Black theologians and Marxist thinkers” — a dialogue that centers on the possibility of “mutually arrived-at political action.”

Matthew 7:16 tells us,

You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?

Think back on the last three years and try to remember some of the actions by President Barack Hussein Obama.

For instance, one of the first things he did when ascending to the throne, err, the presidency, was to lift restrictions on U.S. government funding for groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad.

Per reuters.com:

The Democratic president’s decision was a victory for advocates of abortion rights on an issue that in recent years has become a tit-for-tat policy change each time the White House shifts from one party to the other.

Now, three years later, Obama has made the headlines in his attempt, through the bureaucratic monster known as Obamacare, to force Catholic Hospitals to go against their Denomination’s beliefs and to make them provide contraception and the morning after (abortion) pill.

Again, think back on everything he has done in between these two specific cases.

Is he a Christian?  

“You will recognize them by their fruits.”

What Happened to “Mr. Inevitable”?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics8 Comments

It’s seems like, just the other day, that Mitt Romney supporters, known on Conservative websites as “Mittbots” were insisting that the Nomination of Mitt “The Legacy” Romney as the Republican Presidential Candidate was a fait d’accompli.

Things have changed.

Reuters.com has the story.

Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney’s struggles in Michigan are fueling speculation that Republicans might have to resort to a doomsday scenario and launch a frantic search for a 2012 savior at their nominating convention in late August.

Rare in the modern age of U.S. politics, a “brokered convention” could result in Republicans ditching their current crop of candidates and turning to someone else who they feel would have a better chance of defeating Democratic President Barack Obama in the November 6 election.

How did Republicans get to this point? Romney’s failure to get conservatives fully behind him and put down yet another challenger in the party – this time it’s Rick Santorum – is causing angst in the party.

Many senior Republicans do not think Santorum, a social conservative caught up in the U.S. culture wars over issues like abortion and contraception, has a chance to beat Obama if he wins the party’s presidential nomination.

When he ran for re-election as a U.S. senator from Pennsylvania in 2006, Santorum lost by 18 percentage points. But, nevertheless, he is exposing Romney’s weaknesses in Michigan, where Santorum leads polls ahead of the big Midwestern state’s February 28 primary.

A Romney loss to Santorum in Michigan, the state where he was born and where his father was governor, would only intensify the talk about a weak Republican field and feed demands for someone else as the party’s candidate to challenge Obama.

“It’s hard for me to see how Romney rights the ship if he loses Michigan,” said Republican strategist Matt Mackowiak. “There is no level of spin that can overcome that disaster.”

Michigan will set the table for “Super Tuesday,” the March 6 jackpot when 10 states hold Republican nominating contests. A loss for Romney in Michigan would raise serious doubts over whether he can rally enough support to have a big day on Super Tuesday and make a big move toward clinching the nomination.

The candidates are engaging in a state-by-state battle to become the Republican nominee. The party will officially pick a nominee at its August convention in Tampa, Florida.

Why is Romney losing in what was once his “home state”, a state where his own father, George Romney, was once Governor?

L.Z. Granderson, in an article published on CNN.com, has a possible explanation:

One very clear reason why Mitt Romney is far from a lock to win the Michigan primary, despite his ties to the state, is that he’s not really tied to the state.

He was born here, he lived here. But he’s not family. Not anymore.

That’s why the characterization of Rick Santorum polling well in Romney’s backyard is a bit misguided. The truth is, many of us disowned that two-faced liar years ago. We remember how, back in 2008, Romney came home promising to do all he could to save the auto industry. And we believed him and voted for him and he won the primary here. Then, after he dropped out of the race, he wrote a New York Times op-ed that carried the headline “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.”

The opening sentence: “If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.”

What the he@@?

I thought he said he was one of us.

Later in the piece, Romney talks about why we should let the auto industry go bankrupt. Although he lays out some very sound reasons for this — including an anecdotal story of when his father, George, took over American Motors — at the end of the day he fails to mention the most important thing. Us.

He forgot about the people back home who depended on the auto industry to put food on the table, pay mortgages, send the kids to college. He greeted us like family when he needed our votes, but when he left town he treated us like strangers.

If Romney didn’t think a bailout was the best way to help the state, he should have said that when he came here looking for delegates and let the people at his rallies decide if they agreed with him. Instead he pandered, then kicked dirt in our faces on his way out the door — an all too familiar pattern with Romney.

The reason Santorum is gaining votes in Michigan isn’t because he’s so liked here, though his social conservative rhetoric plays well in the western side of the state. But it’s because we’ve been burned by Romney before. He tells the people in front of him what they want to hear. But when he sets his sights on a new shiny object, he changes the script to fit his new needs.

Unfortunately, for The Legacy, other Americans besides Granderson and the Michiganders have figured out his Karma Chameleon nature, also.

According  to pollster Scott Rasmussen:

…Former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum has now bounced to a 12-point lead over Mitt Romney in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary Voters finds Santorum with 39% support to the former Massachusetts governor’s 27%. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich follows from a distance with 15% of the vote, and Texas Congressman Ron Paul runs last with 10%. Three percent (3%) like some other candidate in the race, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

Now, I’m just an average American, sitting here outside Memphis, Tennessee (Detroit South) in the Northwest Corner of Mississippi, but it seems to me, as I’ve said before, that average Americans, especially Conservatives here in the Heartland, are a stiff-necked people.

We tend to stand up on our hind legs when someone tries to force something (or in this case, someone) upon us that we really don’t trust, or care for.

For an example, please watch a certain Supreme Court Case coming in a few months, concerning the Constitutionality of forcing everyone in America to buy Health Insurance in order to participate in a Federal Government-run bureaucratic nightmare of a Healthcare System, that the overwhelming majority of Americans remain opposed to, but was shoved down our throats, anyway.

By the way, where did Obama and his Administration ever find a state-run Healthcare System to model Obamacare after?

Oh, yeah.  Romneycare.

You know, that might have something to do with Romney’s campaign tanking, as well.

What do YOU think?