I'm George Soros, and I approved this Candidate

Hhhhmmm...




I'm not a big Newt fan...but if Soros doesn't like him...then he can't be all bad...but the flip side is if he likes Romney, then Romney must go!

Ann's Hypocrisy...

Ann Coulter, whom I once admired for saying those things about Liberals, and liberalism, that one oughtn't say out loud, has had one flip too many.  Her over the top support of Romney goes against what she was saying just a few short months ago.

.

That's steeply at odds with her current hyper-partisant rants that Romney is the savior of the GOP in this election. For years, she's been a sharp critic of RomneyCare in Massachusetts...

.


...but has suddenly changed her tune...that's her attempt to justify RomneyCare...now that she's a supporter of Mitt Romney. But Dan Riehl has a excellent rebuttal,

There really is nothing new in her item, nothing at all; it's sophistry wrapped around old information, or argument, all of it dealt with previously and broadly. From a conservative perspective, the only difference being, rather than arguing as a conservative against over-reaching government perpetuated by elitist thinking, a misguided Coulter foolishly seems to have decided she's now somehow one of said elite, competent, or qualified enough to tell us what's good for us. Honestly, it really is that vapid in the sense of argument. But then, she didn't have much to work with.

Ann, stop talking for a few months...get your head out of your ass and start thinking again.

Newt Against The Media

The MSM is against conservatives in a visceral fashion...here's a great example...



The MSM has a hatred of conservatives...and will do what ever than can to ensure that their preferred GOP candidate, Mitt Romney, wins the GOP primaries...but...Newt has the balls to fight back.  I"m not a very big fan of his, but he has the stones to kick the media in the teeth.  That's why he won the South Carolina primary.

via Newsalert.com

Media Bias: Duh!

Via Lucianne.com

Here's why Mr. Romney will not be the next president of the United States...





He's NOT electible.  Despite the media's and GOP establishment's desires, he can't poll above 25%.  The "base" of the GOP just doesn't trust him.

Via 1389 blog.

Why Newt Won South Carolina

All the "elite" pundits and columnists can't really explain why Newt won yesterday's GOP South Carolina primary.  What it comes down to is simply this:



Here's another reason why Newt got the roars,

And where did the crowd roar? They roared when some premise of liberalism or some particular liberal was taken apart. No Republican on Republican crime was rewarded. Even Mitt, no favorite of the red meat crowd, got his loudest moments when he finally decided to support capitalism with some fervor. Newt of course got the big reaction over the week by attacking liberal members of the media who were either attacking conservative beliefs on the whole (Juan Williams and the race card) or protecting Obama by attacking Republicans' personal lives (John King)].[Ed, emphasis is mine]

Republicans and conservatives are tired of being labeled as stupid, racist bigots by the heavily biased media and hypocritical Liberals. That's why Newt won. He's the only candidate who knows who the "enemy" is and is willing to attack them head on. That's why his compaign keeps rising from the dead...because, paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, "...we can't spare this man, he fights..."
But more importantly, Newt won because while he was campaigning, he talked to the voters on substance, not the empty platitudes that Romney and the rest used.   Additionally, Newt was smart enough to use the anger to the GOP "elites" that Romney embodies, and

Gingrich's success here in South Carolina shows more than just a skepticism toward establishment Republicanism. It also shows a hunger for real substance in the campaign, for a candidate who will talk to voters and give them more than phrases like "I believe in America." Mitt Romney's team of seasoned campaign professionals may not think Newt Gingrich has any business playing a deciding role in the race. But they better believe it, and they better take seriously what the Gingrich challenge represents -- before it's too late.

 Something none of the other candidates have picked up on.  If 60% of the electorate, in the Republican party are picking "Not Romney" you'd think the GOP Establishmen would stop trying to ram the son of a bitch down our throats.  After all, except for a bried 4 day period, Romney hasn't polled above 25% for SIX LONG YEARS!!!!!

Newt Gingrich: Working Isn't Racist

Slam dunk: via LegalInsurrection & Instapundit

GOP: How Not To Choose A Candidate....

Over on PajamasMedia there's a terrific post by Adam Graham on how the GOP SHOULDN'T chooes their candidate for the presidency of the US in 2012.  Here are the first few paragraphs.  Undecided

and loosely committed conservative voters face a tough decision on whom to support in 2012. How should they make their decisions? Pundits and activists offer plenty of advice for voters, but several factors are not worth considering:


Electability
While we should consider a candidate’s experience, record, and ability to communicate with voters, for many pundits and party leaders, this isn’t what electability means. It’s an alias for conventional wisdom.

Pundits and politicians make false assumptions like: a conservative can’t win the election. Also, “bird in the bush” theories propose that if the party jettisons social conservatives, then a large pool of voters would embrace the Republican Party. No proof is ever offered that this large pool of voters exists anywhere but in the minds of pundits. In the case of the abortion issue, the actual evidence suggests Republicans enjoy a large advantage because of their position on the issue.

Voters are far more concerned about the condition of the country than the factors “electability” experts trumpet. Republicans should nominate a candidate who will put their best foot forward in representing the party. Unsubstantiated electability claims should be dismissed.

Identity Politics
There are good reasons to back Herman Cain. One bad reason is often cited by activists: in nominating Herman Cain, the GOP would neutralize the race card and gain a significant portion of the black vote. Andrew Breitbart doubled down and called for a ticket of Herman Cain and freshman Congressman Allen West (R-FL)
It is doubtful this tactic will provide lasting gains. Black conservatives are attacked as race traitors. Justice Clarence Thomas was once forced to withdraw from a school event in a predominantly black district due to threats of a protest. The GOP in recent years had a black House Caucus chairman, a black RNC chairman, and elected two black congressmen from the former Confederacy.
In addition, the party has nominated several blacks for the U.S. Senate, governorships, and seats in the House. It has done little good in advancing the GOP cause in the African American community. This is clearly not enough to win over the black vote.
Those who advocate a Cain candidacy on racial grounds are right that the GOP needs to increase its share of the black vote. However, they’re trying to take a shortcut. The Democrats dominate the black vote because they’ve politically organized in the black community. Republicans must do the same. It will take time, money, and effort to reach out. There is no easy way to victory.
Similarly, nominating a female candidate will not give the GOP any edge among women. To the contrary, women rate Sarah Palin more unfavorably than men.
The GOP should nominate the best candidate regardless of race or gender. Basing nominations on identity politics thinking it will gain brownie points has been proven to be baseless.

Forget Veep Madness
In addition to Breitbart’s Cain-West dynamic duo, N.M. Guariglia has called for Congressman West to spice up a Mitt Romney candidacy. In light of the 2008 campaign, these calls for West and other rising politicos, such as Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) or Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI), to be placed in the veep spot seem ill-advised at best.
While Sarah Palin’s addition to the ticket brought excitement to an uninspiring McCain campaign, it has done great harm to Sarah Palin’s brand. Had Palin not been tapped, she likely would have served out her first term as governor of Alaska and won a second. If she were running for president right now under those circumstances, she would be seen as a dark horse candidate in the midst of a gradual process of introducing herself to America. She would be talking to local media in early primary states, any national interviews would be on a cordial basis, and tea party conservatives would be warming to her campaign.
Instead, if Palin runs, it’ll be as a battle-scarred, media wars veteran driven from office by Democrats who abused the ethics process to financially ruin her. Palin’s problems began during the campaign because she was not in charge of what interviews she gave or how she was presented to the American people.
While Palin energized the campaign, she overpowered rather than complimented the McCain candidacy. The lesson is clear: If the Republicans nominate a candidate in need of a veep who will energize the party, they have chosen the wrong person.
Rather than taking the chance of sacrificing promising leaders as the vice presidential candidate for a lackluster principal, conservatives should support a strong nominee and hope for a veep who is conservative, credible, and relatively quiet.

READ THE WHOLE DAMN THING.  If you know someone in  a "leadership" position within the party, please, please, PLEASE force them (at gunpoint if necessary) to read this!

Hat Tip Instapundit