Thank you Debbie,I loved you before now I love you so much more….with all due respect of course.

Juan on February 27, 2012 at 7:46 pm

It seems almost impossible to believe, but there are more and more articles in the liberal and ‘nonpartisan’ press about how the Republican Party has lurched so far to the right that it is alienating the ‘moderates’ who formerly had played such a large role. They are looking at conservative campaign rhetoric, such as it is, and mistaking it (probably deliberately) for substance.

Needless to say, this is not what is happening — the Republican Party is moving more and more to the left. Especially considering what Romney stands for, and what Jeb Bush, waiting in the wings, stands (?@&) for. I too would vote for Santorum — not perfect, but better than the rest of them.

But whoever wins the nomination will be under tremendous pressure to ‘appeal’ to moderates by stopping the supposed drift of the Republican Party to the right.

Little Al on February 27, 2012 at 7:54 pm

I ve liked Santorum since his days as senator and now I m helping him even more.we may lose the nomination to a lesser more money candidate but not with out a fight.

Juan on February 27, 2012 at 8:08 pm

If Romney can’t win a blue collar industrial state like MI, I don’t see him as an “electable” candidate.

Santorum has blue collar roots, he talks about them and he has principles. The only things Romney has going for him is lots of money and the backing of the party establishment.

Debbie might vote for Romney with reluctance in the general election but a lot of conservatives won’t. They simply can’t stand him. And when you aren’t enthusiastic about your front runner, he’s got an electability problem – a serious one.

Romney may be the nominee but he’s got no one excited enough to pull the levers for him and he doesn’t offer a real contrast. His liberal record in Massachusetts will be heavy baggage in the general election.

A race between Obama and Obama Lite is not going to be the stuff of a high stakes 2012 election.

NormanF on February 27, 2012 at 8:27 pm

So, apparently, the Muslims in Dearborn will be voting for R. Paul. My observation is that how many of them will have to cross over to vote for him, because I thought pretty much all Muslims voted for Democrats. Just curious about that.

sturgis on February 27, 2012 at 8:35 pm

The Muslims in MI are typical Democratic voters but I expect many crossover votes from them for Ron Paul.

His anti-Israel stand will appeal to many of them as well as his general isolationist philosophy which amounts to cut and run before Islam.

That’s another reason why they are not your average patriotic American. American citizenship is simply a flag of convenience for them.

Don’t be fooled by their alleged conservative values. They will NEVER pull the lever for a pro-Israel conservative Republican like Santorum and you can bet they they’ll vote the opposite tomorrow from Debbie.

NormanF on February 27, 2012 at 8:44 pm

Santorum guarantees 4 more years of Obama. He might win two states. He has no, none executive experience. So we can’t use that attack on Obama. Worse, Santorum was smacked in his last Senatorial election. The guy is a bad joke.

Fleiter on February 27, 2012 at 8:48 pm

Obama had no executive experience and he served all of four years in the US Senate. Santorum lost in a heavily Democratic year and I doubt any one else would have done as well in PA. He is not perfect but then again if you want four more years of Obama, go with “Mitt Happens.”

I’m tired of Republicans picking the last candidate because now its “his turn.” The problem is conservatives never demand better. And being just a tad better than Obama isn’t simply good enough.

That said, even if the GOP holds the House and takes back the Senate, I don’t see a Republican President getting much done with his new Congressional majority.

NormanF on February 27, 2012 at 8:57 pm

Next week on Super-Tuesday I am also voting for Rick Santorum.

As a Bostonian I REFUSE to vote for Flipp McFloppney! If you’re the religious kind look up Gregg Jackson’s blog on how HE proves point-by-point why Christian Conservatives should NEVER trust Romney. (Gregg used to have a radio show here in Boston but then moved to California and I have no idea if he still has a radio show in Cali. It’s worth going to his site to listen to the 12 minute interview with Jed Babin. When he asks questions that get Babin squirming, he hangs up in a huff.)

Skunky on February 27, 2012 at 9:10 pm

I’ve been pushing Santorum for awhile. He’s grossly underestimated as a politician. He’s got a bit of the street fighter in him, and he’ll provide a sharp contrast with Obama on most important issues. He’s really the only candidate left who has any chance against Obama.

adam on February 27, 2012 at 9:11 pm

A Ron Paul supporter told me that Santorum is a Zionist and will cause us to go to war with Iran.

Poncho on February 27, 2012 at 9:57 pm

Well, I loathe–viscerally hate–Santorum. However, Romney, objectively, is a lying scumbag and a vicious type whom I could not vote for. Even if I were convinced he could beat Obama, he is still, ideologically unnacceptable. And I am furious at those elites who have annointed him.

If Gingrich were campaining in MI, and if he were even reasonably close to Romney in support, I would vote for him.

skzion on February 27, 2012 at 10:04 pm

I think that Debbie and those who agree with her have it right:

1) Rick Santorum is the best candidate still running.

2) Newt Gingrch

3) Mitt Romney

Worse–Ron Paul.

I would vote for any of the top three–even Romney–but, like Debbie, there is no way that I would vote for Ron Paul if he should–G-d forbid–be the Republican nominee.

And I will add the obvious. All the candidate–including Santorum–are flawed. Everyone here knows what they are.

JeffE on February 27, 2012 at 10:36 pm

Clarification:

“I would vote for any of the top three–even Romney–but, like Debbie, there is no way that I would vote for Ron Paul if he should–G-d forbid–be the Republican nominee.”

I am referring to the November election vs Obama.

JeffE on February 27, 2012 at 10:38 pm

“Down-the-line conservative” is just another way of saying “Party-over-principle neoconservative.” Here’s an article (with video) of Ron Paul’s appearance in Dearborn before an over-the-capacity crowd:

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120227/POLITICS01/202270358/1361/Ron-Paul-speaks-to-packed-auditorium-in-Dearborn

Ramjordan on February 27, 2012 at 10:39 pm

Debbie I like Sanatorium better too but he has been shooting himself in both feet. Any Republican would be better than Ozero and Mitt seems more electable to me. I don’t really buy Mitt’s moderate act anyway. Either way it’s all according to G-d’s will so Israel will find a way and H. will be my BFF.

A1 on February 27, 2012 at 10:48 pm

I am a christian Zionist,I support Israel 100% and have since my papi explained things to me many years ago,for that reason,like Debbie I supported Bachman with $$$$ and after her campaign fizzled I came to Santorum,I liked Michelle better but Santorum is just as good only with out the good looks of Bachman.

Juan on February 28, 2012 at 1:08 am

I’ve never thought of the European Christian Democratic parties as especially ideological. The difference between them and the ‘socialists’ is hard to see. Sarkozy and Merkel are going out of their way to pander to socialists in Greece, and support the other countries (PIGS for now) that have been unable and unwilling to control welfare spending, broadly defined. The only ideology is Big Government, and a sense of entitlement from more responsible taxpayers and countries like the United States, China and Brazil (not an implied endorsement of China and Brazil).

Little Al on February 28, 2012 at 1:20 am

Debbie, I agree w/ you – only difference is that after Bachmann fizzled, I switched to Santorum straight away – didn’t stop @ Newt. You speculated that Norquist no longer supports him, but I don’t think that that’s a given.

I too didn’t like Santorum not backing Newt on that debate question about the Palis being invented, but I too like his voting record. I do have one big disagreement w/ him however – in his criticism of Obama’s policies, he criticises them for pulling out of Iraq. I think it’s good that US troops are out of Iraq, and need to be out of Afghanistan as well – let them have their civil wars. Yeah, I sympathize w/ Christian minorities in these countries, and wish that Western immigration would be open to them and closed to Muslims, but I don’t see that happening.

But anyway, the Iraq withdrawal is done, and unlike in 2005, there isn’t a groundswell of support for fresh intervention anywhere. I’d say let the Syrian civil war sort itself out, and let all Jihadis converge there. In the absense of a proper western response to these Muslim threats, that’s the best we can hope for – for now.

Only big problem I see w/ Santorum’s electability – he’ll have a tough time explaining how he plans to defeat Obama when he couldn’t hold his Senate seat in 2008.

I: Actually, I think Newt and Jihad Grover remain thick as thieves. And that’s a major problem with him, in addition to all of the other things. I’ve noted it on my site at length. DS

Infidel on February 28, 2012 at 3:56 am

Bachmann was my favorite and the best conservative of the bunch.

But when she dropped out, Santorum was my second choice. Not enthusiastic about him though.

Here’s why:

Santorum has a lot of good points and merit for conservatives. I can live with a Santorum presidency. I need to point out one thing though, Santorum isn’t the all round conservative like Michele. On the pro-life cause, the endorsement of Arlen Specter gives me pause. One of the big issues facing this nation is the size and scope of government. The nanny state’s overbearing reach into our daily lives needs to be scaled back dramatically. I don’t think Rick Santorum will be the type of president we can count on for this issue. His record and writings don’t bode well.

….on economic and size-of-government issues, Santorum’s record is much weaker.

When Hillary Clinton was justly excoriated by conservatives for her book It Takes A Village, which advocated greater government involvement in our lives, Rick Santorum countered with his book, It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good, which advocated greater government involvement in our lives. Among the many government programs he supported: national service, publicly financed trust funds for children, community-investment incentives, and economic-literacy programs in “every school in America”

He never met an earmark that he didn’t like. In fact, it wasn’t just earmarks for his own state that he favored, which might be forgiven as pure electoral pragmatism, but earmarks for everyone, including the notorious “Bridge to Nowhere.”

The quintessential Washington insider, he worked closely with Tom DeLay to set up the “K Street Project,” linking lobbyists with the GOP leadership.

He voted against NAFTA and has long opposed free trade. He backed higher tariffs on everything from steel to honey. He still supports an industrial policy with the government tilting the playing field toward manufacturing industries and picking winners and losers.

I’m not fully confident he will totally repeal Obamacare. Nor am I convinced he will stop government meddling in business. The practice of government picking winners and losers in the business world will probably continue under him if he becomes president.

Keep in mind Santorum is a former senator. He’ll continue to act like a senator. He’ll compromise and make deals. He’ll give in to get a little of what he wants. Santorum, in interviews recently, said as much to explain his troubling record. A senator mindset is the last thing we need to repair the damage to this country.

Now, can you see why there is a lack of enthusiasm for Santorum on my part? This is why I supported Bachmann. The only people that will be overjoyed with a Santorum presidency are “compassionate conservatives” (code for progressives) and anyone wanting to relive the good old Bush years again.

So if Santorum is this bad, why am I voting for him?

Because the others are even worse. I was 150% behind Bachmann because I was almost totally in agreement with her views and record. First time in my 42 years on this planet that I’ve run across a candidate that represented folks such as myself completely. I can’t even say that about Reagan. Something that has really bothered me over the last 20 odd years is how our two major political parties have changed. The democrat party of my grandparents, the JFK party, has become a radical party of socialists, marxists, progressives and Occupy Wallstreet filth. The republican party has morphed into what the democrat party used to be, with a good dash of progressivism thrown in to complete the downward slide. That leaves people like myself out in the cold. We don’t have choices or candidates that really represent us. So, we vote for the lesser of two evils. When our lesser of the two evils wins, we get a politician that manages our country’s decline and slide towards liberalism at a slower, stealth pace. We still lose and the radical leftists win in the long term.

I’m just hoping a Santorum presidency slows the downward spiral we are on. I’m being pragmatic. I have no illusions he’ll be some sort of savior. He’s just the best of what’s left in the field. Speaking of the others, I will not vote for any of them should they get the nomination. In my mind, they are just as bad as Obama and share too many of his traits that I despise. If any of the other candidates are nominated, this conservative is sitting this one out. There are many other Americans out there that will do the same. I fear we are going to see the voter apathy play out once again like in 2008. The fix is in to nominate Mitt Romney. I’d bet money that Santorum will be the next one the establishment and the liberal, state media eviscerate next. He served his purpose in getting Bachmann out of the race. It’ll be his turn to get sandbagged. I hope I’m wrong because the alternatives to Rick are that bad.

Defeating Obama with a liberal, progressive, big government, statist with an (R) in front of its name would be a Pyrrhic victory for us all.

http://thebachmanncometh.blogspot.com/2012/01/whats-next-for-conservative.html

Chris on February 28, 2012 at 4:37 am

Mitt Romney just does not feel right. He would really have trouble debating President Obama on health care reform issues, since he supported and implemented simiarly policies as a governor. As Debbie has noted, his foreign policy views are rather dubious, especially in regard to Israel. Even on social issues, his change of heart on so many issues, including abortion, smacks of opportunism more than anything else. I just do not find Mitt Romney sincere. He comes across as a marketing plan, rather than as a genuine human being.Worst of all, he would be demolished by Barack Obama. President Obama could correctly point out that Mitt Romney, despite his latter day coversions, in the past supported many of the polices being pursued by the present administration. When Barack Obama appears more sincere and consistent than Mitt Romney as a politician, the Republicans had best worry. An institutional empty suit is not going to defeat Barack Obama in 2012. If all that the Republicans have on offer is an “Obama Lite” candidate, why should party activists or independent voters even get out of bed to vote? President Obama is vulnerable in areas ranging from the economy to race relations, but not a single Repbulican contender has managed to gain any traction against what should be a vulnerable incumbent who does not even seriosly try to appeal to anyone outside of his base anymore. President Obama does not have a record of success that would appeal to anyone other than a left leaning voter, but he still manages to remain in the high forties or better in recent opinion surveys. The Republicans do have to ask themselves why they are performing so marginally in an environment that would have been most congenial for them in the past? The muddled messaging, self-doubts, inside baseball arguments, and mediocre candidates have much to do with this problem. Republicans seem to think that fielding any old “black box” candidate to replace Barack Obama is enough. These people fail to remember, even though they are supposedly accolytes of Ronald Reagan, that President Jimmy Carter did not start to collapse in the polls to Ronald Reagan until the last couple of months of the campaign. This was the case even though President Carter had faced domestic and foreign policy failures, a convention challenge from Teddy Kennedy, and an economy that was quite horrid. There was no coronation of Ronald Reagan in 1980.

Worry01 on February 28, 2012 at 7:08 am

IMO, the biggest thing threatening the world today is Muslims & Islam, and for that reason, I’d be willing to back candidates who are less conservative on other issues, like healthcare, government regulation, free trade, et al if they are congizant of the Muslim threat.

Normally, I’d not make such compromises, but having people who are only too happy to made deals w/ Muslims, such as Bush, Issa, McCain, Chris Christie, Newt, et al is a non-starter for me, no matter how Conservative they may otherwise be. For instance, I’d normally never think of supporing Barbara Boxer, but given that she revoked an award given to a CAIR member once she found out about that person’s Jihad links, I certainly would support her over guys like Darryl Issa, Carly Fiorina and so on.

Problem we have is that too many conservatives have mistaken the filthy rich sheikhs of places like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Emirates, et al as their ideological soulmates, and are only too happy to get into bed w/ them. Sorry, but if that’s what being Conservative means, I find that as repugnant as I used to find Communism during the Soviet era.

Infidel on February 28, 2012 at 7:50 am

Debbie, is it true that Romney closed a busines and sent his employees to New York city to help another employee search and find his daughter?

Terry on February 28, 2012 at 10:40 am

Anyone know of the relationship betweeen Romney and/or Santorum and Jihad Grover?

The other day, Andrew McCarthy was on Milt Rosenberg’s show, and totally refused to comment on Jihad Grover Noquist’s malignant influence. McCarthy’s a total wimp. He writes a whole book on the Grand Jihad in the US, and won’t even mention the single most powerful Jihadi presence on the Republican side.

A: Andrew McCarthy is a total fraud and a plagiarist. Most of his Grand Jihad book and much of what he writes on NRO was ripped off from me and others. The guy has never written or had an original thought in his life. He’s also a liar, who did Sean Hannity’s bidding and defended Hannity’s Freedom Concert Fraud Scam so he could keep going on Hannity’s shows to pimp himself and “his” (ripped off) work. I’m not surprised that he’s also a shill for Jihad Grover. McCarthy is worthless. DS

adam on February 28, 2012 at 10:40 am

One thing to remember about Santorum. In the 2006 election, Santorum lost to Casey (D) by 41% to 59%. This was the largest margin of defeat for an incumbent senator since 1980. It was also the biggest landslide victory for any democrat that has run for the U.S. Senate from PA. Perhaps the people of PA have a lot more insight into Santorum than most of us do.

Jarhead on February 28, 2012 at 10:46 am

Santorum is a whack-job!

1) He said that his duty is to his church first and then the country!!!! That leaves the non-Christians of the country out in the dust.

2) He is anti-choice even in cases of rape, molestation and when the mother’s life is endangered. Has anyone heard of an etopic pregnancy?

3)He is always complaining about big government BUT then he wants to take away insurance covered contraception (which helps many medical conditions)–but is OK with Viagara. Wants to retractively dissolve every gay marriage in every state.

He is a hippocrite who said that JFK makes him want to vomit! And wait for him to use his religion as a basis(meaning excuse) to discriminate and dominate minorities and women.

Lee on February 28, 2012 at 10:56 am

There were several factors that cost Santorum in 2006, not least of which was an unpopular vote to cut budget. What’s more surprising is that the very conservative Santorum won twice in a wishy-washy blueish-purplish state like PA.

adam on February 28, 2012 at 10:58 am

One if by land, two if by sea. But how many if we are stabbed in the back by Quisling Benedict Arnold, Hitler emulating Ron Pauls. Can you believe how many college kids are voting for this scmuck.
I did not know proctology is now taught alongside political science at the universities he visited. I bet they would change their minds if the draft was re-instituted. Hey kids how about spring break in sunny Kabul?
My vote is with Gingrich; he may be insane but there is something about Santorum that reminds me of tricky Dick. Disappointed with our guvner who apparently feels he is playing it safe by sticking with a “homey:.
Hey Snyder, have you checked if Rommney is registered to vote in Michigan?

Ron Wolf aka "Columbo" on February 28, 2012 at 11:56 am

I just want to see Obama gone, and whoever can do it with the best chance is what counts the most. Period. My common sense side tells me that a guy who lost by the largest percentage ever by a sitting Senator in a swing state, well, ask yourself will he have changed the minds of 20% of those voters? No, maybe 10% and that is politically alot. Therefore my common sense tells me you throw away the chance in that swing state and that means you have to win twice the electoral votes somewhere else. Doubtfull as then the margin of error is so small it is not worth the chance. Republicans will do what they have done best in too many elections, go with their principals, stay on them, and we will see 4 years of disaster again. Be smart, too many people have already said wake up, not so sure that has hit home yet.

Mike C on February 28, 2012 at 12:12 pm

Well… with respect for everyone’s opinion, in my view it comes down to this: Santorum cannot beat Obama – and if anyone had any doubts about that, the happenings of the last week and a half should have erased them. Santorum’s positions on issues such as religion will ensure his unelectability in a general election.

So, rather than make Michigan a horse race and split delegates, it makes more sense to give Romney a solid victory and build momentum for him among the brain-dead moderates we’ll need to defeat the Obamster. Four more years of him and the US of A is over. That’s the choice we have in today’s election.

GC on February 28, 2012 at 12:29 pm

I’ve not been sold on any of the GOP candidates, but of all of them, I think Newt would be the strongest candidate in a race against OBummer. Having said that, I think if Mitt or Santorim gets the GOp nomination, neither one will be able to beat “O”. Mitt is Mitt, and Santorim has no personality. Kudos to you debbie for telling us who you will vote for. Hannity hides himself in the “I want to hear all sides and arguments of the candidates before I make my decision”. In other words, he’ll vote for who ever the GOP candidate is. He has no back bone!!!

St. Stephen on February 28, 2012 at 12:32 pm

Santorum’s best statement was at Ave Marie University several years ago when he said that clergymen have been very lax from the pulpit several years ago. I agree with this statement 110%. Since Second Vatican Council, clergymen have been practically nonexitent from the pulpit.
We need another Andrew Jackson or Thomas Jefferson badly.

Confederate South on February 28, 2012 at 1:36 pm

Santorum may make for a sharp contrast from Obama, but independents won’t vote for him.

Yeah Santorum was elected in PA, but Romney was elected in MA.

Santorum keeps saying the Romneycare takes away the whole healthcare debate from Obama and that there is no difference on the issue. But Romney says he will repeal Obamacare (with the help of congress) so what other difference do you need?

On a personal note, when Santorum was running for re-election in PA my wife had a personal glimpse of his personality behind the scenes, and apparently he is a jerk. He tried to have her fired for disagreeing with him on one policy. He was arrogant and petty and preachy. I am not saying we have to be best friends with the POTUS, but he is no mensch.

fred on February 28, 2012 at 1:57 pm

Ron Paul’s domestic platform doesn’t have a chance in hell of being passed, and his foreign policy perspective would guarantee MY election in 2016 on the Nuke the Entire Middle East except Israel platform of the Wake Up America! Party in retaliation for attacks he would allow on Washington, DC, Chicago, NYC, LA, Houston, and Boston. Scary, scary guy. (With apologies to Tom Kratman for stealing that scenario from Caliphate.)

Occam's Tool on February 28, 2012 at 2:10 pm

Lots of problems with all the Republican candidates, but I think that there is enough reason to vote for Santorum if only because the entire Republican establishment is against him. I’m for anything within reason that weakens the Republican establishment.

The barrage of bombast from articles, radio talking heads & so on has been staggering. Campaigns like this are good for assessing who the small number of commentators are who have any kind of integrity.

Little Al on February 28, 2012 at 4:10 pm

I also like Santorum, BUT, unless he stops letting the LSM direct the conversation and grows a set, he won’t win the nomination. He HAS to stay focused on the economy and J O B S ! ! ! Every time he discusses social issues, he is only “preaching to the choir”, and chasing the independents away from voting for him.

That jerk Ron Paul needs to move to Iran if he loves them so much. The sooner Israel hits them, the better. They certainly can’t wait for the pansy in the White House to do anything. He’s WAY to busy apologizing to bother with important stuff like that.

Joe Vigue Sr. on February 28, 2012 at 5:32 pm

According to a report in the Daily Rash, Rick Santorum performed an exorcism at a Chicago Super Walmart yesterday. http://www.thedailyrash.com/rick-santorum-performs-exorcism-in-walmart-parking-lot

HollyW on February 28, 2012 at 6:39 pm

Well, it looks like the winner is Romney. Look at the bright side, Deb. At least Ron Paul didn’t even come close in the one state he really stood any chance in. I think It’s safe to say that it’s all down hill for him from this moment on (not that he was ever really much of a threat). Mel Gibson’s dad will be disappointed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cphTr8W9OnA

Irving on February 28, 2012 at 10:34 pm

God help us if we have to hold our nose and vote for Romney. I did that for McCain, but I at least preferred him more. I just don’t know if I can do it. I will definitely need inspiring words, some coaching, and maybe a little drinkie poo before running up to the polls. I am really hoping that Newt can pull something off. Newt would wipe the floor with obama, win or lose, at least it would be a fight.

sharon on February 28, 2012 at 11:03 pm

Well, the worst of the three big government, statists won AZ and MI.

Looking like this conservative will sit this one out..

With Romney at the helm, America still declines, the progressive agenda rolls on (except he’ll manage it at a slower, stealthier, less in your face pace).

This country is infested with morons and we’re getting the leadership Idiocracy deserves.

Chris on February 29, 2012 at 12:11 am

Santorum is battling to reform the Catholic Church. I wish him well. Cardinal Neuman needs all the help he can get. The record of the Church is NOT a good one. Every Catholic in the Congress of the United States is a Democrat, and everyone is Pro Abortion!

burt on February 29, 2012 at 7:35 pm

NormanF, manufacturing output in America is at all time record highs.

So why aren’t manufacturing jobs corresponding with this output?

Automation and efficiency. Don’t need as many workers to make that widget like we did in the past.

There’s is nothing Santorum can offer to fix that. Nor should he.

Also, Santorum’s manufacturing plans are no different than Obama’s green energy nonsense – big government picking winners and losers in the economy on your dime.

Keep in mind that an American manufacturing renaissance is also in the cards in the coming years if we survive Obamunism.
Wages are climbing in China and overseas. Oil prices as well. These 2 factors cancel out the benefits of making products to be sold here overseas. Makes more sense to make it here.

JeffE, I’m trying to stay positive and hopeful brother. It’s hard. I can stomach a Santorum presidency. The others are just too God awful and have too much in common with Jug Ears Hussein.

Chris on March 1, 2012 at 12:35 am

How about giving consideration to the REAL alternative in this race. The one the republicans fear so much they forced him right out of their party???
GARY JOHNSON!!!!

Bruce Hevner on March 1, 2012 at 9:18 pm

From New Mexico and lived under a Gary Johnson governorship. Guy is a libertarian moonbat that is right up there with Ru-Paul, except without the Stormfront type views.

He doesn’t belong in the Republican Party. He’s a lib, which is typical of New Mexican repubs.

Also, my ex wife’s cousin is the daughter of a contractor in Santa Fe that builds million dollar plus homes. She hung out at Gary’s place often. Said it was a great place to score weed and drugs if that was your thing.

Chris on March 2, 2012 at 12:55 am

With all due respect, why do you place your vote on someone based on their surge? Is that not placing your vote based on where others place their vote? Why not vote based on who you find the best, not who others find the best?

Marcus on March 12, 2012 at 7:29 pm

DS
“I was initially planning to vote for Michele Bachmann, who I thought was head and shoulders above the others. But her campaign quickly fizzled. Then, I was planning to hold my nose and vote for Newt Gingrich when he surged because I felt he was the best choice left, if not such a great choice at that. And he’d have kicked Barack Obama’s butt in any debate. But Gingrich’s surge also fizzled, and now Santorum has surged. If Gingrich was still surging, he’d get my vote. And I’ll admit that I was bothered that, when asked in an ABC debate whether or not he agreed with Newt Gingrich that the Palestinians are an invented “people,” he sided with Mitt Romney’s attack on Gingrich for this and refused to agree. But, on Israel, foreign policy, domestic policy, and everything else, his voting record has been very good. He’s a down-the-line conservative I can live with and trust to do the right thing. I can’t say that about Mitt Romney. And, unlike Romney, he doesn’t send millions to a church that then sends those millions to the largest HAMAS/Al-Qaeda charity . . . and then refuse to answer press questions about it, as Romney did and continues to do. The Dodge might have been made in Detroit, but we don’t like dodgers. Those are in L.A., and they can keep ‘em. Ditto for Romneycare, statism at its worst that was copied by Obamacare”.

So you have supported three candidates, all of whose campaigns fizzled out (no mention of Herman Cain, who I recall you also backed at one time). Do you not think this shows your judgement is rather poor?

C J Walters on April 3, 2012 at 2:56 pm

So, now what are you going to do? If Romney gets elected and has his way with “Obamacare” he and his fellow Republicans will simply replace it with Romneycare, which won’t be much different. Your comments about Ronna Romney are interesting. You call her an anti-Semetic, but you are an anti-Moslem. Bigotry is bigotry, no matter who it is you don’t like.

Paul on August 28, 2012 at 6:42 pm