The Libyan embassy had repeatedly asked for additional security and were refused In fact, their security was reduced. “We couldn’t even keep what we had.”
Watching and listening to Romney now, who do you agree with more: Mitt Romney, or reporters sounding outraged at his criticisms of the Obama Administration?
Both the Obama Administration and their lapdog media surrogates seem far more interested in defeating Obama’s political opponent than America’s Jihadest enemies, or telling the American people the truth.
Iowahawk reports on a recent outbreak of scrutonium, “a deadly poll-eating supervirus that attacks the immuno-hope system, leaving victims vulnerable to material facts.”
Larry Kudlow: “Mitt Romney politely cleaned Barack Obama’s clock tonight. A lethargic and at times tired looking President Obama was out-hustled, out-facted, out-energized, and out-informed by Former Governor Mitt Romney.”
And Jim Treacher has still more. “I’m glad the Greatest President Ever spent so much time stressing the importance of education, because he just got schooled.”
The Washington Postcalled Romney “well prepared and aggressive.”
I didn’t see the entirety of the debate, but in the parts I did see, Romney firmly trounced Obama. Romney looked sharp, engaged, lively and presidential. Obama looked like he was looking at his Blackberry when he wasn’t speaking.
Nor am I alone in my judgment, as even the Obama-friendly press and liberal pundits said Romney won (some in NSFW language):
John Hindraker: “It’s over. I’ve been watching presidential debates for quite a few years, but I have never seen one like this. It wasn’t a TKO, it was a knockout. Mitt Romney was in control from the beginning. He was the alpha male, while Barack Obama was weak, hesitant, stuttering, often apologetic. The visuals were great for Romney and awful for Obama. Obama looked small, tired, defeated after four years of failure, out of ammo.”
Jonah Goldberg: “I had a pretty good feeling about tonight’s debate. But I had no expectation that Romney would simply control the night the way he did. I don’t think Obama did terribly on the merits, even though he clearly lost by a wide margin on points. But you don’t really score a debate like this on points. Romney simply dominated and deflated Obama.”
Rich Lowry: “It was overwhelmingly Romney’s night. He was more confident, more energetic, and better informed than President Obama. He exposed the president’s shallowness and got under his skin.”
On Twitter, gay righty turned lefty Andrew Sullivan bluntly declared “this was a disaster for Obama.” Also: “How is Obama’s closing so fucking sad, confused, lame? He choked. He lost. He may even have lost election tonight.”
Hell, even CNN’s non-rightwing audience thought that Romney won the debate by a landslide of 67% to 25%.
The election, more than ever, is about the size of government. Obama wants an ever-larger, ever more powerful federal government, while Romney-Ryan want to reign it in. Despite Romney having a reputation as a bit of a squish, the pick shows he’s serious about reigning in runaway government. And it doesn’t detract from the debate over Obama’s horrible handling of the economy: Runaway government spending (and the uncertainty it engenders) is the largest single factor holding back the economy.
As an observant Catholic, Ryan sharpens the debate on the Obama Administration’s War on Catholics. The fervor with which Democrats pursued codifying taxpayer-funded abortion (no matter how many House seats it cost them) and the unwavering refusal to allow Catholic and other pro-life entities to opt out from providing insurance coverage of abortion suggests that it was one of the central driving goals of passing ObamaCare. Increasingly it appears that yes, that is the hill liberals want to die on. We should let them, and make sure that devout Catholics know the contempt the liberal establishment holds for both them and their beliefs.
Ryan Puts Wisconsin Further in Play. Scott Walker’s budget successes, and the abysmal serial failure of the Wisconsin recall elections prove that this once solidly Democratic state has been trending increasingly purple. By naming favorite son Ryan as his VP pick, Romney has singled he’s going to put up a real fight there. Romney can win elsewhere (Nevada and Iowa, for example) and still win 270 electoral votes; I don’t see any realistic path to victory for Obama if he loses there.
So Mitt Romney’s campaign has taken Obama’s yawning gaffe and run with it, producing a dozy of an ad called “These Hands”:
I like it!
But people calling it “the best political ad in 30 years” are overselling it. Even if you’re just looking at Presidential ads, there are several I think are a lot more effective.
Here’s the Dukakis Tank ad from George H. W. Bush’s 1988 presidential campaign:
Here’s Swift Boat Veterans for Truth’s devastating ad against John Kerry, using his own words against him in 2004:
(By the way, whenever you hear someone on the left saying that one of their candidates has been “swiftboated,” it means is “Republicans have attacked them effectively with the truth.”)
After Rick Perry’s disastrous fall campaign, I floated the idea that he was still hopped up on goofballs (i.e, taking serious pain medication) following his back operation.
Well now comes word that there’s at least some supporting evidence in the form of Inside the Circus, a book on the 2012 Republican Presidential race. Caveat the first: The Perry camp is hotly denying it. Caveat the second: One of the co-authors is Evan “Obama is a sort of God” Thomas. Caveat the third: The last third of the Chron piece is given over to to professional Perry-hater James Moore to do his usual bashing. Caveat the fourth: The excerpted bit the Chron uses is actually pretty weak sauce unless there are more like it in the book.
Still, the theory nicely explains why Perry, who has been a sharp and relentless campaigner in his state races, floundered so badly at the national level. Indeed, it explains it so neatly that I wonder why the Perry campaign is so insistent in denying it, since it’s much more flattering to him than the liberal “Perry blew it at the national level because he’s a moron that just happened to have kicked our asses repeatedly for the last decade” theory.
On the other hand, maybe they deny it so insistently because it’s not true, no matter how convenient an explanation. And bloggers (myself included) should always be somewhat suspicious of a story that fits our preconceptions a little too neatly…
Today Instapundit Glenn Reynolds asks: “Back in 2008, the social-cons were all-in for Romney, to the point where Hugh Hewitt’s take became a running tagline (“You know who this is good for? Mitt Romney!”) that’s still used by by bloggers from time to time. Now, not so much. So what changed about Romney since 2008 to make him un-conservative?”
A good question, even though I wasn’t a Romney guy back in 2008. But three obvious answers occur to me:
The Tea Party Happened: The election of Obama and Obama’s extreme big-spending, big-government ways have “radicalized” Republican voters to the point that it’s no longer acceptable to campaign like a conservative and vote like a liberal. As the 2010 primary defeats of Charlie Crist and Mike Castle proved, Republican primary voters are no longer willing to give establishment Republicans a pass on their own free-spending, big government ways, and Mitt Romney is as Establishment as they come.
ObamaCare Happened: Before ObamaCare, Republicans might have been willing to downplay the socialistic, anti-freedom aspects of RomneyCare and its own individual mandate under the guise of state rights and the 10th Amendment. But after the passage of ObamaCare, RomneyCare has become a far greater political and ideological liability to Romney, and one that largely negates one of Republicans’ greatest attack issues against Obama, thus making it a much greater problem than it was in 2008.
Romney Isn’t Running Against john McCain: Despite John McCain’s many personal virtues, his voting record is far more that of an establishment Republican than a rock-ribbed conservative. Be it McCain-Feingold or the Gang of 14, McCain has constantly flirted with RINO-hood in his Senate career, making himself a media darling and infuriating the base. In 2008, there was a solid case to make that Mitt Romney was more conservative than McCain. It’s much harder to make the case that Romney is more conservative than Rick Santorum.
Bottom Line: Romney had flaws that were easier to overlook in 2008. You know whose conservative reputation the last four years have been bad for? Mitt Romney!
When I first started covering the senate race, I would grab just about any scrap of information I could about and throw a link to it. Now? The firehose is starting to open up, and I’m getting a bit more selective. For example, I’m not feeling the need to link to Democrat Paul Sadler calling out David Dewhurst over education funding (or Dewhurst’s response), especially since Sadler repeats the lie that the state cut education funding, when it actually increased slightly. (Actually, Sadler attacking Dewhurst, and Dewhurst counter-attacking, is good for both of them; by attacking each other, not only do they garner publicity, but it’s easier for them to ignore the primary challengers that threaten them from their left and right flanks (respectively.) Likewise, I’m not going to link to the Politifact piece on Cruz, since doing so would suggest Politifact has something resembling credibility, which it doesn’t.
Maybe I’m just feeling cranky today.
Politico looks at the Cruz-Dewhurst contest. The idea that Tom Leppert is in second place is mainly supported by that internal Dewhurst poll, which is (as I’ve argued before) dubious due to the completely opaque nature of the methodology,
David Dewhurst: The GOP’s Bad Side Personified: Dewhurst’s “complete disregard for the voters has become so pervasive an issue that it threatens to throw him into a downward spiral; and rightfully so…familiarity with Dewhurst makes it easy to discern that the more he interacts with the right-wing base, the higher his negatives grow.” Ouch!
Ted Cruz was interviewed several times at CPAC. Here he is on Fox Business News:
He also gets some love from The American Spectator.
Dewhurst campaign endorsed by HOSPICE, errr, HOSPAC, the Texas Hospital Association’s political action committee. I can see Dewhurst seeking these business group endorsements, I just can’t see why he would think announcing them to the world at large would cause anyone to vote for him. Every single one of them is like a big rubber stamp that reads APPROVED REPUBLICAN ESTABLISHMENT CANDIDATE.
Dewhurst picks up the endorsement of the Texas Agricultural Aviation Association, which means…wait, really? That’s a real organization? There are enough cropdusters in Texas that they have their own PAC? How can I be sure they’re not just making it up to see if I’ll link to it?
This tiff by the Glenn Addison campaign over Cruz campaign “dirty tricks” is much ado about nothing. You mean opposition research staffers actually sign up for opponent’s emails? Do tell. The piece also mentions that Team Dewhurst is the one pushing for inclusion of Addison in the debates, since he potentially siphons conservative votes from Cruz. That’s smart thinking from the Dewhurst campaign, and even principled, as Addison has run a hard-working, serious Senate campaign in every aspect except fundraising.
Craig James gets some fundraising help from fellow “Pony Express” backfield star (and NFL Hall of Famer) Eric Dickerson.
He also endorsed Rick Santorum for President. That’s probably a pretty canny move for him, as Santorum (for good or ill) seems to be consolidating support as the anti-Romney conservative candidate, and thus, very possibly, the actual GOP candidate. (Now that I’ve said that, given my previous prognostication skills when it comes to predicting Presidential races, expect Ron Paul to sweep Super Tuesday.) It’s quite possible that some Santorum supporters take a closer look at him on that basis alone.
James discusses his endorsement on (you guessed it) Mark Davis of WBAP, who seems to be the go-to radio guy for this race:
So say the tea leaves. An announcement is scheduled for later today. Word is he’ll endorse Gingrich.
A sad turn of events, but also increasingly an inevitable one. After his autumn gaffes, Perry could just never regain traction. He joins Jack Kemp and Phil Gramm among the list of Republican Presidential contenders I’ve supported who have flamed out early. Sic transit gloria.