Gingrich Vows to Contest "46 States" After Romney Big Win in FL

With 94% of delegates yet to be selected, what's the rush to anoint Romney?

There's no denying that Mitt Romney had a big win in Florida Tuesday night. A 14.5% win over Gingrich slightly trumps Newt's big 12.6% win in SC but with a much bigger delegate haul. Once again, the power of money came through with Mitt outspending Newt by more than 3 to 1.

But at the Gingrich concession rally you wouldn't know Newt lost. His speech was positive, energetic and filled with the kind of conservative ideas that have made him the Tea Party and conservative champion in the race. Newt outlined a 21st Century Contract with America that is his personal promise of what he will do within moments of taking the Oath of Office as President. It's a bold action plan designed to immediately reverse the worst of the Obama, Reid, Pelosi legacy. It's that kind of bold action that we just don't see coming from Romney.




94% of convention delegates yet to be chosen.

Florida was a big win for Romney because it suggest that he will be strong in large states with more moderate populations. And Romney now has the lead in delegates but only 71 total with 1144 needed for nomination (Newt has 23). The Washington Post has an interesting chart showing the timeline for how delegates are accumulated and also marking where other past GOP candidates had the race sewn up. The earliest was approximately March 4, 2008 when John McCain had it in the bag. And we all remember how that worked out.


Romney Weakness Unabated?

Another fact to keep in mind is that despite Romney's strength in Florida he still can't quite close the sale with the majority of GOP voters. According to Florida exit polls, 38% of Romney voters wish another candidate was running. He still can't quite make the sale.

If Santorum, who only received 13.4% down from 17% in South Carolina were to drop out Newt would be very well positioned to take on Romney in a contest that was close to 50-50 despite Romney's continuing HUGE money advantage (he has $19 million in cash compared to $1 million for Newt).

Santorum went on to Nevada which will hold their caucus in a few days. He made a Florida concession speech from a meeting in Las Vegas that had only about two dozen supporters present. Not exactly a rousing show of strong public support.

If Newt can hold out until Santorum runs out of money or realizes the game is up we may have end up with a two man race in the remaining states. It's a race that continues to favor Romney in nearly every respect but is not impossible for  Gingrich.

Keep in mind is that Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama by 13% in the 2008 Florida primary and the Democrat's nominating contest went on for months with obviously no ill-effect on the November outcome. Remember also that Hillary Clinton was considered the inevitable Democrat nominee early on....

Obama Gaffe: 22 Million Jobs Created

Is it racist to attack Bush for these screw ups but not Obama?


Were those 22 million "shovel ready" jobs?
You'd think a guy who talked about campaigning in "57 states" and so many other bloopers would stick to the teleprompter!

But at least Obama looks less like a dolt when compared to his Vice President, bumbling Joe Biden!

Shocked Liberals Outraged Over Rep. Allen West's Speech Telling Obama, Reid, Pelosi to "Get the Hell Out of America" with Socialist Message

Funny how liberals never got worked up when Obama's pastor Rev. Wright said "God DAMN America... U.S. of K.K. A.!

U.S. Representative Allen West (R-FL):

WEST:"Take your message of equality of achievement, take your message of economic dependency, take your message of enslaving the entrepreneurial will and spirit of the American people somewhere else. You can take it to Europe, you can take it to the bottom of the sea, you can take it to the North Pole, but get the hell out of the United States of America."

If you disagree with West You're a RACIST!

Bob Beckel on the Fox News Program "The Five" called West's remarks the "most outrageous thing" he's ever heard. And the rest of the liberal commentariat is following suit with words even less kind (1,2).

But I am reminded by our liberal "friends" that when we disagree with Obama, it must be because of the color of his skin (Obama is half white). So, when they disagree with West, who is 100% black and grew up in the South, it must be because of his race. Same with Herman Cain and Justice Clarence Thomas.

I wonder why liberals get so upset to hear such strong opinions. After all, these kinds of statements directed at conservatives are commonplace. Here are JUST TWO out of dozens of examples:


Rep. Maxine Waters: "Tea Party can go straight to hell!"

Rev. Wright: God Damn America!
No doubt we'll hear complaints about Rep. West's uncivil tone from liberals who never uttered a word of disagreement when folks on their side said far worse! Demands for civility are on a one way street!

"The Empire Strikes Back!" GOP Establishment Goes All Out Against Gingrich

What a shame these same folks couldn't fight this hard against Obama!

Rush Limbaugh calls it a "Coordinated Avalanche Against Newt." Last week, the full weight of the entire GOP establishment spoke with one voice. Not in an unfettered endorsement of Mitt Romney (does anyone REALLY like him much?) but in an effort to derail the presidential ambitions of Newt Gingrich. The establishment has lined up in Florida behind a firewall created by the Romney campaign to stop the Newt juggernaut which came out of South Carolina threatening to undue their prince's plans.

What a shame this same bunch couldn't direct their concentrated fire towards Obama. But readers may recall how the GOP establishment collectively issued a warning following Obama's victory in which they forbade criticizing the most radical, corrupt and incompetent President of our lifetime. Romney continues to follow this plan. Mitt won't call Obama a "socialist." In an interview he explained the he "didn't want to be calling him [Obama] names" yet he has no problem calling Newt Gingrich every name in the book.

What do you bet that if Romney gets the nomination, all these coordinated efforts that have been so successful against Gingrich will disappear? Too afraid of being called "racists" or of upsetting the go along to get along apple cart which throws out scraps to the establishment GOP the attack dogs will go silent until the next time the peasants get out of line.

And the losers like Dole and McCain who have rallied around Romney will no doubt impart to him the secret campaign methods which made them the spectacular failures of their time!

Insurgents vs. the Establishment

Newt's recent endorsements include Michael Reagan, Fred Thompson and Herman Cain and J.C. Watts among many others. And while Sarah Palin hasn't officially endorsed Gingrich, she might as well:


PALIN: "Rage against the machine vote for Newt, annoy a liberal. Vote Newt. Keep this vetting process going, keep the debate going."
South Carolina voters did their job and rejected the establishment rush to anoint the go along to get along candidate who is more invested in protecting establishment interests than promoting conservative principles. It's up the voters of Florida on Tuesday. And if they can't do it, then it's on to the next state!

Romney Outspending Gingrich More Than 3 to 1 in Florida Ad Wars

Making it nearly impossible for Gingrich to get out his message!

Newt Gingrich was off his game in Thursday's Florida debate. According to news reports he was floored by Mitt Romney's "dishonesty" during the debate:

Gingrich charged that Romney was lying when he said he didn’t know about an ad his campaign is running that accuses Gingrich of calling Spanish a “ghetto” language. The former speaker charged that Romney also lied when he explained that the only reason he voted for the late former Sen. Paul Tsongas in the 1992 Democratic presidential primary was because there was not a Republican contest that year.

Wolf Blitzer returned from a break in the debate and informed Romney that his researchers had found the ad which Romney denied with the tag line "I'm Mitt Romney and I approve this message."

Gingrich responded to Romney's false statements with an ad on Friday:

TRANSCRIPT:
Mike Huckabee (in 2007 campaign ad): "If a man's dishonest to obtain a job, he'll be dishonest on the job."

Narrator: "What kind of man would mislead, distort and deceive just to win an election. This man would. Mitt Romney. Romney said he has always voted Republican when he had the opportunity. But in the 1992 Massachusetts primary, Romney had the chance to vote for George H.W. Bush or Pat Buchanan, but he voted for a liberal Democrat instead. Romney said his investments in Fannie and Freddie were in a blind trust. But as reported in the National Journal, Romney earned tens of thousands of dollars from investments not in a blind trust. Romney denied seeing a false ad his campaign used to attack Newt Gingrich. But Romney's own campaign paid for the ad, and Romney's own voice is on the ad approving its false content. If we can't trust what Mitt Romney says about his own record, how can we trust him on anything?"

The problem is that few people are likely to see the ad. Mitt Romney has pumped massive amounts of money into the Florida campaign. The following from ABC News:

Newt Gingrich is not just getting outspent by Mitt Romney and his allies on the Florida airwaves, he’s getting creamed.

The Romney campaign and a super PAC supporting him is spending nearly quadruple the amount that Gingrich and the pro-Gingrich super PAC, Winning Our Future, has spent to air television and radio ads ahead of the state’s Jan. 31 primary.

So far, Romney has bought $5.6 million worth of airtime and the pro-Romney super PAC, Restore Our Future, has shelled out a whopping $8.2 million, according to a Republican media buyer who is tracking ad spending in the state.

Compare that to $837,000 spent by the Gingrich campaign and the nearly $3 million of airtime bought by Winning Our Future, a super PAC supporting the former House speaker, and it’s easy to understand one reason why Gingrich has slipped in the most recent polls in the Sunshine State.

Pro-Romney forces are using the vast majority of the $13.9 million they’ve spent to buy up television airtime on broadcast stations in the Miami, Tampa and Orlando areas – population centers that will be critical to the former Massachusetts governor’s hopes of winning the state.

It's no surprise that with that amount of money Romney is recapturing the lead in Florida polls he lost after Newt won South Carolina. With Rick Santorum remaining in the race the conservative vote is split giving Romney the edge.

Still, Gingrich is the current favorite in national polls. But with Romney's money advantage will Gingrich be able to continue the race much beyond Florida?

Numbers Don't Lie: Obama Turning Citizens into Government Dependents

And all the while Obama continues to blame Bush for the problems his policies have caused!

Liberal commenters at Mike's America did their best to try and undermine the cold hard reality presented in the graph "Obama by the Numbers" which clearly shows the failure of Obama's economic policies. But liberal efforts to  twist the numbers, like the facts they represent, is futile in the long run. The facts are that Obama is causing Americans to become dependent on government handouts at an  rate unprecedented in modern times. For liberals still in denial, Investor's Business Daily has the following chart:

Full size image here.

And here's another variation of the Obama by the Numbers chart:

While I don't expect our liberal "friends" to stop trying to twist the numbers and distort reality (they don't have a rational defense of Obama's policies) they will only ending up fooling themselves. Americans who are not drinking the Obama Kool Aid can see the truth with their own eyes!

Bob Dole Joins Fellow GOP Loser McCain in Endorsement of Romney

Birds of a feather.....

One of Mitt Romney's claims is that he is the more electable of GOP candidates. Voters in South Carolina disagreed but Romney is repeating the same claim in Florida.

Thursday, former Senator Bob Dole, the failed Republican nominee for President in 1996 joined Senator John McCain the failed Republican nominee in 2008 by endorsing Mitt Romney and trashing Newt Gingrich.

Being surrounded by two big time losers should hardly be reassuring to GOP voters looking to beat Obama. Neither Dole, nor McCain had the "right stuff" to do the job in their respective races. Their endorsement of Romney might lead some to believe that despite Newt's faults he wouldn't fight the election with one hand tied behind his back like McCain, Dole and potentially Romney.

Two more tidbits:

ROMNEY:  'I Want to Help the 99 Percent,' is what he said in a radio interview this week. After the condemnation that Newt received for "using the language of the left" in his attacks on Romney's actions at Bain Capital will the same people now come forward and condemn Romney for aping the Occupy Wall Street crowd and validating Obama's clas warfare rhetoric? Don't hold your breath!

Newt and Reagan closer than Romney would have you believe. Mitt Romney has absolutely NO TIE to the Reagan era so naturally he's gone after Newt who at times was critical (like many other conservatives) of the slow pace of conservative change during the Reagan era. But to say that Newt has no tie to Reagan's legacy is absurd, as this video by former First Lady Nancy Reagan attests: "Ronnie handed the torch [of conservatism] over to Newt."

Newt's web site also has multiple links to other stories chronicling his close association with the Reagan Revolution.

Obama's Recycled Energy Whoppers in State of the Union Speech

We have more energy available here than all of the Middle East. But Obama won't let us get at it!

By now we all know Obama wants to be America's "green" President. It's bad enough he's recycling his State of the Union speeches. Worse still is that he continues to repeat many of  the same factually flawed and deliberately misleading statements over and over despite the knowledge that his green myths have been debunked.

Take for example this claim in the 2012 SOTU speech: OBAMA: “American oil production is the highest that it’s been in eight years.” He has repeated  similar claims now for years but what he doesn't say is that any increase in oil production is in spite of his best efforts to choke it off. The Natural Resources Committee of the House of Representatives has the facts:

• Oil and natural gas production on federal lands is down by over 40% compared to ten years ago. Carney does not explain that the vast majority of increased production is occurring on private lands in states such as North Dakota, not on federal lands.
• Under the Obama Administration, 2010 had the LOWEST number of onshore leases issued since 1984.
• The Administration held only one offshore lease sale in 2011. Conducted on December 14^th, the Administration narrowly avoided making 2011 the first year since 1953 without an offshore lease sale.

If President Obama is truly committed to an all-of-the-above energy approach:

• Why is he proposing an offshore drilling plan that keeps the majority of our offshore energy resources under lock-and-key?

• Why did his Administration just impose a 20-year ban on uranium mining on one million acres of federal land in Arizona?

Not to mention his rejection of the Keystone Pipeline which killed thousands of good paying American jobs and increased our dependence on overseas oil.

The next big whopper came when Obama said we have "only 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves." This is a variation of the "soon we will run out of oil" lie that is popular among those on the left. But like most left wing fantasies, it's just not true.

Obama's "2 percent" figure was a repeat of earlier remarks he has made such as in June 2010 where he went on to say that "running out of places to drill." What Obama should have said is that he's put most of the places we could drill off limits.

The Institute for Energy Research came out with a new study in December 2011 which highlights the huge potential of North America's untapped energy reserves. There is enough oil, gas and coal for all of North America (Canada, U.S. and Mexico) to be entirely energy independent for centuries. 1.79 trillion barrels of oil available in North America would last the U.S. 250 years at our current rate of oil use.

Obama has repeatedly blocked the recovery of American energy supplies in the vain hope that windmills or solar panels will take the place of oil. Americans are paying higher prices at the pump and enriching Arabs and the Venezuelans instead of keeping that money right here where it could put Americans to work and pay for the rebuilding of America's economic and energy infrastructure.

Obama's State of the Union Deja Vu

Same old speech. Same failed policies!

Maybe Obama needs a new teleprompter as it seems the one he is using now just keeps putting the same empty words up again and again with the nothing but failure to show for it....



Want to know what the real state of our union is in under 45 seconds?



Obama: “If I Don't Have This Done In Three Years, Then There's Going To Be A One-Term Proposition.”
Time's up Bub!

Viewing Guides for Obama's State of the Union Address Tuesday

Will the President who said "we can't wait" and "pass this bill now" finally tell members of his own party in the U.S. Senate to pass a budget or vote up or down on dozens of GOP jobs bills? Don't hold your breath!

Readers may wish to print these graphics out and put them next to their television if they are planning to watch Obama's big speech tonight:

full size graphic here.

The House GOP has a very creative video up as a mock trailer for the President's speech. But I like this one from the National Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee which focuses on Dems in the Senate:




On a side note: I wonder if NBC's Brian Williams will show up tonight and tell House and Senate Dems to remain quiet throughout Obama's speech?

NBC Tampa Debate: Worst Debate EVER!

Was NBC's Brian Williams afraid audience would boo him? He need not have worried. They were asleep!

NBC's Brian Williams, who moderated the GOP candidates debate in Tampa Monday night, instructed the crowd to remain silent throughout. Obviously Williams didn't want to offer Newt Gingrich any opportunity to play off the crowd as he bashed the media. The result was a debate that caused me to reach for the remotes after only a few minutes.

Just look at the comatose crowd. Don't they look excited to be there?

And it appears it wasn't exactly a thrill ride for the candidates either. Here's a photo of Newt as he prepares to leave the stage as the debate ends:

Newt has said that he may not agree to further debates if the crowd is not able to express themselves as they have in past debates this year. I agree. The Tampa debate was beyond dull and boring and I won't watch another one between the GOP candidates with the same restriction. What a shame this fall's debate with Obama will likely have the same gag order on the audience. But then, unless it says "CHEER" on the teleprompter how would Democrats know when to clap?

Occupy Wall Street Protesters Loot Church Which Gave Them Shelter

Even the drug addicts formerly sheltered in the church didn't steal!

Here's an enlightening story. The West Park Presbyterian Church in New York City  gave shelter to some of the Occupy Wall Street crowd. Imagine how the good Samaritan Rev. Bob Brashear felt one day when he woke up and found that not only had his $2,400 MacBook gone missing earlier, but now part of the church's $12,500 bronze baptismal font was gone. The Holy Water from the River Jordan was dumped in the base like discarded spit.

This comes on top of a protester at another church in Brooklyn urinating on a cross. Perhaps he was imitating the government subsidized art of the late Robert Mapplethorpe.

What's really amusing about this story is that the church had previously given shelter to drug addicts in the 1980's and they never touched the valuable font.

But Rev. Bob shouldn't be surprised. Doesn't he know these "99%rs" care only about themselves and think the rest of the world, including churches, owe them a living?

It seems Rev. Bob may be waking up. He's told the Occupy bunch to pack up and get out in two weeks. He better search them as they leave!

The New Jim Crow Era: Dems Cry "RACIST" Because They Can't Defend Obama's Policies

We are witnessing the apartheid of liberal ideology!

At the Washington Times Jeffrey Kuhner writes a great column exploring the Democrats increasingly desperate use of the racecard. Kuhner points out that it was Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid "who compared critics of Mr. Obama’s health care overhaul to the defenders of “slavery” and “Jim Crow.” In other words, dislike for socialized medicine is akin to nostalgia for white supremacy." Never mind that many of these same conservatives objected to the big government plan for socialized medicine put forward by President Clinton who was white. If you oppose Obama's policies you must be a racist.

The latest attack was launched on former House Speaker Newt Gingrich who called Obama the "Food Stamp President" since under Obama's watch Food Stamp use has skyrocketed. Never mind that as of 2010 35.7% of food stamp recipients were white. Only 22% were black. Darn it, Democrats said Newt's statement was racist and that's that!

And if Newt Gingrich from Georgia is a racist what about Romney from Massachusetts? Well, he's just SO WHITE that he must be a racist. Right? One op-ed by a liberal writer in the New York Times said what so many other Dems must be thinking: "“The simple, impolitely stated fact is that Mitt Romney is the whitest white man to run for president in recent memory.”

Kuhner notes that the real tragedy for the black community is not the phony racism of the Tea Party but the failure of Obama's policies:

Hurling the racism charge has been used by liberals for years as an ideological stick to bludgeon conservative critics. In our time, it is the equivalent of previously being called a witch or heretic: a libelous smear that, if it sticks, results in social ostracism. Yet, the fact that liberals are now repeatedly - and blindly - resorting to it is a sign of desperation. It shows they are unable to defend Mr. Obama’s abysmal record. His presidency has been an utter failure.

This presidency has been totally inept, especially for blacks. The black unemployment rate is at its highest in more than 30 years. Unemployment for black males hovers near 20 percent - approaching Great Depression levels. For black male teenagers, it is more than an astounding 40 percent. Instead of restoring economic recovery and focusing on urban blight and the loss of manufacturing and blue-collar jobs, the Obama administration has been obsessed with other priorities: ObamaCare, cap-and-trade legislation, amnesty for illegal immigrants and spending billions on the green economy. This may resonate with trendy academic liberals, but it has done nothing for the besieged black community.

For decades, liberal Democrats have run the inner cities in which poor blacks have been kept as virtual slaves on the Democrat plantation unable to escape the often squalid, crime ridden conditions of their existence while surrounded by the aging failure of the socialist welfare state. Held back by poor state run education and enslaved by economic dependence on Democrat handouts they suffer year after year afflicted by the same grievances which Democrats consistently fail to address.


But never mind all that. We all know that the real problem is the hidden racism of conservatives. Right?

Newt SC Win Exposes Establishment and Romney Weakness Against Obama

Michael Walsh at National Review nails it once again!

Throughout this early primary process Michael Walsh has been a voice in the wilderness warning that Romney was not as "electable" as the establishment bandwagon seemed to suggest.

His views are confirmed by Newt's big win in SC. You'll want to read the whole piece titled "What's the Rationale Now?. Here's an excerpt to tease you:

With Newt’s big win tonight, the glaring weakness of Mitt Romney now stands revealed for all to see. Hopefully including Mitt. Because if this wasn’t a wake-up call for Team Romney, he’s a totally hopeless candidate.
...
What counts is passion. The 2010 midterms proved that, but the GOP bonzes seemed embarrassed by the Tea Party’s success. They pushed the “electable” and “inevitable” memes as hard as they could in the service of a milquetoast candidate, and the mainstream media, openly rooting for the other side, was only too happy to help them out. As I’ve been saying, Romney’s been the candidate the Democrats have wanted to face all along, in part because of his glass ceiling. Which is turning out to be a glass jaw.

So Romney has simply got to come up with a more cogent rationale for his candidacy than he has up to now if he has any hope of becoming president. He can’t run for CEO any more.
...
Segments on the right have not entirely digested the notion that Obama and his party are running on a platform of contempt for America and “fundamental change” for the future; it’s like they think the Dems don’t really mean it. And that taking the high road by confining the campaign to “jobs” will appeal to the “real” America somewhere out there in the heartland. And that playing rough is beneath us.

Newt played rough in South Carolina and won big. That ought to tell the GOP something. Whether it will is another story. If this loss tonight makes Romney a stronger, better, more articulate candidate, terrific. But he has to learn from this stunning defeat: The base is itching for a fight with everything the Obama Democrats stand for and they don’t much care who gives it to them, just as long as somebody does. Tonight, that’s Newt.

As the late Al Davis used to say, “Just win, baby.” And, as the Democrats say, “by any means necessary.” It’s high time they got a taste of their own medicine — and understand there’s a lot more where that came from.

Let me just boil that down a bit. "What counts is passion." We are not electing a CEO, we are electing a man to lead us to victory in November and to lead the charge to dismantle Obama's legacy of failure. We need a general who inspires the troops to get off their feet and go vote. Newt showed he can do that in South Carolina and if that talent translates to other states, it's clear he would be the better nominee to go after Obama!

The Voters vs. The Establishment. Does Newt's SC Victory Signal Trouble for Romney?

Newt's SC win was a gamechanger but how much of one?


[UPDATE: New Florida Polls Show NEWT surge!]
In his victory speech in Columbia, South Carolina Newt Gingrich declared: "we proved here in South Carolina that people power with the right ideas beats big money. And with your help, we're going to prove it again in Florida."

It's no secret that Mitt Romney has the GOP establishment behind him. It's an ongoing effort that the Washington Post reports is intensifying as Gingrich's campaign poses a real threat to the establishment's preferred nominee. But there are kinks starting to show in the establishment armor and some within the establishment may be beginning to realize that GOP voters in the grass roots will not be told they must accept any nominee who does not first win their vote on the basis of merit or ability.

Gingrich's win in South Carolina is especially noteworthy because the exit polls reveal that Newt won across nearly the entire spectrum of voter demographics, issue concerns and qualifications. That includes the vital women's vote in the light of the recycled news about Newt's past marriages and also the electability issue that had hitherto been the claim of Romney's campaign.

Romney took first place among voters who lived in urban areas, were the highest income earners, moderate to liberal in ideology, not especially religious and not fans of the  Tea Party. While Florida has a higher urban population with fewer concentrations of evangelicals and Tea Party enthusiasts will that be enough to tip the scales in Romney's direction?

Polls to shift in Florida?

Last Sunday in South Carolina the polls all showed Romney with a good lead. But in that week, two debates caused the vast majority of SC's undecided voters to flock to Newt and give him his big win. No new polls have been released in Florida during the last week. The polls prior to that week, taken as they were following Mitt's win in New Hampshire are now old news. With two debates in Florida this week there is every reason to expect that the race in Florida will be very close indeed.

Jeb Bush Neutral -- Remember Charlie Crist?

Hints that the solid wall of establishment support for Romney may be cracking ever so slightly came shortly after Newt's SC win. There had been strong signs that former Florida Governor Jeb Bush would endorse Romney. But in the past 24 hours Jeb has signalled he intends to stay neutral.

Florida GOP voters are no fonder of establishment candidates than South Carolina voters are. Remember that Florida is the state where voters rejected Charlie Crist and flocked to Marco Rubio in the 2010 Senate primary despite the near lock step endorsement of the national GOP in favor of Crist. John McCain's endorsement and campaigning with Crist couldn't save him anymore than it did Romney in SC.

The following ad was put out by Rick Santorum, but it could just as well been put out by Newt Gingrich. Both reject the establishment rush to anoint Romney and end the nomination contest:




Mitt's Negative Campaign Continues

In his concession remarks Saturday night and in television news show appearances on Sunday Mitt Romney continued his negative line of attack on Gingrich. Romney's negative campaign worked in Iowa but failed utterly in South Carolina where he outspent Newt by at least 2 to 1. Romney has already spent millions in Florida continuing the same attacks which failed in South Carolina.

It's entirely possible that Florida voters will reject Mitt's negative attacks and flock to the most viable conservative alternative in the same way that SC voters did. In any case, it should be another interesting ten days.

The Gingrich Steamroller Rolls Romney in South Carolina!

A wild week in South Carolina turns the GOP race on it's head with 12% margin of victory for NEWT!

What a difference a week makes! Just a week ago Mitt Romney was still riding high after a big win in New Hampshire and came to South Carolina with a double digit lead in the polls and an attitude being expressed in the media that he had the nomination in the bag.

But then things got nasty in SC as they often do. Romney outspent Gingrich more than 2 to 1 with negative ads and phone calls bombarding the state. But that wasn't enough to overcome SC voters unease about voting for Romney, a candidate they perceived as a moderate and one who had trouble explaining his tax issues and defending his experience as a venture capitalist.

By contrast, former Speaker Gingrich came out swinging in two debates and took his frank, serious, sometimes blunt message around the state where he connected directly to voters who saw him as a solid conservative with a record of experience in getting the right things done. Gingrich's coup de grace over Romney were his boffo performances in two debates held in the state.

South Carolina has a history of voting for the candidate who eventually goes on to clinch the nomination. And if that record holds, historians will look back at the video from Gingrich's two debates, especially the second in Charleston, and say that's where Gingrich made the sale.

Huge Win Just First Step In a Long Contest for Delegates

Compare Gingrich's sweep (right) to the Huckabee/McCain match up in 2008 (left). Gingrich's win dwarfed McCain's. In 2008 McCain received 147, 686 votes or 33%. Gingrich got 240,527 votes or 40%.


From South Carolina the campaign moves to Florida which is very different from this state and one in which Romney has a strong organizational and money advantage. It's too soon to start paying attention to the delegate count but in the end, getting the magic number of 1,144 delegates is required to win the nomination.


Newt's win is a rebuke to the negative ads and massive spending by the Romney campaign. It's an affirmation of the winning possibilities of a conservative candidate and one who can potentially unite the base of the party in ways that Romney cannot.


Newt's win means voters in the remaining 47 states that have yet to vote may have their say. That is South Carolina's gift to the nation. It's up to voters now in those other states what you do with it. Will you go with a conservative or a moderate?

Stay Tuned Here for Updates on SC Primary Results

7:30 PM Exit polls are up. Gingrich very strong across the board with key demographics which may factor in future primaries.

Key findings:

• No big problem with the female vote. Newt won both men and women with only 5% better with men.
• Newt won every age group except the 18-29 which went to Ron Paul.
• Newt won voters with every level of education except those with postgraduate study which went to Romney.
• Newt won both married and single voters.
• Newt won all income groups except those above $200k which went to Romney.
• Newt won the Independent vote by 30%. Paul got 27% and Romney 26%
• Newt won conservatives and Tea Partiers. Romney won moderates, liberals and those who oppose the Tea Party.
• Those with strong religious beliefs went to Newt. Others went to Romney.
• Voters against abortion went to Newt. Those who think abortion should be legal went to Romney.
• Most important issues were the budget deficit and the economy. Those who gave that as their answer voted for Newt overwhelmingly. Those who said abortion was their top issue went to Santorum.
• Gingrich won voters who said beating Obama was the most important quality.
• Newt won voters who said being a "true conservative" was the most important.
• Newt won voters who said the "right experience" was most important.
• Santorum won among voters who said a "strong moral character" was most important.
• 28% of respondents said that Romney's background as an investor was a negative.
• 31% said Romney ran the "most unfair campaign." 25% said that of Gingrich.
• Newt won among voters who decided in the past few weeks. Romney won with voters who made up their minds early on.
• Debates were important to 65% of respondents and the majority of them went to Newt.
• Urban voters went to Romney. Suburban and rural to Newt.

7 PM NEWT WINS!

6:55 PM Want to know why the SC primary is so important? Here's a factoid from the Washington Post:

While Iowa’s caucuses can lay claim to being first vote of the presidential race and New Hampshire is proud of its first-in-the-nation primary, South Carolina has traditionally been the place where winners win. While the other two have spotty records on this front, South Carolina has picked every Republican nominee since its front-of-the-calendar primary began in 1980.

6:10 PM Early exit polls results being reported at Fox News show Gingrich strong in evangelical/tea party vote. A good sign that he will have a strong night. Hint also that Newt's problem with women might not be so bad.

5 PM Saturday. Polls close at 7 PM

Here's some prepartory material if you want to analyze and follow tonight's developments:

Exit polls will be key to showing what impact if any the ABC interview with Newt's ex wife Marianne had on the outcome. Keep in mind that Newt has always polled better with men than with women.

The Washington Post has a list of five key factors, including the female vote, to watch for:

1. Battle of the sexes
2. Religious divide
3. South Carolina’s tea party like Iowa’s or N.H.?
4. Older voters
5. Romney’s Bain

Each of the above factors will play a role as we go forward to Florida where the Romney campaign has a firewall. A good article by Stephen Hayes in the Weekly Standard describes that effort.

Key counties to watch
Compare results to 2008 GOP primary results county by county.
Mike's America is in Beaufort County which went to McCain by 42% with Romney second at 26%. Turnout in B.C. is reported to be stronger than in 2008.

Updates as the evening unfolds.

Unfit for Office: Obama Puts Politics Ahead of National Interest in Keystone Pipeline Decision

Higher gas prices,  fewer American jobs, lost tax revenue, greater dependence on overseas oil and yes, more carbon emissions is the result of Obama's attempt to appease radical environmentalists for the sake of his re-election campaign!

A friend from Calgary, Alberta Canada sent me the following cartoon:

Canadians are scratching their heads wondering why the Obama Administration would reject a pipeline which would provide a steady supply of oil from a trusted ally and neighbor in favor of continuing dependence on overseas supplies. Canadians need to know that it's no bad reflection on them. The bottom line is that Obama put political considerations for his re-election campaign ahead of our relationship with Canada and America's national interest.

The Obama Administration gave various reasons for their decision. First Obama did what he does best and blamed Republicans for setting a “rushed and arbitrary deadline” in the two month payroll tax cut extension. But the Administration had already had three years to study the pipeline and had concluded that there were few environmental risks. 

Rejecting Pipeline will Increase CO2 Emissions

In their protest against the pipeline radical environmentalists relied on their usual bag of tricks trotting out some sap in a polar bear suit trying to link any carbon emissions from Keystone oil to global warming and the destruction of polar bear habitat. Put aside for a moment that the claims that man made carbon emissions are disrupting polar bear habitats is specious (polar bear populations in North America are growing). The plain fact is that this oil will be used somewhere. The Chinese have already expressed an interest in buying the oil. That means that not only will the oil be used in a country with much fewer pollution controls but it will also be shipped there in oil tankers which burn fuel and pose a greater environmental hazard from spills than do pipelines. And of course Americans will still be buying oil from overseas and shipping it to the U.S. in tankers as well.

Another reason given for rejecting the pipeline was that it would cross an environmentally sensitive area of Nebraska called the Ogallala Aquifer which supplies drinking and irrigation water for a large section of the that region. But there are already 25,000 miles of pipeline which cross the aquifer, 2,000 of which are in Nebraska. Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman joined other governors along the pipeline route in condemning the Obama Administration decision.

The Obama Administration promised that if Keystone were to submit a new plan which rerouted the pipeline,  they would consider it. But, that would start the approval process all over again and mean more years of delay and more opportunities for radical environmentalists to kill the project.

Kill All Oil Development

The bottom line for environmentalists is to kill any new supply of fossil fuels and to restrict the use of existing supplies and make them more expensive in an attempt to force people to adopt more expensive, less efficient green alternatives.Writing at Forbes Magazine Warren Meyer describes this goal as "Voting for the Stone Age:"

The real goal of these groups was not to protect water along the pipeline route, but to make it impossible to develop new sources of oil in Canada. Unable to stop Canadian oil drilling and tar sand extraction programs, environmental groups are now trying to block any pipeline that is proposed out of the oil producing regions.

Some would argue that these opponents aren’t anti-energy, they just want to shift energy use from fossil fuels to “green” energy like wind and solar. This is either disingenuous or unbelievably naive. The Keystone XL pipeline would have single-handedly carried more energy to the United States than the sum of all the green energy projects funded by the Obama Administration. And it would have done so entirely with private funds rather than the Administrations increasingly ill-fated and ham-handed attempts at venture capitalism with taxpayer funds. The fact of the matter is that, for the foreseeable future, opposing fossil fuels is equivalent to opposing energy use.

Editorial opinion at many of the nation's newspapers has been scathing. But perhaps the best opinion came from columnist Robert Samuelson:

President Obama's rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico is an act of national insanity. It isn't often that a president makes a decision that has no redeeming virtues and -- beyond the symbolism -- won't even advance the goals of the groups that demanded it. All it tells us is that Obama is so obsessed with his re-election that, through some sort of political calculus, he believes that placating his environmental supporters will improve his chances.
...
Now consider how Obama's decision hurts the United States. For starters, it insults and antagonizes a strong ally; getting future Canadian cooperation on other issues will be harder. Next, it threatens a large source of relatively secure oil that, combined with new discoveries in the United States, could reduce (though not eliminate) our dependence on insecure foreign oil.

Finally, Obama's decision forgoes all the project's jobs. There's some dispute over the magnitude. Project sponsor TransCanada claims 20,000, split between construction (13,000) and manufacturing (7,000) of everything from pumps to control equipment. Apparently, this refers to "job years," meaning one job for one year. If so, the actual number of jobs would be about half that spread over two years. Whatever the figure, it's in the thousands and important in a country hungering for work. And Keystone XL is precisely the sort of infrastructure project that Obama claims to favor.

The big winners are the Chinese. They must be celebrating their good fortune and wondering how the crazy Americans could repudiate such a huge supply of nearby energy.
...
By law, Obama's decision was supposed to reflect "the national interest." His standard was his political interest.

President Obama who repeatedly invokes the phrase "we can't wait" in his push for more American jobs has pushed his own political considerations ahead of the national interest on jobs, energy independence and lower energy costs. USA Today summed this decision up in one sentence: "What's really going on here, of course, is the most craven sort of election-year politics."

Desperate Romney Phone Calls and Mailings in Final Hours of SC Campaign

The guy who started the negative campaign in Iowa directed at Newt may be beaten by his own negativity in SC!

This afternoon the calls started coming in every few hours. One said "This is Mitt Romney, again" and asked for my vote. Another was from his wife Ann. A third replayed the audio of the ad that Speaker Gingrich cut with Nancy Pelosi. I stopped anwering the phone after that but the calls kept coming.

And the following arrived yesterday by mail from the Romney campaign:

There were three more pages just like that or worse.

Romney has waged what amounts to a "dirty campaign" that goes far beyond what most of us have seen in the past. And in South Carolina, that is saying something.

The reason for Romney's desperation is clear. Look at the Real Clear Politics graph below and how Newt (green) surged in the days since his stellar performance at the Myrtle Beach debate:

If these polls are correct, Newt Gingrich will win the South Carolina Primary on Saturday and we will have a real contest for the GOP nomination between a real conservative and a Massachusetts moderate.

May the real conservative win!

Newt Gingrich Smacks Down Media Obsession with Old News from Newt's Family History

They won't ask Obama the tough questions but will dig the dirt on ANY Republican!

John King, CNN's moderator for Thursday's debate in Charleston, SC opened the debate with a question directed at Speaker Gingrich regarding the upcoming interview with his ex wife Marianne and the old news about their marriage. Gingrich came out swinging and the crowd loved it. Take a look...



This is the kind of fighter that South Carolina voters want in the White House!

For those on the left who want to make some twisted comparison between Newt Gingrich and Bill Clinton, keep this in mind: Newt Gingrich never lied to a Federal Judge under oath about his transgressions. I'm also reminded of the 1992 campaign where both Bill and Hillary Clinton went on Sixty Minutes and Bill lied repeatedly about his relationship with Jennifer Flowers. And who can forget the classic scene at the White House when President Clinton said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman... I never told anyone to lie, not a single time. Never! These allegations are false." [video].

Gingrich owned up to his mistakes and his past. Something top Democrats rarely , if ever, do.

Texas Governor Rick Perry who called Newt a  "conservative visionary" when he endorsed Gingrich, put Newt's past marital problems in their proper perspective when he said "there is forgiveness for those who seek God and I believe in the power of redemption."