2012 republican presidential nominee III: can romney get santorum out of his hair?

And the simple answer from historians: none so blind as those who will not see.

http://www.ocrpl.org/?p=103

Santorum on whether Obama is a "sincere, liberal Christian":

part of his response (I think this is from 2008)

But is there such thing as a sincere liberal Christian, which says that we basically take this document and re-write it ourselves? Is that really Christian? That’s a bigger question for me. And the answer is, no, it’s not. I don’t think there is such a thing. To take what is plainly written and say that I don’t agree with that, therefore, I don’t have to pay attention to it, means you’re not what you say you are. You’re a liberal something, but you’re not a Christian. That’s sort of how I look at it.

but Santorum's a filthy papist, why should we listen to him

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2012_02/more_on_santorums_religious_an035555.php#

santorum better be sporting ashes during the debate tonight

the existence of articles bashing santorum should be proof that the media isn't liberal

My guess is that most of tonight's debate will be everyone going after Santorum over all the wingnut stuff he's been saying the past week or two. Not that he doesn't deserve it, but I'd much rather it be Santorum going after Romney over all the phony stuff he's been saying lately--the auto bailout, "severely" conservative, I love trees, etc., etc. Probably nobody'll go near the first one, though, because that would be admitting the bailout worked.

i love how the implication of his judgment there is that pretty much no protestants are christians. since when are catholics 'bible-believing' anyway??

QUESTION: You haven’t spoken so much about McCain’s religious condition. Could you shed some light on McCain’s religious views?

ANSWER: Yeah. I don’t think he has any.

I really need to stop reading anything about this guy.

no ashes

why does ricky hate jesus

what is even going on, this feels out of control

Gingrich has been sucking up to Romney all night--he wants Santorum out.

Highlights so far: 1) Romney (mis)quotes George Costanza--is there anyone less George-like than Romney? 2) First questioner is Gilbert from Gilbert; 3) Gingrich casually mentions some task force he wants to get going that will be headed up by Rick Perry. Well played, Newt.

I thought Santorum was much better during that Romneycare skirmish. Awkward at first in that he forced it into the conversation, but his Dukakis line was great; Romney was so slimy in throwing in Arlen Specter, and Santorum's explanation was politically lucid.

some task force he wants to get going that will be headed up by Rick Perry

charged w/ remembering which cabinet seats perry wants to eliminate?

Romney's answer to the final question (what's the biggest misconception about you?) was awful. Straightforward question, Paul and Gingrich basically addressed it, and it was the perfect time for him to self-effacingly address the idea that he's a little lacking in spontaneity. He instead launches into programmatic drivel, and when John King breaks in to redirect him, he gets snippy: "You get to ask the questions you want, I get to give the answers I want." Made me cringe. (Unfortunately, Santorum followed by doing the exact same thing.)

Everyone on CNN is saying Romney was strong tonight and Santorum wasn't. Disagree with at least the first half of that. What is obvious is that the crowd was bussed in by Romney.

intrade seems to have given him a bump

@pattonoswalt "Big-gest mis-con-cep-tion? Define mis-con-cep-tion. Arming laser eyes. ARMING LASER EYES!" -- Mitt Romney #tweetthepress
22 minutes ago

Probably a Rorschach test as to how you felt about Romney in the first place. He was constantly reminding me of why I find him creepier all the time. And I genuinely liked Santorum's explanation of why he endorsed Arlen Specter in 2004, something he got booed for.

Nice line from Dave Wiegel: "(Paul) reiterates his ad's claim that Rick Santorum is 'a fake.' Santorum tugs his sleeve and says 'I'm real!' There is no cut to Romney, as he processes what it might mean to be real."

Something else I hated about Romney tonight: throwing Santorum's 2008 endorsement of Romney back in his face. Probably politically smart, but slimy. I mean, Romney knows how this works--he endorsed McCain in 2008 after they spent months despising each other, now McCain endorses him, etc., etc. You endorse whoever's politically expedient at the moment. And then they're forgotten about.

Maybe, but Santorum's whole deal is toeing a very purist line. He's the driven snow, he brooks no compromise, right's right & wrong's wrong and he's the last man willing to tell the truth, etc. So Romney's not so slimy to sort of expose that that's a pose on Santorum's part, which it really is; part of what makes him a fascinating figure is how appealing that pose is to him, how much he wants to strike it - to my mind in a way that's deeper than "maybe this will help me win."

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17ecdc3drm9lpjpg/original.jpg

http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/intel/2012/01/30/30_romney1.o.jpg/a_560x375.jpg

snacks!

(xxpost) But it was Santorum who argued for process and compromise tonight--in explaining earmarks, in explaining his endorsement of Specter, in explaining his support of No Child Left Behind, etc. I'm not at all supporting his many creepy views. And I admit that I want him to do well because it hurts Romney. But to me, he comes across as much more honest than Romney.

oh god that photo. it's like mitt & co. are about to stage an intervention where they grab you and pin you down when you try to run, but for now they're maintaining this thin pretense of "hello there, would you like some snacks?"

and you reach for the sunchips but his penis is inside the bag.

sorry. shouldn't have hit submit there.

disagree?

penisunchips

Totally not what a robot would do, Thermo.

http://exclamationmark.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/kanephonetop.JPG

...but his penis is inside the bag!

I would not be smiling that much if someone was making me serve my severed penis in a Sun Chips bag to a nervous photographer

Cool Ranch Doritos might be a different story

Oh KLo

If she were a really good investigative journalist, she would have called up Linda Blair, too.

She was going to call Max Von Sydow but she saw his latest film and thought he was now mute.

SNL joke about Romney being the bad guy in every blaxploitation film ever otm

it's true! there was another line, not on SNL, about how rick perry had the "exaggerated good looks of a soap opera villain" that was otm as well

What was the Costanza misquote?

letterman had a classic series of romney zings in 2008

Ha, didn't know Jason Alexander tweeted a response.

iirc he yelled "We're out of Quik!" instead of "We're out of Bosco!"

http://gawker.com/353939/rip-david-lettermans-mitt-romney-looks-like-jokes

William Peter Blatty, ladies and gentlemen:

When every culture in every part of the world from the beginning of history has entertained a belief in the likelihood that there is a Very, Very Bad Guy out there who “destroys the work of the Creator,” my tendency is to believe that where there is quite that much smoke there is probably fire — if you get my drift. To doubt the possibility of such a being out of hand is to regard Christ and/or the evangelists as either maniacs, liars, or very, very, very mistaken. As for Santorum’s outspokenness on the subject, I far prefer a man who has a position and lets us know what it is as opposed to Addison and Steele’s Sir Roger de Coverley whose answer to any difficult question put to him was always, “There is much to be said on both sides.” Yes, there is, but who is to say that Santorum’s side is the one that is incorrect?

"Mitt looks like a former Tarzan"

"he looks like the guy that would approve your check at a supermarket"

"Mitt Romney looks like the American president in a Canadian movie."

is pretty accurate

Yes, there is, but who is to say that Santorum’s side is the one that is incorrect?

*Raises hand*

Cathololics

When every culture in every part of the world from the beginning of history has entertained a belief in the likelihood that there is a Very, Very Bad Guy out there who “destroys the work of the Creator

Where did you get your comparative religion degree, a Bazooka chewing gum wrapper?

yeah that's sort of startling in its wrongness. Conceptualization of satan was a fairly unusual theological development

“destroys the work of the Creator

Here is the root of this problem. The Very Bad Guy is the Creator himself, you imbecile. And if you think Very Bad Guy is something outside of your Creator then your Creator sort of has limits and isn't exactly all-powerful now, is he?