2012 republican presidential nominee IV: NEEDS MORE BOOING

George Will and Newt Gingrich are proof that you can get people to think you're smart through the sheer force of persona.

The right audience doesn't hurt either.

I like Rick Nielsen too. I guess bow ties have a fundamentally overpowering allure for me.

― clemenza, Sunday, March 4, 2012 8:19 PM Bookmark

Tucker Carlson.

Louis Farrakhan

http://freddiebell.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/louis_farrakhan.jpg?w=468

Pee-Wee Herman:

http://laughingsquid.com/wp-content/uploads/pee-wee-herman-20090810-174119.jpg

Me, Halloween 1998:

http://phildellio.tripod.com/surrender.jpg

What can I say? Our little group has always been, and always will until the end.

Frum lets'er rip.

Frum and Will are saying almost exactly the same thing. Why is Will worthy of derision, while Frum is "letting it rip"?

Because one is George Will and the other is David Frum

The Seventh Inning Stretch of Evil.

I like David Frum fine--he's been great the last couple of years--but I don't get that. If they're making the same point, and Will's doing it in a way that's funny, then kudos to both.

imo the worst part is the rest of the abc panel giggling at the 'salad fork' joke.

Rush attempts to explain himself.

"Let's'er rip" is one of my oft-used phrases for links, used sarcastically or sincerely.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=se2jXRJJs4Y

They thought it was funny, so they laughed. I laughed too. It was a good line. I wasn't thinking about anything Will might have written about Walter Mondale in 1984.

imo the worst part is the rest of the abc panel giggling at the 'salad fork' joke.

and reinforced the impression that the Beltway punditocracy is a merit-based circle jerk (educated people, see, know the difference between forks).

Those two words were inappropriate, uncalled for, and actually distracted from the point I was trying to make

oh fuck you

If you find Will funny, as I do sometimes, I think that's part and parcel of why you find him funny--his snobbish and carefully calculated detachment from the world. I just don't see it as anything worth getting upset about.

I admit: I own two of his collections.

by the way, if you think I'm mocking you for finding Will's remark funny, that's not at all my intention. He's made me laugh too. I used his remark as an excuse to write about how repugnant Will is generally.

I'm going to the mat for him. He's a great man, and he should be added to Mount Rushmore.

oh god 'legal insurrection'

oh god #IAmAndrewBreitbart and #RallyForRush

If Frum truly believes that Limbaugh's three-day outburst was "the bottom of the barrel of shock talk", then either he has an exalted idea of human self- restraint or else no idea of the depths to which humans are willing to descend .

"...of shock talk"

For bottom of the barrel commentary, go for this instead. All the man's tics on display: the equivocation, condescension.

Rush: "Only the leftists try to use extortion, pressure, threats to silence opposing voices…."

Goldberg reminds me of that Lincoln quote about packing the most words into the fewest ideas.

Chris Wallace on Fox showed Santorum the video clip of Obama making the case for all kinds of further education and training, not just 4 year colleges...

Santorum acknowledged that he might have made a mistake.

"Look, maybe I've read some comments where at least it was characterized that the president said we should go to four-year colleges," he said. "If I was in error, you said you haven't found that, I certainly read that… if it was an error, I agree with the president that we should have options for a variety of training."

Santorum's defensive answers to Wallace re Catholicism and birth control, and his lack of charity donations are uh, entertaining as well

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/04/rick-santorum-fix-news-birth-control_n_1319393.html

http://images.politico.com/global/2012/03/aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.jpg

^^^ Real life LOL!

that's really great

omg

cheap and funny

kind of a weird filename tho

That cover's great...up there with the secret lives of Obama/Michelle cover from 2008.

jonathan bernstein thinks we should lock this thread

http://plainblogaboutpolitics.blogspot.com/2012/03/endorsements-party-actors-and-2012.html

It sure seems to me that events to date have been all about Mitt Romney wrapping up a very open nomination quickly and fairly easily. Not as easily as George W. Bush did in 2000 (when he had a much better record of endorsements). But to me, Romney's nomination is quite comparable to the nominations of Kerry in 2004, Dole in 1996, and Dukakis in 1988, and a lot more certain a lot earlier than that of McCain last time around. That seems to very much fit a model in which party actors compete and coordinate on nominations and voters in primaries and caucuses ratify it, rather than a model in which candidates compete in a weak party environment and voters in primaries and caucuses determine the nomination. Yes, there's been momentum and press effects and other stuff that has produced a few oddball primary and caucus results, but none of that has really, as far as I can see, done as much to shape the contest as has decisions by party actors. In particular, the party's apparent lack of interest in Rick Santorum, seen through a lack of high-profile endorsements after Iowa and again after Colorado and Minnesota, appear to have been far more predictive than Santorum's strong showing in those states.

No one believes -- and I certainly don't believe -- that a "party decides" view of the nomination process rules out stray candidates winning the occasional primary or caucus. What matters is the nomination. And it sure looks to me as if the nomination has been over for a long time, exactly as those of us who push this view would have expected given most indications of party actor support.

Initiate lockdown.

Romney's 2009 USA Today op-ed in which he encouraged Obama to pass something very much like the individual mandate that he now disowns:

Our experience also demonstrates that getting every citizen insured doesn't have to break the bank. First, we established incentives for those who were uninsured to buy insurance. Using tax penalties, as we did, or tax credits, as others have proposed, encourages "free riders" to take responsibility for themselves rather than pass their medical costs on to others. This doesn't cost the government a single dollar.

http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20090730/column30_st.art.htm

it makes absolutely no sense to compare this to kerry 2004. there's a big difference between 'everybody else lost' and 'romney won' even though the end result is the same.

I want to frame that New Yorker cover.

Best cover since the Blitt terrorist fistbump.

But Norquist has forgiven Romney for the 2009 "mandate" op-ed:

Anti-tax crusader Grover Norquist said Monday that Mitt Romney made a "mistake" in advocating the individual mandate as part of the president's healthcare reform law, but that he was encouraged that the Republican front-runner had shifted "in favor of liberty" and now opposes the requirement.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/214077-norquist-romney-made-a-mistake-in-pushing-individual-mandate

xps: i think the point is to put this primary contest well within recent historical norms, and mark out the 08 republican primary as a real outlier

all polling showing romneys gonna deliver the knockout punch 2moro :/

Jonathon Bernstein is almost certainly correct that the anti-Mitt forces aren't organized enough to stop his getting the nomination, and the nomination is all that matters in the end. What is fascinating to me is the visceral strength of the anti-Mitt emotions among Republicans, and the fact that Mitt (I think) has yet to crack 50% of the vote anywhere, including Michigan. To me, this smells like a sizable chunk of the Republican base sitting on its hands in the general election.

I think the problem is the gop today can't operate as a 'party' in the same manner as previous elections. there was something different about this election - the 15-different frontrunners pattern was abnormal. romney didn't end up w/ this because of party support - he's still not got that much considering how far into the game we are. he ended up w/ this because none of the other candidates were remotely credible as national figures. that is also not normal.

idk. they (and lots of LOTS of white moderates) really, really hate this Obama dude.

xpost

but it is probably the new normal. xp

all polling showing romneys gonna deliver the knockout punch 2moro :/

the gaggle of newt lovers in georgia is really bummed about this btw

If Newt edges Mitt (I love these names, btw) in Georgia, then Newt'll announce himself as still viable and continue his crusade for Newtthink.

Seriously disappointed they could not be bothered to stage a reunion of Santorum.jpg, a la the Get Back cover.

dc otm

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs287.snc4/40689_10150247505400082_542160081_14159749_3713901_n.jpg

I just watched that movie....

netflix amirite

yep

God, I think this motif needs its own thread.

http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/theticket/clinton-drinking-afp.jpg

pplains has turned this into the 2008 Hillary: Needs More Kahlua thread...which is a lot more interesting than what's happening with that other lot.

lol

In more mundane news Romney filed for an extension on doing his taxes, and there is older video of Romney saying poor Moms should experience the dignity of work (outside the home) if they want to get government benefits

new thread dudes

LOCK

No need for Part Five, the Mittening, right? This just melds into the GE thread?

Yup.