Iowa wild card: Christian conservatives

Image from Washingtonpost.com

With two weeks to go until the Jan. 3 Iowa Caucus, the great unknown in that race continues to be who evangelical Republicans will get behind. According to Boston.com, the majority of them are still undecided and torn between Ron Paul (TX), Michele Bachmann (MN) and Rick Santorum (PA).
The article did a good job of barely mentioning Rick Perry (TX), who's spending these final weeks before the Caucus on a bus tour of the state, focusing on these very voters. The media has completely written him off. That may be a mistake. If he gets in there and starts connecting with values voters on the ground, as a fellow Christian and governor, he may appeal to them far more than Paul, Bachmann and Santorum combined. He speaks their language on faith, foreign policy and limited government, has a record of executive leadership and honestly, he's not a woman (with this crowd, it does matter).
At this point every one's envisioning and girding themselves for a Paul upset in Iowa. For good reason. He's got a lock on the ground game and the most passionate supporters. At the same time, all the big guns are blazing away at Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich for epic flip-floppery and corruption, destroying voters' trust in them and cancelling each other out.
If evangelicals decide at the last minute that Paul is too off his nut on foreign policy and Bachmann and Santorum are just too weak, they could easily coalesce around the candidate that most comprehensively appeals to their vision of a leader - that male, conservative Christian, Southern governor. At this point, a win for Perry in Iowa isn't just possible, it would be the biggest upset of all.

Romney snags endorsement from the Des Moines Register

Photo by Darren McCollester/Getty Images North America

I don't know what's more exciting, Christine "I'm not a witch" O'Donnell's endorsement of Mitt Romney or the one he just got from Iowa's largest newspaper, the Des Moines Register. The paper acknowledges it didn't endorse Romney in 2008, but that was then and this is now. Now it's all about his "sobriety, wisdom and judgement." This year it's "a different field" (read: full of pandering psychos) and he's matured as a candidate. The paper tries weakly to explain away his myriad flip-flops by claiming he's evolved politically - and besides, they all do it! In closing ranks with the establishment, they argue Newt Gingrich is an alienating, unelectable bomb thrower and Ron Paul would bring about "economic chaos and isolationism." While they may be right about Gingrich and Paul, it's still fun to watch the establishment squirm over the possibility of Dr. No taking Iowa. It would be the right-leaning version of  OWS, occupying the Iowa Caucuses. There would be no greater discombobulation. And if that happens, expect the MSM to go into collective hyperdrive to (a.) diminish the Iowa victory by claiming the Caucuses no longer matter and (b.) by going "Dean Scream" on Paul to shut down his momentum. Here's the memo to come: He can't win! He can't win! He can't win! Got it?

From the So What? dept.: SC gov. Nikki Haley endorses Romney

South Carolina governor Nikki Haley (R) has endorsed Mitt Romney for the GOP nomination. My first thought when I heard that was, really? How politically dumb can she be? I agree with this writer at TPM, who suggests the endorsement won't do much for Romney in the Palmetto primary. Haley isn't exactly popular down yonder these days, even among Republicans. And SC conservatives just do not like or trust Romney, so it's a mistake to think her endorsement will help him. Maybe Haley's angling for the VP spot with Romney?

Rolling Romney $tyle

Image from The Washington Post

The colors are coming home: US military officially ends war in Iraq

President Barack Obama can cross off the list his greatest campaign promise - to end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home. Nine years after the invasion and ouster of Saddam Hussein, and with the loss of 4,500 of our service members, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta took part in a ceremony packing up the flag U.S. forces fought under.

NDAA (indefinite detention bill) no longer faces veto threat from White House

The White House has withdrawn its veto threat of the National Defense Authorization Act which states the U.S.A. is a battlefield (WOT) and okays the detainment and indefinite detention of U.S. citizens identified as terrorists or terrorist sympathizers. The White House rescinded the veto threat after changes were made to the controversial provision. Those changes take the power of who to detain away from the Department of Defense and gives the authority to the president. Our founding fathers would be rolling in their graves if they knew just how much of our rights and freedoms we've given away since 9-11. As Ben Franklin said, "He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.” 

Doing delegate math with Mittens!

Here's your word problem for the day: Based on the delegate math, his performance in 2008 and the cosmic variable unknown, can Mitt Romney overcome a possibly hostile early primary schedule to win the GOP nomination?

Is Mittens the Hillary Clinton of 2012?

From an interview with Ben Smith and Maggie Haberman at Politico:

"When the (Des Moines register poll) came out showing Romney in third I actually had a shot of PTSD,” said one former Clinton adviser. “Four years ago, (the) biggest factor was opposition to Bush - and Obama skillfully managed to paint Hillary as timid on Bush … Now (the) biggest thing is hatred of Obama, and Gingrich … makes Romney seem timid. Or he seems it himself. So that’s why Romney is in the box of being third in Iowa. And counting on a New Hampshire firewall that is shrinking away.”

Newt/Romney a lock on Iowa? Don't bet on it

Image: http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/09/08/am-the-republican-debate-social-security-and-minimum-wage/

As we get closer to the Iowa Caucuses Jan. 3, most folks are laser-focused on the slug fest that is Newt/Romney. I blame the political chatteratti for that. They conveniently forget there are a few other contenders in the race. The race could go down as predicted by most polls, showing Mitt Romney's support crashing and Newt Gingrich's surging from Iowa to Florida. But then again, being the strange and volatile season it is, other weirdness could ensue.
Take Ron Paul. His rising poll numbers in Iowa now have him in second place. His base is probably the most passionate and his ground operation is well-organized and strong. He's also been making a lot of noise with a great TV ad campaign that appeals to young voters and skeptics of Newt/Romney. Dr. No may be one of the oldest guys to ever run, but the kids love him. He shouldn't be underestimated in Iowa.
Then there's Rick Perry. Most everyone in the media has written him off because of his gaffes and space-outs. Sure, that dopey behavior puts off the elites and freaks out a lot of regular folks who still watch the news. But in Iowa, and especially South Carolina, those aren't exactly the voters Rick Perry is gunning for. Unlike Romney and Gingrich, his primary focus from now until Jan. 3 will be winning over the Hawkeye state's Christian conservatives. They are legion. If they decide they can't trust Romney and that Gingrich is too foul, Perry seems far more likely to be their candidate. And if he takes Iowa, he probably takes SC, too.
Then there's Jon Huntsman and New Hampshire. He's put all of his eggs into that crazy, independent basket. Who can really know which way Granite state voters will go? Not even the Magic 8-Ball has an answer for that one.
I know this much, if Paul or Perry pulls an upset in Iowa and Huntsman comes in first or second in New Hampshire, it will throw the race and entire media narrative into a realm of political weirdness we have not witnessed in decades. If political junkies thought the race between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in 2008 was epic, they could be in for yet another nominating spectacle for the ages if the battle goes down to a brokered convention in Tampa.
I'm tempted to bet 10 Large Perry winds up with the nomination.

President Obama trailing GOP front runners?

I'm not buying the numbers being offered in a new round of USA Today/Gallup polls.They surveyed registered voters across 12 battleground states: Romney 48 - Obama 43; and Gingrich 48 - Obama 45. I'll bet you $10,000 they surveyed a bunch of older voters on land lines, leaving out the youthful multitude of voters who use cell phones. I'd love to see those numbers.

House, Senate agree on defense bill authorizing indefinite detentions of U.S. citizens

Donna Cassata at The Huffington Post reports: House and Senate negotiators late Monday agreed to a sweeping $662 billion defense bill that requires military custody for terrorism suspects linked to al-Qaida, including those captured within the U.S., and indefinite detention without trial for some suspects.
The big question now is whether President Barack Obama will follow through on his threat to veto it.

Savage offers Gingrich $1 Million to drop out of GOP race

Image: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2011/03/gingrich-prepares-to-make-his-move.html

Conservative radio host Michael Savage has offered "fat, old, white" Newt Gingrich, current GOP front runner, $1 million to drop his candidacy "for the sake of the nation." At his web site, Savage lists the reasons why he opposes Gingrich and mentions terms to the agreement. Gingrich has 72 hours to accept.

Taibbi discusses the declaration of Battlefield U.S.A.

The elites are feeling the heat from Occupy Wall Street and are striking back using their useful idiots in congress. If the National Defense Authorization Act passes (including the provision declaring the U.S.A. a battlefield), any U.S. citizen deemed by the government to be a terrorist or terrorist sympathizer could be detained indefinitely by the U.S. military. That means possibly anyone involved in domestic protest (OWS, Tea Party). All it would take to go after protesters is for an act of domestic violence to occur and be pinned on whatever movement it chose. Protesters could be accused of being in collusion with "associated forces." Make no mistake, this legislation has little to do with terrorists, but a lot to do with  crushing dissent.

House bill could make diplomacy with Iran illegal

The Orwellian/NeoCon nonsense continues. Reps. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) and Pete Stark (D-CA) warned colleagues in a letter that the Iran Threat Reduction Act (H.R. 1905), expected to pass this week, would make it illegal for U.S. officials to negotiate with Iranian officials in certain cases. In Nov., Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) also warned that "the sanctions against Iran mandated by this legislation are definite steps toward a US attack on Iran."

NDAA: Handing our nation's enemies the biggest victory ever

According to a new article in The Huffington Post:

A measure that Congress will likely pass this week allowing indefinite detentions of Americans by the U.S. military will mark a significant loss in the war on terrorism, says a former admiral who ran the Navy legal system.

The National Defense Authorization Act, passed by the Senate just over a week ago after a heated debate, includes a provision that requires the military to hold foreign-born terrorism suspects, and also lets the military grab U.S. citizens for indefinite detention.

The House and Senate are expected to release the final legislation as soon as late Monday, and in spite of a personal lobbying effort by President Obama, it is expected to include the controversial language.

A growing list of current and former government officials and national security experts oppose this measure. One of them is Adm. John Hutson, Judge Advocate General of the Navy from 1997 to 2000 and dean emeritus of the University of New Hampshire School of Law. The way Hutson sees it, the United States chipping away at one of its fundamental principles of civilian law enforcement is a win for terrorists.

"The enemy is just laughing over this, because they will have gotten another victory," Hutson told The Huffington Post. "There'll be one more victory. There won't be any bloodshed or immediate bloodshed, there's not a big explosion, except in a metaphorical sense, but it is a victory nonetheless for the enemy. And it's a self-inflicted wound."

Romney jabs at Gingrich, gets punched right back

Earlier today, a desperate Mitt Romney challenged Newt Gingrich to return the money he received from consulting with Fannie and Freddie.
Newt's reply: "I would just say: if Governor Romney would like to give back all the money he's earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over his years at Bain, then I would be glad to then listen to him. And I will bet you $10, not $10,000, that he won't take the offer."
Oh, snap!

Andrew Sullivan sums up tonight's debate quick-like

"10.54 pm. Tapper is playing up the $10,000 Romney bet - and I suspect he's right to. It leapt out at me, along with the "Newt Romney" line from Bachmann. Other than that, Newt wins; Romney loses; Paul rises. Have yourself a shot. I sure will."
A few thoughts of my own...
I predict Romney's glib $10k bet offer to Perry will be the equivalent of George H.W. Bush's epic space-out on the price of a gallon of milk. We all remember how that turned out. Just to drive that point home, Jon Huntsman, who was MIA tonight, bought www.10KBet.com. Can't wait to see what they do with that.
Romney went into this race desperately needing to neutralize Newt Gingrich's new front runner status. Instead, he received a knock-out blow from Gingrich at the very beginning when the former House Speaker reminded voters that Romney would've been a career politician if only he could've gotten elected.
Ron Paul did well and got much applause, but as usual, the talking heads refused to acknowledge it. The political press is mind-numbingly predictable. He's polling in second place right now in Iowa. I'd pay good money to see the look on the faces of a dumbstruck intelligentsia if Dr. No actually pulls a Huckabee and wins the Iowa Caucus.
Rick Perry did better than expected tonight. He gave good, heartfelt answers to two important questions re: character (if you lie to your spouse, who won't you lie to?) and where he came from (modest beginnings). As doofy as he is, I've been saying that it's foolish to count him out just yet. With an upcoming Iowa bus tour, he could still win the coveted Christian vote. As for Bachmann and Santorum, their role tonight was useful, but I doubt it'll do them any good.

ABC News-Iowa GOP debate: Will the real front-runner please stand up?

With the fur now flying between the Romney, Gingrich and Paul campaigns, tonight's ABC News,Yahoo News, WOI-TV, Des Moines Register, Iowa Republican Party debate should be very entertaining. With the Iowa Caucus just weeks away, the stakes are higher than ever.
Questions to ponder while we wait for the fun to begin... will there be an open bar? Will a desperate Mittens locate his cajones and go after Newt face-to-face for screwing up his front-runner status by reminding everyone about his voluminous record of ethics violations and personal scandals? Will Newt drop the "I'm above it" act and go medieval on Mittens by rubbing his flip-floppery in his face like a dog's nose in poo? Will they both make each other look so petty and stupid that Ron Paul actually gains his opening to win the Caucus? (He is right up there with them in the polls.) What kind of Bush-league buffoonery will Rick Perry bring tonight? Will Jon Huntsman's rich daddy buy him some air time? And, will anyone notice those other two clowns still hanging around?
Seriously, I can only hope moderators Diane Sawyer and George Stephanopoulos give Gingrich a good grilling over his recent comments regarding his disdain for child labor laws and saying that Palestinians are an invented people. I also hope she questions Mittens over why, as outgoing MA governor, he and his staff bought all those hard drives and scrubbed whatever records they could, as well as making him defend his record of ever-shifting positions. It would also be nice to hear Paul questioned over what he would do as president in his first 100 days in office, should he be nominated and beat President Barack Obama. I know, I know... it'll never happen. I'd still love to hear what Dr. No's big plan would be, just the same.
The debate is being held on the campus of Drake University in Des Moines and starts at 9 p.m. Eastern/8 p.m. Central. To watch, tune into ABC TV or watch the live-stream at ABCNews.com, Yahoo.com, MyABC5.com or DesMoinesRegister.com.

Mother Jones: 13 reasons Newt will not be the GOP nominee

In a recent column, conservative big-thought guy George Will described Newt Gingrich as unstable as water. That quote he plucked from Genesis nails it. Unfortunately for the rest of the Republican field (most notably Mittens), GOP primary voters haven't gotten the memo. In a recent article, Mother Jones gives readers a list of 13 reasons Gingrich will never be the GOP nominee. The list is devastating; but the jury's out on whether it will matter to Republican voters this go 'round. The harder the conservative intelligentsia goes after the former House Speaker, the higher his poll numbers rise. It's truly baffling.
As mercurial as this nominating contest has been, there's just no divining who will win the nomination. However, the Magic 8-Ball does say there's no way Gingrich, an epically flawed candidate can beat President Barack Obama in the general election.