RedState Morning Briefing February 2, 2012 Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge. 1. Danger Will Robinson . . . or Ann Coulter 2. Give Me Your Money in the Name of Jesus 3. Senate Porkers Defeat Earmark Ban 4. A Former Union Thug’s Take On Right-to-Work: What’s Right & What’s Not… 5. Horserace for February 2, 2012 ———————————————————————- 1. Danger Will Robinson . . . or Ann Coulter This week is a career milestone for me. I appear in Time magazine writing about the state of the conservative movement. As a kid living overseas, my American history teacher subscribed us all to Time and U.S. News and World Report. So it is kind of cool to be in an issue of, between the two, the still printed survivor. The point I try to make is that the conservative movement is going through a necessary transition after the Bush years. You can read the whole thing here but a really relevant part is here: “The internecine fights we are witnessing are about a conservative movement starting to separate itself again from Republican Party. Unfortunately, neither of the front runners have legitimate conservative integrity to claim the banner of conservative movement leader, but they will both try. Romney will hold the banner for conservatives within the GOP and Gingrich will hold the banner of the traditional alliance of conservatives with the GOP.” I see this playing out in, of all things, my friend Ann Coulter’s column defending Romneycare . Mark Levin offers the definitive rebuttal, which you can listen to here , but there is a point that too few are making that needs to be made. It relates to the dangers associated with supporting Mitt Romney and Ann Coulter’s column is exhibit A on why supporting Romney portends disaster for the conservative movement. Please click here for the rest of the post. 2. Give Me Your Money in the Name of Jesus Yesterday, in the middle of his campaign National Prayer Breakfast speech, President Obama delighted those of us who love irony by quoting C.S. Lewis. It was an interesting moment in a speech that put forth the notion that taxing the wealthy is right in line with the teachings of Jesus. I mean, Jesus did hang out with tax collectors, right? The idea that government welfare is somehow the fulfillment of Jesus’ teaching on charity is a common misconception that many people make, Christians included, and it’s the main reason that liberals believe conservatives are Christian hypocrites. Perhaps if the president visited church more often than only during campaign seasons, he might not be so confused. See, not only do we spend time praising God in church, we also gain insight from our pastors who have surely spent more time in the word of God than we have. While Obama may have been correct in saying that government mandated, shared responsibility is equal to the Islamic belief that those who’ve been blessed have an obligation to use those blessings to help others, he is incorrect to group in Jesus’ teaching, “for unto whom much is given, much shall be required.” Aside from the fact that Jesus was discussing requirements from God, not the government, he was actually teaching his disciples that they were stewards of God’s gift of Revelation. Their requirement was to spread the good news of Jesus Christ. It’s the crux of Christianity that Obama seems to miss. Jesus came because we are imperfect. We could never fulfill all the requirements that the pharisees loved to lord over the people. Jesus’ coming ended the rule of law and the began the acceptance that our only way to God was through Him. Yes, Jesus very much emphasized the importance of giving to the poor, but as a reaction in joy to what we’ve been given; not because of a law. Giving out of obligation is not truly giving, it’s merely following the rules. Just ask anyone who’s ever written a check to pay their taxes, I doubt you’d find them excited. The Bible also teaches that everything we have, including money, belongs to God. We are called to be good stewards with His money. The government is the epitome of mismanaging money. If you truly want to help the poor, you should probably seek out charities; but that would require a bit of work on the part of the giver and a great many find it easier to just let the government run every aspect of their lives. So it is that welfare money ends up spitting out of strip club ATMs, and those same people who paid their charity to the government wonder why government hasn’t solved the issue. Perhaps they should ask the 27 Democrats who voted against stopping welfare checks from being used at strip clubs, casinos and liquor stores. Please click here for the rest of the post. 3. Senate Porkers Defeat Earmark Ban Senators Pat Toomey (R-PA) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) learned a valuable lession today about member’s desire to go back to the practice of earmarking pet projects. Toomey and McCaskill offered an Amendment to the STOCK Act that would have created a new Senate point of order against earmarks in bills. They were met with bipartisan opposition to this common sense idea. Please click here for the rest of the post. 4. A Former Union Thug’s Take On Right-to-Work: What’s Right & What’s Not… Having spent nearly a decade as a former union representative and activist (aka “union thug”) in a Right-to-Work state, it has been interesting to discuss and watch the activities and debates over the Right-to-Work battles occuring within the various states. Having been on both sides of the labor-management equation, it’s easy to see the two sides of the coin—the pluses and the minuses—that come into play with Right to Work legislation. Please click here for the rest of the post. 5. Horserace for February 2, 2012 There are storm clouds on the horizon. A day after Mitt Romney’s massive win in Florida he opened his mouth and promptly told conservatives he was incapable of articulating conservatism. Then Newt Gingrich found a bright line rule in the Republican rules that clearly and precisely states that all delegates awarded before April 1, 2012, must be proportional. There goes giving Romney all fifty delegates from Florida despite what Florida’s GOP Chairman says. Then National Review and other Romney supporters , taking a bit of comfort in his secure win in Florida, decided they could finally express some buyers remorse, or at least now stop zealously defending him and criticize him some. Then people really examined the exit polls in Florida. What they found was that turnout fell from 2008. But in counties where turn out was up, Newt Gingrich won. Where turnout from 2008 was down, Romney won. This pattern followed South Carolina. The base remains unexcited about Romney and his comments yesterday about the poor and the social safety net keep the base from getting excited. What should have been Mitt Romney heading into February securing his nomination now becomes an effort to stave off a rear guard action to pick him off. Gingrich and Santorum now have the ammunition they need to keep the Great Coalescing from happening. What should have been a clear path to the nomination is suddenly in jeopardy. We’ll get into it all in the Horserace. Please click here for the rest of the post.
See the original post:
Morning Briefing for February 3, 2012
There are storm clouds on the horizon. A day after Mitt Romney’s massive win in Florida he opened his mouth and promptly told conservatives he was incapable of articulating conservatism. Then Newt Gingrich found a bright line rule in the Republican rules that clearly and precisely states that all delegates awarded before April 1, 2012, must be proportional. There goes giving Romney all fifty delegates from Florida despite what Florida’s GOP Chairman says. Then National Review and other Romney supporters , taking a bit of comfort in his secure win in Florida, decided they could finally express some buyers remorse, or at least now stop zealously defending him and criticize him some. Then people really examined the exit polls in Florida. What they found was that turnout fell from 2008. But in counties where turn out was up, Newt Gingrich won. Where turnout from 2008 was down, Romney won. This pattern followed South Carolina. The base remains unexcited about Romney and his comments yesterday about the poor and the social safety net keep the base from getting excited. What should have been Mitt Romney heading into February securing his nomination now becomes an effort to stave off a rear guard action to pick him off. Gingrich and Santorum now have the ammunition they need to keep the Great Coalescing from happening. What should have been a clear path to the nomination is suddenly in jeopardy. We’ll get into it all in the Horserace. Newt Gingrich You would not know it, but Gingrich has put his campaign through a bit of a shake up in order to instill more discipline within the campaign and hopefully within himself. His erratic messaging and attacks hurt him in Florida. He knows it. The campaign knows that Newt Gingrich’s debate strategy — naps and quiet time — I AM NOT JOKING — will no longer serve him. The Romney camp sought to destroy the myth of Gingrich the Great Debater and largely succeeded in Florida. Gingrich has much to do. He needs more focus, more message discipline, and more delegates. The RNC rule on proportional delegates will help him. Like Florida, Arizona had intended a winner take all primary, but that is not to be. And lucky for Gingrich, Mitt Romney’s comments on the poor and the conservative outcry over them will give Gingrich an issue with which he can focus on jobs, the economy, and Mitt Romney. If Gingrich is serious about staying in till the convention, he could deny Romney a first ballot win and spare the base from the man they don’t like, even if Newt himself cannot get the nomination. He is more of a long shot today than he was a day before Florida, but he can still be the nominee. Ron Paul The spectacular disaster of the Ron Paul campaign has been one of the least told stories on the campaign trail. The media is officially ignoring Ron Paul because they don’t want to deal with the crazy that will come out if they even deal with Ron Paul objectively. He came in third in Iowa. He came in second in New Hampshire. He came in fourth in South Carolina. He came in fourth in Florida. Yes, he may currently lead Santorum in delegates, but consistently coming in behind the winner does not help him. He has not won a single state. He is the only candidate left standing to not win a state. He hopes that Nevada will be that state. Caucuses are notoriously hard to poll, but the polls show he won’t come in first. It is Ron Paul’s best shot at a first place win. If he does not come in first in Nevada, his only other hope is to go to a brokered convention. That becomes harder and harder for him as we get to winner take all states if he can’t win at least one now. Ron Paul will not be the nominee. But might Gingrich and Santorum ally with Paul in Virginia and throw their support to him? It would bolster Paul there, but more importantly it would hurt Mitt Romney badly. Santorum and Gingrich are not on the ballot there. Mitt Romney Had Mitt Romney not gone on Soledad O’Brien’s show and said what he said, he would be fully secure in his nomination. He has put himself in jeopardy. He gives Santorum and Gingrich wiggle room to keep playing. I have to agree with Jamie Dupree of Cox Media Group’s Washington Bureau. Mitt Romney is too message disciplined for something like this to happen accidentally. There had to be campaign preparation for this. There had to be campaign strategy behind the statement. My only guess is that, like Gingrich, Romney is exhausted from three weeks of grueling campaigns. He didn’t get the talking points out right. He flubbed. But to go on CNN and say what he said and then reiterate it later with a surrogate saying Romney won’t change policies for the poor had to be a planned strategy. The messaging had to have gotten screwed up though. That, or the Romney camp really is out of touch. This is still Mitt Romney’s race to win or lose. The next few states favor him. But he just gave powerful ammunition to Gingrich and Santorum. How those campaigns use it will tell us more about them than Romney. Rick Santorum The Romney camp is actually nervous about Santorum. They believe he can do well in the caucus states that, even though they are non-binding, will put wind into Santorum’s sail. They are nervous. Santorum has not shown he can compete past Iowa. He does not have the money. He does not have the resources. He does not have a large enough team. But he has passion. And I maintain that Santorum staying in the race hurts Romney more than Gingrich because ultimately Santorum’s voters will drift slowly to Romney. That won’t happen with Santorum in the race. And if, like in South Carolina, Santorum is able to pick up steam and money, Romney will have both Gingrich and Santorum firing at him. That’s bad news for Romney.
Read more:
Horserace for February 2, 2012
WASHINGTON — Ah, yes, Newt Gingrich did in the last days of the Florida primary precisely what I predicted he would do. He hurled wild charges at Mitt Romney that suggested Newt was losing his grip. He charged Romney with lying and falling into the hands of George Soros and Goldman Sachs, and he did this while seeking the Republican presidential nomination! Newt quoted Soros as saying, “We think either Obama or Romney’s fine, but Gingrich, he would change things.” Citing Goldman Sachs’ profiting from the bailout, he linked the Wall Street firm to anti-Gingrich ads, filling in the dots: “Those ads,” he averred, “are your money recycled to attack me.” On Sunday, he suggested that Rick Santorum drop out of the race and support him. Santorum had left the campaign trail to be with his desperately ill daughter. That is the kind of grace we have come to expect from Gingrich, who, by the way, supplied no evidence of Goldman Sachs’ or of Soros’s aiding Romney. Newt lost support in his last week in Florida because conservatives gave him a closer look. Sure we loved his one-liners singeing the tail feathers of the Liberal media and politicians. Yet, we have to put someone up against President Barack Obama who can win. Moreover, we have to put someone in the White House who can govern. With Newt we would be explaining his gyrations every few days during the campaign. And in the unlikely event that he should win we would be spending the next four years apologizing for his extravagance. I did it once before in the 1990s, and I can tell you it was a thankless task. As I wrote last week, Newt is a 1960s generation kid. Allow me to elaborate. That generation — my generation — was the most ballyhooed generation raised in the 20th century, and it was — at least in politics — a failed generation. Gingrich, the Clintons, Al Gore, and the rest of the 1960s hustlers began their political careers in college when they were the first generation to actually believe that student government was on campus to govern. The weak Liberal administrators went along with them and gave them a say in the running of their universities. The universities have yet to recover. Yet, beyond the damage they did to the universities was the damage they did to themselves. They became the most self-absorbed generation of narcissists ever heard of. From their student government days to their days in national politics they all lived out a fantasy. Now it is over. It would be eminently fitting if Romney won the presidency and set the country on course in 2012. He is from the normal half of that generation, a man who was a student in the 1960s and afterwards a businessman, until he had secured his fortune and entered public life in middle age. By then the Clintons and Newt had been supping at the public trough for years. The unreported aspect of last week’s story of the conservative writers and politicos turning on Gingrich was the role played by the Episodic Apologists. They are the media types who have been covering for the Clintons for years. They have high hopes for the Clintons’ talents. Then they are crestfallen by one of the Clintons’ scandals: the pilfering of the White House, the last-minute pardons, Monica Lewinsky. Then their high hopes rekindle anew. They were loath to report my attack on Newt as being the Republican’s Bill Clinton, but they jumped at the “conservative Establishment’s” attacks on his veracity and his other wayward traits. Yet, Newt’s failure is part of a larger failure, the infantilism of the 1960s generation. In his narcissism, impulsiveness, and deviancy he is at one with the Clintons. Mitt, and for that matter Santorum, are just the opposite. They are straight arrows and duty-bound. They would not be a riot of scandals in the White House, but is it not about time that we leave the scandals to Hollywood? This country is facing its worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. President Obama offers us what Romney calls Crony Capitalism. Romney is right and Crony Capitalism means more Solyndras. Congressman Paul Ryan, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, has served up a budget to cure the nation’s ills and head us on a course that will not end like Greece has ended. Romney is not far from the Ryan budget and he can move even closer. Newt can be forgotten.
See the original post:
Exit Newt
The Muslim Brotherhood persecutes Egypt’s Christian minority relentlessly then has the balls to complain about “Islamophobia.” (IkhwanWeb) — Dr. Mohammad Badie, Chairman of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), received in his office Tuesday afternoon, Hervé Gaymard, France’s former Finance Minister and president of the French National Assembly’s Egyptian-French Friendship Group, Jean Felix-Paganon, the French ambassador in Cairo,
As readers will recall, we had an exchange
