You might think that as EFM’s resident Pennsylvanian, I’d have a lot to say about the presidential candidacy of my former U.S. Senator, Rick Santorum.  I’ve definitely got opinions.  Yet I have been very quiet on here, and by choice.  Many of my friends (including some of my dearest ones) support Sen. Santorum.  I definitely don’t want to attack them, I’d rather not argue with them in the first place, and I did not think Sen. Santorum would last this long.  But he has, people are asking me about him, and this weekend, he is throwing overheated charges at Gov. Romney that do not fit with the graciousness my friends admire in him.  I will still do everything in my power to refrain from viciousness, but I can keep quiet no longer.

The reason I do not support Sen. Santorum is that I adhere to a slightly altered version of … Read the Rest »

By “he,” I mean Speaker Gingrich.  And by “it,” I mean supporting the individual mandate–this time, in 2009:

You’ll recall that the other would-be conservative messiah, Sen. Santorum, also supported the mandate back in 1994.

I’ll say it again: It isn’t true that one of these guys (Speaker Gingrich, Sen. Santorum, and Gov. Romney) is meaningfully more conservative than the other.  They’ve all disappointed.  The only real difference is that only one can beat President Obama.… Read the Rest »

Humble pie, that is.  Nancy sent me this gem from the May 2, 1994 edition of The Morning Call, the daily newspaper in Allentown, Pennsylvania:

Santorum and [his Republican primary opponent Joe] Watkins would require individuals to buy health insurance rather than forcing employers to pay for employee benefits.

Yes, that’s the same Sen. Santorum who now condemns not just the federal government requiring people to buy health insurance, but–as in RomneyCare–the state governments doing so, just as they do with car insurance.  This is just more evidence that in the 1990s, a mandate was the “conservative” position, as Speaker Gingrich himself has said.  That’s why when Gov. Romney went to the conservative Heritage Foundation in the early 2000s for help on health care, they gave him the same prescription.  Perhaps (as Heritage now quite honorably says) they and the many Republican politicians of Sen. Santorum’s vintage … Read the Rest »

…because Speaker Gingrich and Ambassador Huntsman’s pants are in flames.

You’ll recall that the gentleman formerly from Georgia has repeatedly condemned negative campaigning and promised to stay positive.  Today, as the Speaker is sinking fast in the polls, John McCormack of The Weekly Standard (among others) is reporting that Mr. Gingrich has promised to go negative on Gov. Romney regarding abortion in South Carolina.

Personally, I’m not against negative campaigning.  Contrast is important.  I’m just against hypocrites, especially when their line of attack is bogus, which Speaker Gingrich’s is.  The Standard even quotes our friendly neighborhood EFM constitutional attorney:

It’s true that the Massachusetts supreme court ruled in 1981 that the state must fund abortions for people on government health plans such as Medicaid. Twelve other states—including conservative or battleground states such as Arizona, West Virginia, Minnesota, and Alaska—pay for abortions for Medicaid recipients because of state supreme court rulings.

… Read the Rest »

Fred Barnes:

Newt Gingrich has adopted an anti-free market argument—a favorite of the political left—to criticize Mitt Romney. Gingrich accused his rival of making money by “bankrupting companies and laying off employees” in his years at Bain Capital.

Under Romney’s leadership, Bain Capital emerged as a prominent private equity firm, investing initially in startups—Staples was one—then specializing in turnarounds. The company was highly profitable, but was criticized for reducing payrolls and shutting down firms it couldn’t revive. Romney left Bain Capital in 1999.

Whether its investments were successful or not, Bain Capital was engaged in the rough and tumble of free market capitalism. Thus Gingrich’s criticism, coming from a conservative, was surprising.

Surprising?  I’d say pathetic.  Read the rest.… Read the Rest »

…with which to agree in Gov. Huckabee’s recent advice to the Tea Party, via Ben Smith:

It would be real tragic if they stayed out. Mitt Romney may not be their first choice, but Mitt Romney every day of the week and twice on Sunday is going to be a much more effective president for issues that they care about than Barack Obama.

I think sometimes there is this anxiety within the Republican Party of who is the perfect candidate. The answer is there isn’t one.

… Read the Rest »

This is how you know when the Conservative Messiah Watch has truly gone off the rails: when some conservatives are so bent on opposing a guy who held some liberal views in the past that they consider running to a guy who unrepentantly holds them today.

Unlike some of my friends who believe, even after today’s catastrophe, that there will be a President Cain holding press conferences at the White House soon, I’m not under any illusions about my candidate.  He is a politician and he has made mistakes.  But it is clearer than ever right now that he is the only adult in the room and the only one who will be able to stand up to President Obama’s barrage of attack ads.  As Jennifer Rubin puts it, there is no viable alternative.… Read the Rest »

Is the Republican primary season revealing a disturbing strain of political correctness in the conservative movement.  I think so, and at Patheos I explain why.… Read the Rest »

If you’ve heard it once, you’ve heard it a thousand times: The 2012 race for president is Tea Party versus GOP Establishment, with the Tea Party still searching for its candidate and the GOP Establishment slowing gathering under the Romney banner.  But after traveling all over the country, speaking at Tea Party events, and interacting with Republicans from coast to coast, I’m beginning to think that this analysis is too simplistic.  What if the GOP isn’t divided between tea partiers and cocktail partiers but instead between strategists, activists, and, well, actual primary voters.

First, the strategists.  These guys may be no less conservative than the activists, but they often play a different game for a different audience.  They’re thinking not about ideological fidelity but instead about winning elections and then governing following victory.  Their calculations lead them to sometimes compromise too easily, to play too close to the middle, … Read the Rest »

Paul Singer is not imaginary.  He is also not my friend.  Oh, and he doesn’t think you have mental problems–I just couldn’t resist the funny photo above.  But I love so much what Mr. Singer just wrote to his friends about Gov. Romney that I’d really love for him to be my friend.  So I’m going to imagine he is.

In all seriousness, Mr. Singer is one of the most coveted Republican donors.  He just got behind Gov. Romney.  According to POLITICO, this–referencing imaginary friends–was part of his reasoning, and I couldn’t agree more:

In addition — and of supreme importance — Mitt Romney can defeat the incumbent president, a task that is a matter of urgency and of keen importance to the country. Perfection in candidates is obtainable in the same place where imaginary friends reside. What we can hope to actually find in the real world, if

… Read the Rest »