The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

I normally don't bother reading the comments following an article. But I did run through about 50 of them and was surprised at the number of people who have high regard for her.

And then he went on to say that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between Democrats and Republicans on the issues that matter most, from foreign and monetary policy to the debt and deficit.

Maybe Paul was just being cranky. Certainly, he was being a crank — it is what he is. But either way, no matter what happens in Iowa, I suspect we won't have heard the last of him. And Mitt Romney won't have, either.

It's time for some sense and sensibility. With a field of nine candidates, the Republican product is too diluted. That's the reason the polls have been so fluid. There are only two candidates with a chance to win the nomination: Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. The rest are sincere, nice people who "can't light the candle," as someone said of John Connally in 1980. You are excused. There's only one who can beat Barack Obama. Romney was a governor and a businessman, and we will need that kind of expertise to pull us out of the president's famous ditch. Newt is too volatile and has too much baggage.

In October, I joked that the Republicans should suspend their campaigns since the president was sinking so fast on his own. I thought David Axelrod was on the verge of urging the president to give a Jimmy Carter malaise speech. Scheduling 16 major debates in states that thirst to be first was an unforced error by the GOP. I kept waiting to see Kim Kardashian and Paula Abdul as moderators with Lady Gaga performing at halftime. Trust me, everything you need to know from the candidates can fit into four debates. What genius decided to take the focus away from the president and his dismal record? (I know the threshold for genius has been lowered. I have heard both Paul Begala and Tim Geithner called geniuses).

First of all, the Republican primary voter will not decide the general election. The independent voters, who deserted the Democrats in droves in the midterm elections and are poised to do so again, will be the determining factor. Republicans should be focused on who can win the general election, not who has the most muscular conservative DNA.

Second, let's get the conversation back to the president and his job performance. It will be easy to benchmark since he left office after two years and nine months to campaign full time for the same job but this time as the Republican populist Teddy Roosevelt.

Third, in a game of chess, you do not try to capture the king on every move. You accumulate smaller victories with other pieces until the king is defenseless. The House voting down the payroll tax cut after Obama would have been forced to show his hand on the XL oil pipeline was a mistake. If you see the president's approval rating going up, blame the Republican strategy.

The Tea Party has many strong points: fiscal sanity, orderly demonstrations and a penchant for cleanliness that the Occupy Wall Street group should try to emulate. But they must understand they are part of the Republican defense against the president. They cannot run around like the Knights Templar ready to die for their ideals. They compared themselves to the soldiers in "Braveheart." Did any of them see the end of that movie? I recommend they watch "Patton" and adopt his credo, "Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

There are still plenty of things to be grateful for this holiday season: Nancy Pelosi breaking new ground with her befuddled appearance on "60 Minutes"; Eric Holder threatening to bring suit against states requiring a photo ID to vote (maybe we can text in unlimited votes like "American Idol"); Vice President Biden suggesting in 2009 that Jon Corzine should be the president's go-to guy to get us out of the ditch (I guess Bernie Madoff wasn't available) and contending that the Taliban is not our enemy; Jay Carney growing nearly as annoying as Robert Gibbs.

A lot is at stake in the next election: the Supreme Court, federal regulations on business, the American way of life. We should look at Europe (which the president so greatly admires) and ask if we want that to happen to us. In five years, it will be too late. If you think you're better off now than you were four years ago, be sure to order "La Dolce Vita" and "The Fall of the Roman Empire" from Netflix.

Anybody that wants to take away from SS will not have my vote, regardless of party.

Santorum targets blacks in entitlement reform
By Lucy Madison

Updated: 6:35 p.m. ET

At a campaign stop in Sioux City, Iowa on Sunday, Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum singled out blacks as being recipients of assistance through federal benefit programs, telling a mostly-white audience he doesn't want to "make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money."

Answering a question about foreign influence on the U.S. economy, the former Pennsylvania senator went on to discuss the American entitlement system - which he argued is being used to politically exploit its beneficiaries.

"It just keeps expanding - I was in Indianola a few months ago and I was talking to someone who works in the department of public welfare here, and she told me that the state of Iowa is going to get fined if they don't sign up more people under the Medicaid program," Santorum said. "They're just pushing harder and harder to get more and more of you dependent upon them so they can get your vote. That's what the bottom line is."

He added: "I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money; I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money."

"Right," responded one audience member, as another woman can be seen nodding.

"And provide for themselves and their families," Santorum added, to applause. "The best way to do that is to get the manufacturing sector of the economy rolling again."

It is unclear why Santorum pinpointed blacks specifically as recipients of federal aid. The original questioner asked "how do we get off this crazy train? We've got so much foreign influence in this country now," adding "where do we go from here?"

When asked about the comments in an interview with "CBS Evening News" anchor Scott Pelley, Santorum said he wasn't aware of the context of his remark, but mentioned that he had recently watched the movie "Waiting for Superman," which analyzes the American public education system through the stories of several students and their families. (The students and their families portrayed in the movie represent several races.)
"I've seen that quote, I haven't seen the context in which that was made," Santorum told Pelley, of the Sunday remarks. "Yesterday I talked for example about a movie called, um, what was it? 'Waiting for Superman,' which was about black children and so I don't know whether it was in response and I was talking about that."

Santorum stressed that he wants to make life better for Americans regardless of race.

"Let me just say that no matter what, I want to make every lives [sic] better - I don't want anybody - and if you look at what I've been saying, I've been pretty clear about my concern for dependency in this country and concern for people not being more dependent on our government, whatever their race or ethnicity is."

CBS News found that of the people on food stamps in Iowa, only nine percent are black -- and 84 percent are white.

Just days ago, the Pennsylvania conservative raised some eyebrows while talking about diversity at an event in Ottumwa, Iowa.

"I was at a debate with Howard Dean and we were asked what was the most imp quality of America and he said diversity. Diversity? Have you ever heard of e pluribus unum?....The greatness of America is people who are diverse coming together to be one," Santorum said. "If we celebrate diversity, we lay the groundwork for that conflict. We need to celebrate common values and have a president that lays out those common values."

In October, I joked that the Republicans should suspend their campaigns since the president was sinking so fast on his own.

I enjoyed it as well. I just don't think it was one tenth as snarky as his sister's pieces.