Knock Out Punch – Conservative’s Plea

Leadership and Perspective

Recently a few of those in conservative circles have been calling upon Mitt Romney to lay a knock-out punch on Obama, believing that the timing is right with the Supreme Court ruling and Obamacare. They further perceive weakness in the Romney team, which has not been as assertive as they might want in this regard, and consequentially the team needs an overhaul or shake-up. There is no question that a certain weakness exists in Obama because of Obamacare. To some degree, within the recent Supreme Court ruling and public animus toward Obamacare there is a window to capitalize upon. Even so, as to weakness in Obama, take your pick! Fortunately or unfortunately for us, there are many points of weakness in Obama: detachment; failed leadership; foreign policy (or lack thereof); security leaks; unbridled spending; obviation of Constitutional checks and balances through imperious edict and czars; Fast and Furious; immigration; burdensome debt and consequential intergenerational theft; lack, or undermining of trade policy; undermining of religious freedoms; abandonment of fundamental American values wherein he has undermined our social fabric by not defending marriage, family and life; failed economic and job policies; attempted purchasing of society; overburdensome and oppressive regulation, just to list a few. Appreciating the many conservative voices in the mix and the want to take out Obama now, we must recognize in our want for instant gratification that it is a process – a week is a lifetime in politics. If we can glean anything from history, within the political process, campaigns will experience innumerable ups and downs – and a week does not necessarily make or define a campaign – perspective.

Notwithstanding the dynamics of the process, the key constant and stratagem of a successful campaign must remain in a critically focused message, appreciating the want for static knock-out punches along the way. If there is any measure attributable to Mitt Romney and his team, it is focus, focus and focus! This does not presuppose the campaign should not and will not be agile and responsive to attacks or opportunities as they arise. However, amid the commotion and voices from the right or left the message is and remains, the economy! With the recent employment statistics and those that are sure to follow in the ensuing months, the economy will continue to be the key catalyst for change on November 6th.

Parenthetically, an interesting metaphor that harkens my thoughts and further applies to the commotive voices – when Israel was victorious over Egypt in the 6-day war. Notwithstanding the breadth of its border with Egypt, Israel’s strategy was to identify Egypt’s weakest point, line up its tanks and penetrate the border and then disperse. It was an elegant strategy for victory. The Romney team has similarly identified Obama’s weakest point (much to the suffering of America), the economy, and is laser focused on its message.

Surely, there will be many voices – Obama, his campaign and PR machine chief among them, that will seek to distract the message away from the economy and Obama’s record. Whether it is immigration, Mitt Romney’s character and personal wealth, 99:1 and class warfare, Obamacare or whatever, Romney’s campaign needs to keep its primary focus on the catalyst for change, the economy and jobs. People in America are ‘tired’ and ‘suffering’ and unlike Obama, Mitt gets it.

Mitt Romney has assembled a great team whose depth and resources are second to none. As the general election cycle continues, the team will continue to expand as was recently announced with Kevin Madden being elevated in his role, or as resources are culled and called upon for the evolving campaign dynamics and/or the Vice Presidential candidate. Gratefully, we have a candidate and support team that understands the process and is earnestly steadfast in what matters. They listen, gather data, adapt, and press forward with purpose in the message. What is the phrase – too many chefs in the kitchen spoil the broth? I am just saying… With so many passionate, interested and influential voices speaking simultaneously, and further compounded with the Obama campaign and public relations machine, the Romney campaign must remain adherent to a clarion voice of purpose, message and focus. Can they do better in communicating the message with clarity and passion? Yes. Does it require a shake-up and overhaul? No. Will the campaign be sufficiently agile in drawing upon needed, adaptive and experienced resources? Yes.

Our anxieties and wants to get Obama out now can encumber and cloud our perspective, especially if we allow it to seep into the cracks of our faith, or our understanding of ‘enduring’ campaigns. Gratefully and confidently, Romney has been sufficiently steeled in his experience to have the wisdom necessary to filter the voices of commotion; and is further endowed with the key leadership capacities to listen and guide his campaign and our country to victory in November. To paraphrase Ann Romney, with Mitt Romney the country wins, with Barack Obama, we lose!

Appreciating the quarterbacking from so many and the need to express critically constructive opinion, now is the time to stand as one, unified and aligned with Mitt Romney, that we might take back America and restore our economy and freedoms; he remains our hope for America’s future. Even so, as we are wont to offer constructive thoughts, we must do so with consideration for Obama’s PR machine and how they might seek to use our commentary as a further divide to fracture our party and nation. Without any doubt, now is the time to raise our voices with purpose and measure! Now is the time to draw upon the strength of America and Americans, coalescing all interests behind Mitt Romney to take back what we have lost in the Obama Era – restoring freedom, liberty, our economy and America’s exceptionalism.

Follow David Parker on Twitter @dparkersrs

David Parker’s latest book.

Barack Obama’s Vortex of Poor Decisions & Actions

Today while eating lunch and reading a book involving a US Navy sailor describing his service on the USS Abraham Lincoln, a Nimitz-class supercarrier, the question entered my mind and has been with me all day: Will Barack Obama ever have an aircraft carrier named after him? Or even a smaller US Navy ship? We have the USS Ronald Reagan and the USS George H.W. Bush, both Nimitz-class supercarriers. Then I snapped back to reality. What was I thinking? Of course not! What has the man led or accomplished in his life aside from winning elections on oratory skill?

Justice Ginsberg, 79 / Photo Credit: Saul Loeb

If the month of May was disastrous for President Obama, June could easily eclipse May and probably will. As I have studied the man Barack Obama as President, I have been surprised how he consistently makes one poor choice after another terrible decision. Honestly, if I did not think he was earnest in his desire to be re-elected, I would think he was trying to lose. I even saw an article earlier today that recommended he resign. If you did not read the June 3rd article by Wayne Allyn Root that was widely published and quoted (“Why Obama Will Lose in a Landslide”), it is a must read if only to read his list of Mr. Obama’s poor leadership choices. And since Root’s piece, Mr. Obama made a decision to ask wedding shoppers to forego those gifts to donate to him, he keeps doing fundraisers while ignoring the disastrous Colorado fires, while begging and whining in speech after speech (check out this short video: “I hope you still believe in me”).

Most recently fellow Democrats have been jumping off Mr. Obama’s tattered coat tails telling him and the campaign “no thanks” to their invitations to attend the Democrat convention with him in North Carolina. Early “voting” consists of fundraising success and failure. Though Mr. Obama is ahead in overall fundraising and cash on hand, his campaign team members are terrible cash managers and their burn rate is through the roof. Their gimmicks are even hitting the small contributors and yesterday poor cash projections caused the campaign to cancel a key opening event at the North Carolina convention. If the enormous taxpayer cost to support Mr. Obama’s fundraising (Air Force One, Secret Service logistics, etc.) is not enough abuse, he is now sticking cities like Boston with the tab for security at is events.

Tomorrow might end up being recorded in American history as one of the most critical tests of the power and strength of the American Constitution. So many of Mr. Obama’s actions have been reversed by the federal courts, including the Supreme Court, while we witness senior administration executives ordering laws to be ignored. Weeks of Holder’s hubris combined with the overall Obama administration arrogance is nothing short of stunning and outrageous. Tomorrow we will witness Democrats and Republicans standing together to vote for contempt of Congress for the first time in modern history against a US attorney general while others decide to make a show of racism.

Are we in a different world or what? Had somebody told me six years ago we would be witnessing these events of May and June 2012, I would have laughed them to scorn. There is no way any sane person could have predicted what we have seen and what we are about to see. Early tomorrow morning, we are likely to receive the judgment of the Supreme Court over Mr. Obama’s single largest action. His silence on ObamaCare this year been deafening. Since the cliche “landmark decision” has been used in dozens of articles as of late, I won’t attempt to speculate when reality will be here soon enough. Of paramount importance to me is what we will learn of the Supreme Court itself tomorrow. Will the justices vote along preconceived and predicted ideological lines or will they stand with the Constitution and the fundamental personal freedoms for which America was founded and for which she has become known?

You may recall an article Paul Johnson wrote for MittRomneyCentral March 30, 2012 in which he discusses the enormous importance of a President’s decision to nominate a justice to the Supreme Court. His article is excellent and most relevant today. Rarely do I quote from the left leaning New York Times, but today they published a decent article titled, “Future of an Aging Court Raises Stakes of Presidential Vote” that is quite good in briefly describing the importance of the role of the next President in shaping the future of our nation; it is worth the read.

If Governor Romney is elected in November and if he were to serve two, four-year terms, he could end up nominating more justices to the Supreme Court than any recent POTUS. It is my expectation that he will have that privilege many times in the next eight years.

Artwork by Michael Ramirez

Total number of days left until Mitt Romney is President Elect Romney: 132

Twitter Follow: @VicLundquist

Kudlow: Conservative Romney Compares Well with President Reagan

The mainstream media, along with Gingrich, Santorum, Limbaugh, Palin, and many others, have effectively created the public image of Gov. Romney as a moderate Republican for any number of reasons. Serious voters that study his record as Governor, and his rhetoric as a candidate, discover early that Romney is very much a conservative.

Yet, the “moderate” label brings to mind two important ironies: 1) In the 2007-08 cycle, Gov. Romney was considered conservative by comparison to the eventual nominee, John McCain, and 2) the TV-informed voters of this cycle have accepted the moderate label (among other attributes) and as a result consider Romney the superior choice to defeat the incumbent Obama.

In the sun with sons

Romney’s record as governor proved he is a conservative leader — his 800+ vetoes alone informs the electorate that he had the conservative will and courage to stand up to an 85 percent Democrat legislature in one of the most liberal states of the union.

Larry Kudlow wrote an insightful piece titled, “The Reagan in Romney” at National Review Online on topic:

The late William F. Buckley Jr. naturally put it best when he said, “The wisest choice would be the one who could win. No sense running Mona Lisa in a beauty contest. I’d be for the most right, viable candidate who could win.”

Bill Buckley’s Law applies to Mitt Romney today. And it’s worth noting Rush Limbaugh’s recent update to the dictum. Following Romney’s terrific Illinois victory speech on Tuesday, Rush said flatly, “A conservative alternative to Romney is Romney.”

[Candidly, I don’t trust Limbaugh much at all in his opinions. We’ll see. I stopped listening to him years ago as it became obvious that he is about 85 percent entertainer and 15 percent sincere conservative thinker (his show makes way more money when a liberal is POTUS)]

As the tough primary season ventures on, Romney has clarified and evolved his views into tough conservative positions.

On economic policy, for example, he would limit the government budget to 20 percent of GDP, slash $500 billion in his first term […] He’s for a true, all-of-the-above energy policy that would take the regulatory handcuffs off drilling on federal lands. He would repeal Obamacare. And he has come up with a supply-side tax cut that lowers marginal rates by 20 percent across-the-board and drops the corporate tax to 25 percent.

These are very conservative positions. One can seriously ask whether Romney isn’t the most conservative presidential candidate since Ronald Reagan. Click here to continue reading

Mitt Romney Central – Andrew Breitbart: In Remembrance…

In remembrance

Andrew Breitbart

February 1, 1969 – March 1, 2012

We were shocked and saddened to learn today of the sudden passing of conservative activist and journalist Andrew Breitbart. While walking very early this morning near his home in Los Angeles, he collapsed. After a witness called 911, he was rushed to UCLA Medical Center.

Efforts to revive him failed.

He was 43 years old.

From his website:

With a terrible feeling of pain and loss we announce the passing of Andrew Breitbart.

Andrew passed away unexpectedly from natural causes shortly after midnight this morning in Los Angeles.

We have lost a husband, a father, a son, a brother, a dear friend, a patriot and a happy warrior.

Andrew lived boldly, so that we more timid souls would dare to live freely and fully, and fight for the fragile liberty he showed us how to love.

Andrew recently wrote a new conclusion to his book, Righteous Indignation:
I love my job. I love fighting for what I believe in. I love having fun while doing it. I love reporting stories that the Complex refuses to report. I love fighting back, I love finding allies, and—famously—I enjoy making enemies.

Three years ago, I was mostly a behind-the-scenes guy who linked to stuff on a very popular website. I always wondered what it would be like to enter the public realm to fight for what I believe in. I’ve lost friends, perhaps dozens. But I’ve gained hundreds, thousands—who knows?—of allies. At the end of the day, I can look at myself in the mirror, and I sleep very well at night.

Andrew is at rest, yet the happy warrior lives on, in each of us.

From Governor Romney:

Ann and I are deeply saddened by the passing of @AndrewBreitbart: brilliant entrepreneur, fearless conservative, loving husband and father.

Breitbart once served as editor for the Drudge website; he and Matt Drudge were friends:

In the first decade of the DRUDGEREPORT Andrew Breitbart was a constant source of energy, passion and commitment. We shared a love of headlines, a love of the news, an excitement about what’s happening. I don’t think there was a single day during that time when we did not flash each other or laugh with each other, or challenge each other. I still see him in my mind’s eye in Venice Beach, the sunny day I met him. He was in his mid 20’s. It was all there. He had a wonderful, loving family and we all feel great sadness for them today. ~ M. DRUDGE

Mitt Romney Central offers our condolences and prayers for Mr. Breitbart’s wife Susannah, his four young children, and his extended family.

► Jayde Wyatt

How Conservative is Romney on Health Care? – More Senators Co-sponsor Romney’s Medicare Reform Plan

For a candidate who is not even in office yet, Romney’s Medicare plan is attracting a lot of attention from leaders of congress. Just last week, Senators Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) joined the growing ranks of conservative leaders who have co-sponsored legislation supporting Romney’s Medicare plan. 

The media, preferring to focus on “RomneyCare” and how it relates to “ObamaCare,” has largely omitted any discussion of Romney’s achievements on Medicare reform. Romney’s success in crafting a workable plan to reform Medicare has been an unrecognized and significantly under-reported topic in the mainstream media.

As you may recall, Romney’s Medicare reform plan is to give seniors more options on where they can purchase medical insurance by allowing seniors to choose between traditional Medicare or purchasing private insurance with government vouchers. Such a plan would introduce greater competition among insurance companies but also allow seniors to craft health care plans that are more customized to their specific needs. 

Sens. Burr and Coburn liked that idea so much they were willing to attach their names to it by co-sponsoring legislation supporting the idea. Sens. Burr and Coburn also adopted Romney’s proposals on how to reduce the cost of Medicare by gradually increasing the age when seniors are eligible to receive Medicare and by requiring the richest seniors to pay more of their health care expenses than the poor. 

Recently, Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) also teamed up to co-sponsor Romney’s idea on reforming Medicare. Paul Ryan’s endorsement of Romney’s proposal sends a powerful message to Republicans who might wonder how conservative Romney is on health care reform given Romney’s key role in passing RomneyCare. If Paul Ryan, who is one of the most influential and popular conservatives in Washington, is co-sponsoring Romney’s proposals on Medicare reform, then conservatives in general can trust Romney on this issue. 

But the fact that a Democratic Senator, Ron Wyden, also co-sponsored the bill is quite impressive. The Ryan/Wyden bill reveals an important aspect about how Romney creates political goals: namely, that Romney creates bold ideas that are also practical and workable. Romney is not a politician with his head in the clouds, dreaming up “fantasy legislation” that appeals only to one side of the political sphere. He’s a pragmatic conservative who understands the realities facing America, whether those realities are economic or political, and can work within those realities to get things done.

It is important to remember that these leaders in congress who are co-sponsoring Romney’s plan aren’t just expressing vocal support for Romney’s Medicare reform plan. They are taking their support to the highest level by co-sponsoring actual bills that use Romney’s proposals. Any one of Romney’s rivals for the Republican nomination would kill to have Paul Ryan and three other U.S. Senators co-sponsoring legislation about their ideas.

So, in order to get a more complete and accurate picture of how conservative Romney is on health care issues, we must look not just at RomneyCare but also Romney’s Medicare reform plan which is garnering a host of endorsements and co-sponsors from the most respected and popular conservatives in Washington.

#UnravelTheSweater: Santorum’s Courage Betrayed by Willingness to Sacrifice Core Principles

Rick Santorum - Unravel the Sweater

The CNN debate last week had a moment that was unbelievable and yet fully revealing!

In Deep Thought, Dressed in his Battle Armor

When Santorum said, “It [my vote] was against the principles I believed in…” — I paused the TV stream and said to Cindy my wife, “I can’t believe he just said that! Unbelievable!” On national TV, Santorum freely admitted that he has no problem whatsoever compromising his principles! The one thing all Americans despise in most politicians is their lack of conviction to principles. That propensity to sacrifice core principles for expediency is precisely why Americans want “to kick the bums out of Washington.”

And when Santorum was asked to give one word to describe himself, he ironically chose “Courage” as that most descriptive word! Could it be that he was using the word to describe his courage to admit to the world that his principles aren’t really foundational? What about his core? It is my opinion that this one debate moment was the most revealing of any debate moment of the 20 we have seen this cycle!

As you watch this short video clip, watch is face. He freely admits his ability to sacrifice his principles:

His admitting the betrayal of core principles only exacerbates the most obvious weakness he has: Zero executive leadership experience. Click here to continue reading

Mythbusters – “The Conservative Base Doesn’t Like Mitt Romney?” Analyzing the Exit Polls

We’ve all heard the line “the conservative base doesn’t like Mitt Romney” or some version of that idea. It’s a line that has been thrown around carelessly in the media for several months now, and we all know that once the media adopts a theme or “narrative” about a candidate, it becomes incredibly difficult to break that narrative even when evidense abounds to the contrary.

Well, now that there has been some actual voting, lets look at the FACTS to see if that claim holds water. What I am going to argue is that, if we analyze the exit polls from the competitive primaries and caucuses held so far, Romney has captured the conservative base by a large margin over his competitors. So according to actual voters, and not just the pundits and talking heads in the media, Romney is doing just fine with the “conservative base.” 

Of the eight states that have held competitive primaries or caucuses, Romney has won four and tied one. Romney won New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada and Maine and then essentially tied Iowa. Exit polls from the states that Romney has won show that Romney captured the “conservative base” by a large margin. Lets look at some examples:

New Hampshire – Chris Cillizza gave a summary of the exit polls which showed: 

Mitt picked up 49% of GOP voters.

Romney’s 49 percent is the highest mark among self-identified Republicans for any presidential candidate since New Hampshire moved its primary forward in the calendar.

Contrast that with John McCain, with whom he’s often compared as a squishy moderate with problems with Republicans.

McCain is the only candidate since 1980 to win New Hampshire even as he lost among self-identified Republicans.

That means McCain was essentially the worst winner with Republicans in New Hampshire over the past 30 years, while Romney was the best.

Florida – Exit polls in Florida show that Romney received the vast majority of Republican support between the candidates with 48%. Among those who self-identify as “conservative,” Romney garnered 41%, more than any other candidate. Among those who consider themselves “very conservative,” Romney split the vote with Gingrich (Romney got 30% and Gingrich got 41%).

Nevada: Exit polls in this state reveal Romney truly stomped the other competitors in regard to which candidate the self-identified “very conservative and “conservative” voters supported.

Romney garnered a vast majority of the Republican vote at 56%. Romney won every category of Republican voters including the Very Conservative by wide margins. The category of very conservative is particularly interesting, Romney got 46%, Gingrich got only 25% and Santorum only 15%.

Maine: No exit/entrance polls were taken. Results of the caucus show:

Mitt Romney has 39.2 percent of the vote with 2190 votes, Ron Paul has 35.7 percent with 1996 votes, Rick Santorum has 17.7percent with 989 votes, and Newt Gingrich has 6.25 percent with 349 votes.

So the pundits and talking heads say that the conservative base doesn’t like Mitt Romney, but exit polls of ACTUAL VOTERS in New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada and Maine show otherwise. 

A critic might say, “O.K., Romney did well among conservatives in the states he won, but what about the states that Romney didn’t win?”

While it is true that Romney didn’t do as well among conservatives in the states he lost (South Carolina, Colorado, and Minnesota), we have to also acknowledge that Santorum and Gingrich didn’t do well among “the base” in the states that Romney won. So if we are going to claim that “the base doesn’t like Romney” because he lost some states, by the same logic, we would have to conclude that the base doesn’t like Santorum because of how voters of the base rejected Santorum in Florida, South Carolina, Nevada and Maine. We would likewise have to conclude that the base doesn’t like Newt Gingrich because of how he performed in Iowa, New Hampshire, Florida, Nevada, Minnesota, Colorado and Maine. The same standard needs to be applied to all the candidates.

National Polls – I just want to make a quick comment about national polls. For those of us who have been watching the presidential race closely, we remember a couple of months ago how the pundits frequently used national polls to illustrate that “the base didn’t like Romney.” The pundits would say something along the lines of “Romney just can’t break out of that mid-twenties approval rating in national polls, that shows that the base just doesn’t really like Mitt Romney.” However, in the last month, Romney has shattered that myth by shooting into the mid to low thirties since Iowa and New Hampshire. In fact, after Romney’s win in Florida, he polled higher in the national polls than any other candidate has polled since the race began a year ago. That is why I was amused yesterday to hear Sarah Palin say “I like Mitt Romney . . . but he has to do more work to convince conservatives. His support can’t break out of that mid-thirties level.” 

Mitt Romney: The Only True Executive Leader — The Most Conservative, Proven Leader (by David Parker)

NOTE: The guest editorial that accompanies the table below is absolutely outstanding. Due to the length of this “Experience Comparative,” in order to read the whole editorial, you will need to click the “CLICK HERE TO CONTINUE READING…” link at the bottom.

In 2006, a close friend of mine introduced me to David Parker, a personal friend of Governor Mitt Romney. I was contemplating doing some grassroots work to promote his run for President and wanted to know more about the man. Candidly, I was skeptical. How could a governor of such a liberal state be a Republican, let alone a conservative? David met me for lunch at Strawberry Farms and laid out the high points of Governor Romney’s strong conservative action, from his record of protecting life to his hundreds of vetoes. I was sold!

David L. Parker

David organized this amazing matrix, comparing the leadership experience and skills of the four remaining Republican presidential candidates. In my opinion, this table — along with the accompanying Op-Ed piece by David — should be published in every major newspaper in the nation, including the New York Times and The Wall Street Journal! I honestly believe that if every literate voter were to carefully study this table and Op-Ed, the nomination would be over now.

As you compare each candidate below, add Obama to the list and subject his experience to these points — the results of his trial and error leadership are dismal indeed. Most impressive to me is the comparison below of leadership experience in the private, public, and philanthropic sectors — Santorum, Gingrich, and Paul simply don’t measure up to Governor Romney’s extensive background of executive leadership. Why any person would consider voting for a candidate without proven executive experience — after voting for Obama the community organizer — I will never understand. (there is good reason it is extremely rare that a congressman or senator is ever elected as POTUS)

You can make a big difference in this elections season. Please pass this Op-Ed piece by David Parker to as many people you know as possible.

“No Apology, the Case for Mitt Romney” — by David Parker

Are we so blind in our pursuit of our conservative ideology that we fail to recognize needed pragmatism? Our nation, a center-right nation, is not conservative, nor liberal, but an amalgamation of many people, each with individual agency, thought and perspective that leans center-right in the majority.

[ editorial continues below the table ]

Yes, we are clumped together at times in ideological conclaves, but to impose or dictate our conservative ideology in absolute myopia is a failed and fractured model, just as it is with those on the other side of the aisle. We cannot win and they lose, nor visa versa. We are one Nation under God, and thus we need to be sufficiently pragmatic and persuasive to win the majority, and lead those who believe in contrary principles of liberal thought to the more conservative Promised Land — America, an exceptional nation!

Accordingly, leadership and governance, and ideological advocacy demands pragmatism over some perceived capacity of force majeure.

Click here to continue reading

Mitt Romney: “Will Dominate” / The Glitter Gunman / Gingrich Going South / Secret Service / The KARL / faith

Photo: Emmanuel Dunand

Santorum’s wins this week in Missouri, Minnesota, and Colorado caused some to cry out, “The sky is falling!” Everybody needs to calm down and look to our file leader. None of us should allow the mainstream media (or “new media”) or outside source define how the campaign for Governor Romney is progressing, or not.

From day one, Governor Romney told the world the race to the nomination would be a long, competitive process, probably not decided until April. Yet, we allow the MSM make us feel that Governor Romney has it in the bag early, or not. Governor Romney has told us from day one that the nomination process would be competitive and then when it is, the MSM tells the world that he does not have conservative backing, when in fact he does. Governor Romney has told us from day one that his strategy is based on securing as many delegates along the way as possible — the MSM tries to change the subject at every turn — because it needs a new story every day; and that is what it does.

We all just need to settle down and take our lead from Governor Romney.

Remember this: Every writer, every pundit, every blog, every “news” organization, every knucklehead out there needs to write something new every day. Their desire to be clever causes them to come up with crazy stuff to make us all think that Governor Romney’s strategy is somehow not working. Just keep your eyes on Governor Romney himself. Nobody has more experience in planning a successful strategy and executing to it than Governor Romney. Nobody still left in this hunt.

On the Hannity show yesterday, Governor Romney leads the way — CLICK TO WATCH

Meanwhile, the boogeyman Gingrich would have us all believe that he will be hitting doubles, triples, and home runs (I can’t wait for baseball’s spring training!) on Super Tuesday and in the South. Oooooooh, my knees have been shaking for weeks now as I have imagined him secretly lining up support down there. Well yes, he is going South. BTW, I heard that his wife may speak soon! Can’t wait!

Karl Rove brought some sanity to the race yesterday in the Journal in his Op-Ed column titled, NEWT’S SOUTHERN STRATEGY WON’T WORK. While the many points Rove makes below are all spot-on, I will never count Gingrich out — not ever — with an ego the size of Texas and a determination driven by revenge, he will always be dangerous.

I just love Rove’s pragmatism and dry humor!

By Karl Rove

Newt Gingrich’s remarks Saturday night after the Nevada caucuses and on NBC’s “Meet the Press” the next morning proved that presidential candidates should talk policy, not process.

Proclaiming “We want to get to Georgia, to Alabama, to Tennessee,” Mr. Gingrich said primaries in the South would produce “a series of victories” that by the April 4 Texas primary would make him “very, very competitive in the delegate count.”

Well, the Gingrich Southern strategy faces big obstacles, starting with Rick Santorum and Ron Paul. Demanding that these two candidates drop out so he becomes the only conservative alternative to Mitt Romney hasn’t worked.

Mr. Paul sees himself as the leader of an insurgency. He’s made it clear he’s in the race to stay. And while Mr. Santorum’s victories on Tuesday in the Minnesota and Colorado caucuses and Missouri’s beauty contest primary didn’t produce any national convention delegates (Missouri’s vote was nonbinding, and the caucuses were for precinct delegates), his wins also spell trouble for the former House speaker’s plans.

Headed South -- Photo: Getty Images

Mr. Santorum’s success came because while Mr. Romney and Mr. Gingrich battled in Florida and Nevada, he barnstormed Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri, making 22 stops in the three states to Mitt’s three and Newt’s two. He demonstrated that showing up matters and gained critical momentum toward becoming the not-Romney alternative.

Newt’s Southern strategy also faces a geographical obstacle. There are 25 contests in February and March, and 18 of them, with 579 delegates, are outside the South.

Click here to continue reading

Gingrich’s Tin Message — Why Conservatives Reject Gingrich

In yesterday’s Commentary Magazine, Peter Wehner provides outstanding insight into why Mr. Gingrich’s message does not ring true. He and Sarah Palin would have everybody believe that “the establishment” is against him since Governor Romney has all of the endorsements (pre-voting votes). This is just one more of those pesky ironies associated with Mr. Gingrich. He is the establishment. He helped create the establishment and he has been a part of Washington ever since! Peter Wehner writes:

The reality is that conservative/”establishment” opposition to Gingrich generally falls into three categories. One is that if he won the nomination, he would not only lose to Barack Obama, but he would sink the rest of the GOP fleet in the process. A second area of concern is that Gingrich is temperamentally unfit to be president –he’s too erratic, undisciplined, and rhetorically self-destructive. A third area of concern is the suspicion that the former House speaker is not, in fact, a terribly reliable conservative, that he is not philosophically well-grounded (see his attachment to Alvin Toffler for more).

Some of these criticisms may be appropriate and some of them may be overstated or miss the mark. But to pretend the criticisms of Gingrich — expressed in varying degrees by commentators like George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Charles Murray, Michael Gerson, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Bob Tyrrell, Pat Buchanan, Mona Charen, Mark Steyn, Michael Medved, Hugh Hewitt, Bill Bennett, Karl Rove, Ramesh Ponnuru, Rich Lowry, Elliott Abrams, John Podhoretz, John Hinderaker, Jennifer Rubin, Ross Douthat, David Brooks, Yuval Levin, and the editorial writers at the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Examiner, to say nothing of a slew of conservative members/former members of Congress who worked with Gingrich in the 1990s –are rooted in their fear of “genuine change” is simply not credible.

[emphasis added]

As Mr. Gingrich continues to complain, his surrogates will join him in whining that it isn’t fair that Governor Romney has all the endorsements, organization, effectiveness, infrastructure, and money. Yada, yada, yada….

There is no question that the administration of a President Romney would be far more organized and effective than the administration of a President Gingrich. And President Romney will absolutely make sure all the ducks are in a row when it comes to issuing waivers to states regarding ObamaCare (reference to Gingrich’s inability to get certified in his own home state of Virginia for the primary ballot in March).

Gingrich is not an executive. He does not know how to execute. He is an ideas guy (moon colonies, etc.).

Yes, organization does matter.

Yes, character matters.