Skip to content

Nomination Excitations: Changing Totals, Jerks, Idiots, Fools, And Gonzo

17 January 2012 @ 14:46


-Out Iowa-way: According to Byron York, Willard may not have won Iowa after all [tip of the fedora to Memeorandum]:

On caucus night, party officials in each of Iowa’s 1,774 precincts were required to fill out what is known as Form E. The form contained the official count for each candidate in the caucus. It was signed by precinct officials on caucus night and witnessed by representatives of the various campaigns. It is the official vote total for each precinct caucus.

When that work was finished, precinct officials called in the results to party headquarters in Des Moines. It was on the basis of that called-in information that GOP officials announced the winner in the early morning hours of Jan. 4. But as it always does, the process of receiving the results by phone opened up room for error, with the possibility that someone misspoke or misheard the results for a particular caucus.

The state GOP has the Form E’s mailed to them and they are counted to get the final, official vote count.

In the tallying of the actual Form E’s, Rick Santorum is eighty votes ahead in those forms counted so far.

Please do take the time to click here and read the rest of Mr. York’s report.

Nice Deb asks the spot-on question:

The narrative that has emerged in recent weeks is that Mitt is inevitable – his early wins in Iowa and New Hampshire have played into that. But is that a fair perception if he really didn’t win Iowa?


-Long-time readers will recall that I defended Juan Williams in his battle with NPR when they fired him. I would still mount the same defense today of the man, but I would not include the complimentary things I said about his character. After watching most of last night’s debate and the way he worded his questions, I’ve come to the sad conclusion that Juan Williams is a jerk. I blame myself for faltering and believing that this Leftist could ever be anything but.


Newton Leroy’s dangerous flirtation with using Leftist arguments to make some of his points has paid off in him getting a Reach Around from the leader of the AFL-CIO, Communist Richard Trumka.

From David Freddoso, we learn:

AFL-CIO boss Richard Trumka, a union leader who has in the past excused violence against non-union workers, sent this email to supporters today, against endorsing Newt Gingrich’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s career at Bain Capital….

DF has the text of the e-mail here.

Thanks a-lot, Newt.


From ABC News, Arlete Saenz reporting [tip of the fedora to Memeorandum]:

In response to a question about whether or not Turkey should still be a part of NATO, Rick Perry suggested some consider the country to be ruled by “Islamic terrorists.” “Obviously when you have a country that is being ruled by what many would perceive to be Islamic terrorists,” Perry said during the debate.

Victoria Coates, foreign policy advisor to Perry, further explained the governor’s remarks, saying that some view the leaders of Turkey as Islamic terrorists due to their support of Hamas and the flotilla against Israel.

“The governor was responding to the questioners references to violence against women and to association with Hamas, I think both of which are things that many people do associate as he said with Islamic terrorists,” Coates told reporters in the spin room. “He was referring to those things, and while he would welcome the opportunity to work with Turkey on regional issues like Syria or Iraq, this kind of behavior on the part of that country is disturbing and I think we should concerned about it.”

So…James Richard ‘Rick’ Perry states a fact that is the truth, but that last sentence from Mzz. Coates shows he didn’t really mean it. Typical. What’s so damn wrong about stating that, indeed, Turkey is being run by Mohammedins [ie: terrorists]?

Over at Jihad Watch, Robert Spencer points out the hypocrisy of Gov. Perry in making his initial remarks [tip of the fedora to Memeorandum]:

As I said here, “Rick Perry is woefully unfit to be president of the United States.” It is satisfying to see him bringing up the rear in the polls, especially once the Perrybots, including some former friends and allies, made it personal with their false claims and smears after Pamela Geller and I exposed Perry’s close ties to Islamic supremacist enabler Grover Norquist and his foolish sponsorship of a whitewashed curriculum on Islam for Texas public schools….

RS then goes on to state:

Anyway, Turkey is not ruled by Islamic terrorists. Turkey is ruled by Islamic supremacists who are working to dismantle Kemalist secularism and transform Turkey into a Sharia state. That is not at all the same thing, although Erdogan certainly shares the goal of jihad terrorists worldwide, which is to impose Sharia.

I hate to do this, but: You’re wrong Mr. Spencer. An Islamic Supremacist is an Islamic Terrorist because the Mohammedin believes that one of the permitted means to achieving their ends is terrorism. It is just one of many ways of waging Jihad.


Some have asked: ‘What makes Willard Mitt Romney run?’

Apparently, it may be future debates.

From Byron York [again], we learn [tip of the fedora, again, to Memeorandum]:

After a debate in which Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney faced attacks from all sides, the Romney campaign says it has not yet accepted invitations to participate in two high-profile debates leading up to the January 31 Florida primary, and a key Romney adviser is expressing fatigue and frustration over what he sees as a never-ending series of GOP debates.

“There are too many of these,” Romney strategist Stuart Stevens said after Monday night’s Fox News debate at the Myrtle Beach Convention Center. “We have to bring some order to it. We haven’t accepted Florida…It’s kind of like a cruise that’s gone on too long.”

Romney will participate in the next South Carolina debate, Thursday night in Charleston. Asked by email about the candidate’s debate schedule after that, Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said, “I have no announcements to make on debates at this time.”

Poor baby.


Stacy McCain is asking a very interesting question:

After the debate last night, I talked to several people about the situation that we find ourselves in: Four days away from the crucial South Carolina primary and still we have three “not Romney” candidates — Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Rick Perry — dividing up the conservative vote. Another 10 to 15 percent of the GOP primary vote here will probably go to Ron Paul, and thus it is altogether possible that Mitt Romney could win with less than 30 percent of the vote.And so I ask: Is Fox News the problem?

This thought came to me this morning as I watched “Fox & Friends” and saw how, in the apparent interest of being “fair and balanced,” they distributed their attention between the various candidates. Knowing what an enormous influence the network has among conservative voters, is it possible that coverage by Fox News has played a major role in the way this campaign has developed?

Do take the time to click here and read the rest.

And check out the report on the debate he filed this morning over at The American Spectator.

Numquam excidit insania.

One Comment
  1. Wayne permalink
    17 January 2012 @ 15:35 15:35

    Bob, I’m overseas right now and if not for your site, I’d have no idea what was going on with the debates. Thanks for the inside scoop. I can’t bear to look at Faux Nooze anymore.
    I advise you to be very careful of Pam Geller and her kin. While they may be great allies against the encroachment of Islam, you will find they have no problems with flooding the West with 3rd world hordes until the Beloved City is completely surrounded. Her issue with the English Defense League shows her true colors when it comes to allowing the indigenous peoples of the West to retain a majority in their historic homelands. She expects them to resist the destruction of their culture by Islam (which I applaud), but not the destruction of their race (which founded their culture) by outside influence.
    It’s also a little funny that her crew sees no problem with taking whatever steps must be taken to ensure Israel remains culturally, ethnically, religiously and racially Jewish, while denying the same right to every other Western nation.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: