Race Baiters Exposed....

Finally, someone from the black community calling out the race baiters "Reverends" Sharpton & Jackson....

Now if we could find someone to call out the radical Islamic terrorists.....

 

Who knew Paul Harvey was a Prophet...?

Is Hollywood FINALLY starting to come around?

A new move due out this summer based on a book by Dinesh D'Souza....
Maybe the tide is turning.....?


2016: Obama's America | Official Movie Site

Putting the "Cool" back in Coolidge....

I find myself with a little more time on my hands these days.  So, between seeking my next source of income, studying The Book of Romans and other of life's responsibilities, I decided to enroll in Hillsdale College's online course: "Constitution 101"(free - BTW).  In the process I stumbled upon (required reading, actually) a speech from the apparently often overlooked president, Calvin Coolidge.  In the speech, President Coolidge says the following:

About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful. It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers.... 

No other theory is adequate to explain or comprehend the Declaration of Independence. It is the product of the spiritual insight of the people. We live in an age of science and of abounding accumulation of material things. These did not create our Declaration. Our Declaration created them. The things of the spirit come first. Unless we cling to that, all our material prosperity, overwhelming though it may appear, will turn to a barren scepter in our grasp. If we are to maintain the great heritage which has been bequeathed to us, we must be like-minded as the fathers who created it. We must not sink into a pagan materialism. We must cultivate the reverence which they had for the things that are holy. We must follow the spiritual and moral leadership which they showed. We must keep replenished, that they may glow with a more compelling flame, the altar fires before which they worshipped.  [all emphasis added]  - Calvin Coolidge, “The Inspiration of the Declaration,” in Foundations of the Republic: Speeches and Addresses (New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1926), 441–54 

What a great argument against those who believe the founding documents are "living breathing" documents whose meanings are subject to change with the times.  No.  Not at all.  Not even close.  That was precisely what the founding fathers where attempting to keep from happening when they declared:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, 

Wow.  Powerful stuff....  Thank you Hillsdale.

Must see videos:

The Path to Prosperity: An overview:
 





The Path to Prosperity: A visual future of our two choices:



The Path to Prosperity: The truth about Medicare & how to save it:



The Path to Prosperity Pro-growth Strategy:





How come all politicians can't be as clear and concise when they speak as Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)?  


Why do typical politicians always want to talk about past failures and place blame, rather than take an honest look at where we are, where we need to get to and paint a picture of that path for us to follow, like  Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) does?

Obama Road....

So what is after the loony left's nationalization of healthcare?

The pretext:  “Food is one of the only base human needs where the American government lets the private market dictate its delivery to our communities.”

So, now we know.  They are not just going after children's school lunches or soldiers meals.  No, now it is time to get the government involved in food distribution.  As what is the motivation?  Well, it's a "food justice" thing.  a class warfare thing - only the rich can afford to eat well.  

Before the Food Arrives on Your Plate, So Much Goes on Behind the Scenes

By DWIGHT GARNER

Published: February 20, 2012

Ms. McMillan’s chapters about Walmart and Applebee’s are the book’s best. She is not a slash-and-burn critic of either company: both provide needed jobs and treat their employees at least moderately well. But you will steer clear of both places after reading about her travails.

Sick....

Finally, The Vetting Begins...

Andrew Breitbart's final legacy...  The vetting of President Barack Hussein Obama.

The Vetting Begins

AlinskyPosterFullRez


It turns out "State Senator Baraka Obama" was part of guest panel after the play....


The play, of course, was all about what a great person Mr. Alinsky was.


I'm sure "Baraka" was there to refute what Saul Alinsky stood for, much like I'm sure Hillary Clinton's thesis in college was a refutation of Alinksky as well.  (Go ahead, click the link and read for yourself.  Then ask yourself, "Is she really a moderate?")


I encourage the you to read Breitbart's article.  Please help spread the word about the REAL Barack Hussein Obama.  And remember to watch for future installments on Breitbart's websites:
Big Government, Big Journalism, Big Hollywood and Big Peace.

Porn Stars: The Death of a Sex-Industry Profession

This is a good thing, right?


Not really.  When you read the story you find out the reason the "Porn Star" is a dying breed (pardon the pun) is because of "over supply".  In other words, it is the perfect storm for girls who want to become "Porn Stars".  It seems there is a "near unlimited supply" of girls who will do this kind of work.


The main reason for the oversupply is pretty disturbing.  Our society has finally accepted porn as mainstream, so instead of there being a stigma against "actresses" ending up doing porn as a final desperate act, girls are now growing up aspiring to work in the porn industry (i.e. have sex with strangers for money and have it videoed for distribution on the web).


If this is not a sign our society is in deep trouble, I do not know what is.


Here is the complete article:

Porn Stars: The Death of a Sex-Industry Profession

The Daily Beast

Richard Abowitz

February 28, 2012

The pull quote:

[Mark Spiegler] now turns away more aspiring porn stars than ever before. He notes that if a lot of people are willing to do a task, the star aura of the performers quickly vanishes. “A few years ago there were 100 girls in the entire industry, and now 100 girls enter the industry each week. They used to all be stars; now they all just think they’re stars.” The result, Spiegler says, is that “they’ve become interchangeable.”{Emphasis added}

He talks as if describing the parts of a machine.  'They are interchangeable', like windshield wipers.  Toss out the out worn out ones and plug in the new squeaking clean ones - until they too become old, worn and ineffective.  Like a commodity to be consumed.  


Remember, the "they" he is talking about are you daughters, sons, sisters, brothers, moms and dads.  These are human beings, treated and traded as things.  


For those of us who believe, the "they" he is describing are people created in the image if of God. Desecrated temples....

This ought to scare the bejesus out of you...

I've always held that abortion is murder.  The reason abortion is equivalent to murder is bumper sticker simple:  "If it's not a baby, you're not pregnant".  

So now that we have established abortion is murder all we are arguing about is, "At what point in time does the mother have the right to murder their child?"  Is it less than 26 weeks?  Or maybe it should be less than 3 years old?  The logic is pretty simple.

I guess my argument has gone mainstream....

From The Telegraph:

Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say

By Stephen Adams, Medical Correspondent

1:38PM GMT 29 Feb 201

Parents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are “morally irrelevant” and ending their lives is no different to abortion, a group of medical ethicists linked to Oxford University has argued.The article, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, says newborn babies are not “actual persons” and do not have a “moral right to life”. The academics also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.

The journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, said the article's authors had received death threats since publishing the article. He said those who made abusive and threatening posts about the study were “fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society”.[Emphasis Added]

The article, entitled “After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live?”, was written by two of Prof Savulescu’s former associates, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva.

They argued: “The moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus in the sense that both lack those properties that justify the attribution of a right to life to an individual.”

Rather than being “actual persons”, newborns were “potential persons”. They explained: “Both a fetus and a newborn certainly are human beings and potential persons, but neither is a ‘person’ in the sense of ‘subject of a moral right to life’.

 From the Abstract of the actual paper:

Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus’ health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled. 

So, given the moral relativism of the modern-day liberal (whether it is the Supreme Court Justice who says the U.S. Constitution is a 'living breathing document' subject to interpretation based on changing mores or it is a president who equates the burning of a Quran with the killing of American soldiers) none of this should especially be surprising.  


Now, let's think about this...  According to this report, "After-birth Abortions" are ethical and moral and Obama's Independent Payment Advisory Board [i.e., "Death Panels"] are charged with limiting the cost of health care to the federal budget by determining who qualifies for the expense of caring for certain illnesses.  


Now, cleared of the moral and ethical responsibility of killing children who may be born with "severe abnormalities whose lives can be expected to not be worth living..." the IPAB [Death Panels] can require doctors to kill the child using approved 'After-birth Abortion' techniques. Just think about that....


Do any of us wonder why our nation may have fallen out of favor with our Creator?  

Federal Checkpoints on the "Interstate" Highway system in the U.S.? Maybe...

The TSA Is Coming To a Highway Near You

Forbes.com

By Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)

Rep. Blackburn makes an effective argument as to why TSA's agents should not me considered TSO's (Transportation Security Officer's).  But to me, the most crucial paragraph is this one:

Interestingly enough, as TSA officials like to routinely point out, their agency’s acronym stands for Transportation Security Administration, not the Airport SecurityAdministration. This fact has extended the TSA’s reach has far beyond the confines of our nation’s airports. Many of my constituents discovered this first hand this past fall as those familiar blue uniforms and badges appeared on Tennessee highways. In October Tennessee became the first state to conduct a statewide Department of Homeland Security Visible Intermodal Prevention andResponse (VIPR) team operation which randomly inspected Tennessee truck drivers and cars.[Emphasis added]

 If I combine the two points Rep. Blackburn makes, I should not have to comply with a TSO on the roads anywhere in the state.  That is Municipal or State Police's territory only.  I wonder if she'll back me up if I get stopped by one and tell them they'll have to call the real authorities if they want to "inspect" anything.  


Just don't taze me bro'!!

The REAL Planned Parenthood: [WARNING: EXTREMELY GRAPHIC]

All parents should watch this....  It is frightening.  Really frightening.

The Moral Authority of the Catholic Church and Obama

American Catholicism’s Pact With the Devil

Paul A. Rahe · Feb. 10, 2012

 This article describes how the moral authority of the Catholic Church has been abdicated by equating the left's agenda for a nanny state and it's stance on the abortion issue.  It is truly fascinating.

Given that my father was a Catholic who could not partake in the Holy Sacrament because he was married to my mother who was a divorcee' I have always held a skeptical view of the Catholic Church.  Now being a born-again evangelical Christian, it weighs heavy on my heart that many of my relatives may never have that personal relationship with Jesus Christ I experience daily because religions like Catholicism which are steeped on rituals and legalistic interpretations of the Bible.     

Still, I was unaware of these history behind these decisions by the leaders of the Catholic Church, but it certainly does make sense.   Here are some excerpts:

In the 1930s, the majority of the  bishops, priests, and nuns sold their souls to the devil, and they did so with the best of intentions. In their concern for the suffering of those out of work and destitute, they wholeheartedly embraced the New Deal. They gloried in the fact that Franklin Delano Roosevelt made Frances Perkins – a devout Anglo-Catholic laywoman who belonged to the Episcopalian Church but retreated on occasion to a Catholic convent – Secretary of Labor and the first member of her sex to be awarded a cabinet post. And they welcomed Social Security – which was her handiwork. They did not stop to ponder whether public provision in this regard would subvert the moral principle that children are responsible for the well-being of their parents. They did not stop to consider whether this measure would reduce the incentives for procreation and nourish the temptation to think of sexual intercourse as an indoor sport. They did not stop to think.

In the process, the leaders of the American Catholic Church fell prey to a conceit that had long before ensnared a great many mainstream Protestants in the United States – the notion that public provision is somehow akin to charity – and so they fostered state paternalism and undermined what they professed to teach: that charity is an individual responsibility and that it is appropriate that the laity join together under the leadership of the Church to alleviate the suffering of the poor. In its place, they helped establish the Machiavellian principle that underpins modern liberalism – the notion that it is our Christian duty to confiscate other people’s money and redistribute it.

.... 

I would submit that the bishops, nuns, and priests now screaming bloody murder have gotten what they asked for. The weapon that Barack Obama has directed at the Church was fashioned to a considerable degree by Catholic churchmen. They welcomed Obamacare. They encouraged Senators and Congressmen who professed to be Catholics to vote for it.

... 

In my lifetime, to my increasing regret, the Roman Catholic Church in the United States has lost much of its moral authority. It has done so largely because it has subordinated its teaching of Catholic moral doctrine to its ambitions regarding an expansion of the administrative entitlements state. In 1973, when the Supreme Court made its decision in Roe v. Wade, had the bishops, priests, and nuns screamed bloody murder and declared war, as they have recently done, the decision would have been reversed. Instead, under the leadership of Joseph Bernardin, the Cardinal-Archbishop of Chicago, they asserted that the social teaching of the Church was a “seamless garment,” and they treated abortion as one concern among many. Here is what Cardinal Bernardin said in the Gannon Lecture at Fordham University that he delivered in 1983:

Those who defend the right to life of the weakest among us must be equally visible in support of the quality of life of the powerless among us: the old and the young, the hungry and the homeless, the undocumented immigrant and the unemployed worker.

Consistency means that we cannot have it both ways. We cannot urge a compassionate society and vigorous public policy to protect the rights of the unborn and then argue that compassion and significant public programs on behalf of the needy undermine the moral fiber of the society or are beyond the proper scope of governmental responsibility.

..... 

Upon reflection, he can accept the fig leaf that President Obama has offered him. Or he [Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York] can put Sister Keehan and her supporters in their place and fight. If he wants to regain an iota of the moral authority that the Church possessed before 1973, he will do the latter. The hour is late. Next time, the masters of the administrative entitlements state won’t even bother to offer the hierarchy a fig leaf. They know servility when they see it. 

Here is a follow-up to the controversial article above:

American Catholicism: A Call to Arms

Paul A. Rahe · Feb 15, 2012 

Was the Judge fired for this?

The Judge's show "Freedom Watch" was cancelled.  According to the Judge's own Facebook page, he said it was for business reasons, as a couple of his shows have been cancelled in the past.  Each time he was rewarded with bigger & better opportunities.

Still, it's a little unsettling....

The 2012 Index of Dependence on Government

The 2012 Index of Dependence on Government
William W. Beach is Director of the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation. 
Patrick D. Tyrrell is Research Coordinator in the Center for Data Analysis. 


I encourage you to click the links above and read the entire report.  It has many great graphs and charts that show how things are getting out of control.  We are at a tipping point in our country.  After looking through the facts, there is no doubt about the sense of urgency we need to have about the direction of the USA, lest we become yet another mediocre European style socialized democracy.  


Excerpts:

Taxes


The percentage of people who do not pay federal income taxes, and who are not claimed as dependents by someone who does pay them, jumped from 14.8 percent in 1984 to 49.5 percent in 2009. This means that in 1984, 34.8 million tax filers paid no taxes; in 2009, 151.7 million paid nothing.


70.5 percent of federal spending now goes to dependence-creating programs, up dramatically from 28.3 percent in 1962, and 48.5 percent in 1990


Beginning in 2008, the federal government took over the operations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and has since then spent more than $150 billion to keep them afloat and allow them to continue to provide mortgage credit to finance home sales. More than 90 percent of all single-family residential mortgage credit is now provided by these two government-sponsored, government-controlled enterprises, thereby extending dependence on federal assistance to middle-class and upper-middle-class households.


Medicare/Medicaid


 In 1970, 20.4 million individuals were enrolled in Medicare. By 2010, the number of enrollees had more than doubled to 47.5 million Over the next 10 years, the number of people enrolled in Medicare will increase dramatically. In 2011, the first of 81.5 million baby boomers became eligible for Medicare. In 2010, the size of the Medicare-eligible elderly population was 21.5 percent the size of the non-elderly adult population; the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) predicts that by 2035, this proportion will grow to 36.4 percent.


In 2010, 53.6 million Americans were enrolled in Medicaid, an increase of almost 3 million individuals in just one year, and 20 million since 2000. Medicaid serves a diverse population of the poor, including children, mothers, the elderly, and the disabled. Combined, the total national cost of Medicaid and CHIP in 2010 is estimated at $413 billion, and is projected to rise to $914 billion by 2020.


By 2020, Medicare spending will reach $922 billion, and total spending for Medicaid and CHIP will reach $914 billion, at which point government spending will represent 50 percent of all health care expenditures.


Welfare


The erosion of marriage and family is a primary contributing factor to child poverty and welfare dependence, and it figures significantly in a host of social problems. A child born out of wedlock is seven times more likely to be poor than a child raised by married parents, and more than 80 percent of long-term child poverty occurs in broken homes or homes where the parents never married. 


In 2009, 1.7 million children were born to unmarried parents. Contrary to popular conception, the typical single mother is not a teen, but in her twenties. Whereas in 1970, one-half of all out-of-wedlock births were to teens, in 2009, births to girls younger than 18 years of age comprise only 7 percent of such births. Sixty percent of out-of-wedlock births occur to women in their twenties. About 43 percent are high-school dropouts, and 36 percent are high-school graduates. Eighteen percent have had some college education; only 2 percent have a college degree.

In the TANF reauthorization, Congress, for the first time, enacted a healthy-marriage initiative, allocating $100 million in TANF funds per year—less than 1 percent of total TANF expenditures in FY 2006—to local organizations that provide voluntary marriage-centered services and skills training to recipients.

Yet, in February 2009, the Democrat-controlled Congress and the new Obama Administration enacted legislation that essentially overturned the fiscal foundation of welfare reform and reverted to an AFDC-style funding scheme. States now receive cash bonuses when they swell the welfare rolls.[Emphasis Mine]

Social Security

... the demographic forces that once made Social Security affordable have reversed, and the program is on an inexorable course toward fiscal crisis. To break even, Social Security needs at least 2.9 workers to pay taxes for each retiree who receives benefits. The current ratio is 3.3 workers per retiree and dropping because the baby boomers produced fewer children than their parents did and are now nearing retirement. The ratio will reach 2.9 workers per retiree around 2015 and drop to two workers per retiree in the 2030s.

Current retiree benefits are paid from the payroll taxes collected from today’s workers. Due to the effects of the recent recession, Social Security has not collected enough taxes to pay for all its promised benefits since 2010. Both the Social Security Administration and the CBO say that these deficits are permanent.

From 1983 to 2009, workers paid more in payroll taxes than the Social Security program needed in order to pay benefits. These additional taxes were supposed to be retained to help finance retirement benefits for baby boomers. But the government did not save or invest the excess taxes for the future. Instead, the government used the money to finance other government programs.

Higher Education

During the 2010–2011 school year, total federal spending on student aid programs (including tax credits and deductions, grants, and loans) was $169 billion—making total federal aid 142 percent higher than for the 2000–2001 school year (inflation-adjusted). In the 2010–2011 school year, federal grant aid increased to $49 billion, a 16 percent increase over the previous year—well ahead of the inflation rate.

Increases in federal student aid subsidies over the years have done nothing to mitigate ever-rising college costs. Tuition and fees at public and private four-year institutions rose by 7.9 percent and 4.5 percent, respectively, after adjusting for inflation, from the 2009–2010 academic year to the 2010–2011 academic year.

Farm Subsidies

 In 2009, the average farmer had a net worth of $915,019 (159 percent of the national average of household wealth); in 2010, an annual income of $84,440; while living in a rural area with a significantly lower cost of living than that of suburban and urban areas. The failure rate for farms is about one-sixth the rate of other businesses.

Yet, farm subsidies have become one of America’s largest corporate welfare programs. The majority of subsidies go to commercial farms, which report average incomes of $200,000 and net worths of nearly $2 million.  The bottom 80 percent of farmers receive just one-fifth of the subsidies

Conclusion

Americans have reached a point in the life of their republic when the democratic political process has become a means for many voters to defend and expand the “benefits” they receive from government (read: their dependence). This can only lead to a corruption of government and of self-serving voters. 

How bad are things, REALLY...?

Here are three random stories in the news today.  Each describes one part of what is a conglomeration if problems created by the mishandling of the U.S. economy by Barack Hussein Obama....

Congressional Budget Office reports another $1 trillion deficit
The Politico 
By DAVID ROGERS | 1/31/12 10:06 AM EST 

.....
The $1.079 trillion deficit now projected for this fiscal year ending Sept. 30 is a step backwards from what CBO had predicted in August.

And....

CBO: Taxes Will ‘Shoot Up by More Than 30 Percent’ Over Next 2 Years

CNSNews.com

By Terence P. Jeffrey

January 31, 2012

The amount of money the federal government takes out of the U.S. economy in taxes will increase by more than 30 percent between 2012 and 2014, according to the Budget and Economic Outlook published today by the CBO.
....
From just 2012 to 2014, the increase in federal tax revenues from $2.523 trillion to $3.313 trillion equals $790 billion—or 31.3 percent.

Latest Congressional Budget Outlook For 2012-2022 Released, Says Real Unemployment Rate Is 10%

zerohedge.com

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/31/2012

"Had that portion of the decline in the labor force participation rate since 2007 that is attributable to neither the aging of the baby boomers nor the downturn in the business cycle (on the basis of the experience in previous downturns) not occurred, the unemployment rate in the fourth quarter of 2011 would have been about 1¼ percentage points higher than the actual rate of 8.7 percent" translation: CBO just admitted that the BLS numbers are bogus and real unemployment is 10%. 

So, where does that leave us?  Well pretty screwed...  It does not seem that the MSM (Mainstream Media) will be reporting this type of info anytime soon, as it my have a negative impact on out Dear Leaders campaign to remain Emperor for 4 more years....


The Obama's want round 2 for another crack at more than 90 rounds of golf, extravagant vacations to Martha's Vineyard & Hawaii, Michelle's vacation to Spain, parties and state dinners at the White House, and date nights to NYC....  


Meantime, we have to pay...  

Ron Paul supported Cynthia McKinney in 2008...?

That is about all you need to know about Ron Paul.  I agree with his fiscal policies, but that is about where my agreement with him stops.


Here's the story from 2008:

Paul dismisses major party nominees

Posted by Foon Rhee, deputy national political editor September 10, 2008 07:31 PM

Boston Globe

Former presidential candidate Ron Paul urged his supporters today to vote for a minor-party candidate, saying that he had rejected a last-minute appeal from Republican John McCain for his endorsement. 

The Texas congressman cultivated a loyal following and raised sizable amounts of campaign cash online during the Republican primaries. 

At a news conference in Washington he appeared with independent Ralph Nader, the consumer activist, and Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney, the former Georgia congresswoman. 

Libertarian candidate Bob Barr, the former Republican congressman from Georgia, held his own news conference to announce he has asked Paul, the party's nominee in 1988, to be his running mate. 

In a letter sent to Paul, Barr called Paul one of the "few American patriots" who exist in today's society, and asked him to "seriously consider this final offer as an opportunity to show true, lasting leadership beyond party politics."
UPDATE: Nader issued a statement tonight:

"Today, along with other third party candidates, I joined Congressman Ron Paul to endorse a common agenda that stands up for the US Constitution by ending illegal wars, and protecting the privacy and civil liberties of all persons under US jurisdiction. We also jointly called for an immediate halt to the increase in the national debt, an end to corporate subsidies and taxpayer bailouts of corporations, and to start aggressively pursuing prosecution of corporations that commit crimes and frauds.

"Both Congressman Paul and I also support holding President Bush and Dick Cheney to account for their transgressions against our Constitution.

"Today's coming together of third party candidates marks the beginning of the realignment of American politics.

"While Congressman Paul and I do not agree on all things -- such as health and safety regulations, health insurance systems, and how to handle areas where the market fails or is not up to the task of getting the best outcomes for the American people -- on the overriding foreign policy, reckless waste financed by deficit spending, and civil liberties issues of the day, we stand together. He is a stalwart who has consistently stood up for what he believes in and never wavered when he is opposed by the legions of commercial interests and lobbyists that swarm the Capitol." 

When you're sharing the stage in support of Cynthia McKinney & Ralph Nader, you know you've gone too far....  It's too bad most of his supporters are ill-informed college kids or idealists. 


Even Rand Paul looked uncomfortable sharing the stage with his father in Iowa. 

Who's next? Olympia Snowe & Susan Collins?

From Politico:

McCain to endorse Romney tomorrow

By EMILY SCHULTHEIS

1/4/12 12:09 AM EST

John McCain will endorse his '08 rival Mitt Romney tomorrow, a top Republican source confirmed to POLITICO.
The Arizona senator fought a bitter nomination battle with Romney four years ago, though Romney has worked to mend the relationship since then. The endorsement was first reported byBuzzFeed.McCain’s endorsement will help Romney pivot away from Iowa, toward New Hampshire, and turn the page on the caucuses in any case. But McCain also symbolizes much of what the GOP base doesn’t want in its 2012 nominee, so it’ll be interesting to see just how closely Romney hugs the Arizona senator.
The endorsement is also a blow to Jon Huntsman, who has attempted to campaign as a McCain-style maverick and staked his whole bid on the state that made McCain a national figure.

I am sure Romney thinks this is a good thing.  Personally, I think it's the kiss of death.