While diverging from Ron Paul on a number of political issues, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) says he is not ready to see the liberty-minded Texas Congressman withdraw from the GOP presidential race. "I really don’t want Ron Paul to drop out until whoever our front-runner is is collecting some of the ideas that he’s talking about," DeMint said when the Daily Caller asked him whether it was time for other GOP contenders to relinquish their campaigns and support former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, who took first place in both the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary.
As Minnesota voters gear up to vote on a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as only between a man and a woman, the Catholic Church’s archbishop for Minneapolis and St. Paul has ordered priests in his diocese to show their support for the amendment effort — and the church’s stand on the institution of marriage, which they promised to defend when they were ordained — or remain silent.
According to the Progressive Catholic Voice, a blog that supports same-sex marriage, the letter from Archbishop John Niensedt was addressed to the priests and deacons of the archdiocese and was originally published in the Archdiocesan Updates newsletter.
In the epistle to his fellow priests, Niensedt, who has been a vocal supporter of the marriage amendment, wrote, “I do not believe it is an exaggeration to say that in this movement to protect and defend the definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman we are faced with one of the greatest challenges of our times.” He warned that the goal of those who oppose passage of the marriage amendment “is not just to secure certain benefits for a particular minority, but, I believe, to eliminate the need for marriage altogether.”
In what some legal analysts consider the most significant decision covering religious freedom in the last 20 years, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled January 11 that a religious organization has the right to fire an employee under the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s “ministerial exception” clause.
Moments after placing a strong second in the New Hampshire primary, Ron Paul sent a message to all the other Republican presidential candidates who have never been Governor of Massachusetts: Get out of the race so I can beat Mitt Romney. In a statement, Paul’s national campaign chairman Jesse Benton asserted that Paul’s strong finish in the Granite State, and his “top-tier showing in Iowa,” demonstrate that “he is the sole Republican candidate who can take on and defeat both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.”
Newt Gingrich’s campaign, now in a free fall after dismal results in New Hampshire and Iowa, is unloading what’s left of his arsenal on the victor in those two races — Mitt Romney. Gingrich calls Romney a “Massachusetts moderate” and is warning voters that he is looking to “European Socialist ideas” to rescue America from the current economic quagmire.
Of course, sour grapes might account for Gingrich’s charges, but regardless of the motivation behind these accusations, it behooves Republicans to analyze the allegations and see if there is any truth behind the bitterness.
There’s a lot about Mitt Romney that doesn’t appeal to advocates of limited government within the GOP. He is the man who signed the individual mandate into law, he’s wishy-washy on his commitment to reform Social Security, and he’s a champion of ethanol subsidies. These are not the hallmarks of a candidate keen on attracting conservatives, true constitutional conservatives.
Regardless of his policy positions and his record as Governor, Mitt Romney is winning. Perhaps there is a prevalent spirit among Republican voters that anybody would be better than President Obama. That theory might be based on the correct premise that President Obama is systematically usurping powers not given him by the Constitution and then employing those unlawfully gotten powers to convert the United States of America into a socialist democracy based on the European model. In that case, Mitt Romney is no different from Barack Obama.
Want proof that the establishment (the so-called “conservative” establishment, that is) fears Ron Paul and needs Mitt Romney to win the Republican campaign for President? Read this headline from the Wall Street Journal: "No one has done more to help Mitt Romney than has the libertarian candidate Ron Paul, who has no chance to win the GOP presidential nomination himself."
Nero fiddled while Rome burned. Barack Obama hosted a dress-up fantasy tea party while millions of Americans went without the very basic necessities of real life. A shocking story published in the New York Post paints a vulgar picture: A White House “Alice in Wonderland” costume ball — put on by Johnny Depp and Hollywood director Tim Burton — proved to be a Mad-as-a-Hatter idea that was never made public for fear of a political backlash during hard economic times, according to a new tell-all.
Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney won the first-in-the-nation New Hampshire primary January 10 with 38 percent of the vote, and Texas Congressman Ron Paul placed a strong second with 23 percent (with 78 percent of the precincts reporting).
"The president has run out of ideas," Romney said in his victory speech. "Now he's running out of excuses. And tonight, we're asking the good people of South Carolina to join the citizens of New Hampshire and make 2012 the year he runs out of time."
"He had a victory," Ron Paul said of Romney. Regarding his own second-place showing, Paul said, "We had a victory for the cause of liberty tonight."
Paul's speech had a different substance than Romney's partisan speech. Paul focused upon ideas in his talk. "I sort of have to chuckle when they describe you and me as being dangerous," Paul told his supporters. "We are dangerous to the status quo in this country. And we will remain a danger to the Federal Reserve system as well." The mostly young audience broke out in loud chants of "End the Fed! End the Fed!" Paul had predicted the housing and financial crisis as early as 2001, and warned that the United States was currently in the midst of a currency crisis.
As New Hampshire voters go to the polls in the nation’s first presidential primary of 2012, the results of last week’s Iowa caucuses have still not yet been certified. The Iowa GOP leadership decided to accumulate the vote totals of the caucuses at a secret location based on a threat that they received from a group called Anonymous.
But now, the secrecy decision by the Iowa GOP leadership is beginning to haunt them. KCCI-TV in Des Moines reported that one of participants in the vote count, Edward True of Moulton, Iowa, compared his totals to those posted by the Iowa GOP and found a discrepancy. The discrepancy is in Mitt Romney’s favor by 20 votes. True’s total for Mitt Romney at his caucus was 2 votes, but the Iowa GOP showed 22 votes.
The newscast went on to state that a spokeswoman for the Iowa GOP said that because True was not a Precinct Captain nor a county chair, “He had no business talking about election results.” That’s not how America was founded. The credibility of a witness is not based on the status of the person, but rather on his own merit. That’s why our U.S. Constitution forbids granting of titles of privilege to persons and the Declaration Independence states that all men were created equal.
In 1992 JBS President John McManus told who was behind the unwarranted smear on the JBS in 1961.