The Reason Ron Paul Won't Run 3rd Party

It's been a big concern for conservatives and Republicans in general: Will Ron Paul run as a third party candidate in the likely possibility that he doesn't win the Republican nomination?  To his credit, Congressman Paul has stated that he almost certainly will not run third party campaign (reserving only the slightest of options).  Yet among us who believe the #1 priority above all else in the world for 2012 is to fire Barack Obama and elect a new President, there remains a healthy concern.  We know that a Paul run would likely divide the conservative vote and most likely would re-elect Obama. I do believe Ron Paul realizes this and, out of patriotism and love of country, so for this reason alone he will not run third party.  But there is a bigger reason.

I'm here to tell you the number one reason why Ron Paul will not run third party. Are you ready?  I want to make sure you're paying attention, ok?  Ready?  Here's why Ron Paul will not run third party:  Randall Howard Paul. 

(Better known to us as Kentucky Senator Rand Paul.)

Ron Paul will not run as a third party candidate because he knows it will absolutely destroy his son's political career. Rand won't be able to get himself on the ballot for Dog Catcher as the Republican nominee.  And personally, I think that would be a shame, because I like Rand Paul an awful lot.  Senator Paul has his father's sensible economic policy while actually being in touch with reality on foreign policy and having the ability to communicate conservatism effectively. In short, there's a reason why I name Rand Paul in the company of people like Nikki Haley, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindall and of course (genuine chills of excitement) Marco Rubio.

Congressman Paul's first choice is to be the President, but I also know he'd be pretty happy to be the President's father as well.  More importantly, Congressman Paul is a pragmatist.  To his credit, he cares more about his issues than about his own electoral success.  I think Congressman Paul knows that his son may be capable of drawing support than he has been to date.  (For example, Senator Paul doesn't have his father's tendency to ramble and stammer when he speaks.)

Ultimately, Congressman Paul will not run 3rd Party so he doesn't hurt Senator Rand Paul's ability to run and continue to champion many of his favorite issues.  So, unless I am completely off base, we can trust Ron Paul when he says he will not run as a 3rd Party Candidate.

Biblical Conservatism Blog is responsible for the content of this message. 

(Belated) Reactions to the CNN-FL Debate

To my regular readers:  I apologize for the delay in publishing my reactions to this debate.  I unfortunately found myself laid up with a stomach bug Thursday and Friday, so I was unable to publish this article until now.  Thank you as always for reading!

Thursday night, the four remaining Republican candidates for President meant for their 207^th Debate in the 2012 Election (give or take four or five).  The polls have shown Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich trading leads for the last couple weeks.  We know this debate will not be the last…although the 208^th Debate won’t be happening for nearly a month.  So this debate was a big one.  Not only is Florida the first winner-take-all Primary, but there are five primaries happening between now and the next debate.

---------------------------

Newt Gingrich – Buy (Buy):   

Newt came out of South Carolina on Saturday the big winner.  20+% swung from Mittens to Newt, largely on the strength of the two debates leading up to South Carolina.  Now we’re on to Florida, with again two debates before the primary. 

At the beginning, Newt said something I’ve said again and again: Ronald Reagan was called “unelectable” too.  How’d that work out?  Reagan crushed Jimmy Carter in 1980.  That’s because real conservatism wins every time it’s effectively communicated.  That’s why Newt is rising, friends, he’s effectively communicating conservatism.

Mittens tried to go after Newt on his record, and Newt dodged and weaved with skill reminiscent of Mohammed Ali. I think he did a great job of responding to Mitt’s attacks.  I think Newt was more relaxed this debate, but do not confuse that for failure to be strong.  He had more of a Ronald Reagan “There you go again” mentality with Mittens, yet stronger.  He showed why he can absolutely smack down Obama’s guaranteed lies and spin in a way that will be convincing while also effectively communicating conservatism.

I heard Speaker Gingrich comment that it seemed like the Romney campaign filled the room with supporters at this debate.  When I heard it I thought to myself “Oh Newt…come on.”  Then I watched the debate.  Mitt got huge applause on baloney lines and for sounding like a jerk.  So maybe Newt was right after all.

I thought Newt did a pretty good job of dealing with the onslaught from Mittens, if you paid attention just to the volleys back and forth between the two and not to the decidedly pro-Mittens crowd (whether that was by design or by accident, I’ll leave that up to you to decide).  I think Newt was right to be absolutely furious with Mittens when Romney started complaining about false attacks from Newt, given how many false attacks that Mittens launched at Newt, especially in Iowa.  It was, of course, a bunch of baloney to hear Mitt start to get self-righteous about attacks when he’s been the greatest user of that sort of attacks and then he’s pretended it wasn’t him. 

As far as the idea of a private sector Space Race: First of all, it was made to be a silly concept, but of course it wasn’t silly when John F. Kennedy set the goal of putting a man on the moon.  Given a Newt’s concept, a fiscal prize setup for the company that got the job done, that wouldn’t be unbelievable.  Set a $10 Billion prize for the company that sets up a Lunar Colony and all of a sudden the private sector is going to get it done.  Is it a big idea?  Sure.  But this is a big idea country.  When Kennedy said we were going to put a man on the moon in ten years that was a big idea.  When Ronald Reagan said “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” it was a big idea.  When Thomas Jefferson commissioned Meriwether Lewis and William Clark on their expedition to the West Coast, it was a big idea.  When Abraham Lincoln authorized the creation of the Transcontinental Railroad, you guessed it, big idea.  I think you get the point. 

I felt the one great “Newt Moment” in this debate was when Newt talked about his faith and the need of God in his life.  Friends, that moment was the moment that showed what I keep saying when people ask me how can I back Newt given his moral failures:  Newt, like me, is a repentant sinner, saved by the grace of God through the blood of Jesus Christ.  The song says “Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me, I once was lost but now I’m found, was blind but now I see.”  A close friend of mine owns a shirt that says “I’m the wretch the song refers to.”  Newt is a sinful man saved by grace who has repented of his sins and is now serving God, and I know what the Bible says, that Heaven rejoices more over one sinner who repents than hundreds who need not repent. 

Newt was good in this debate.  Unfortunately, I didn’t think he was great.  I wish he had been.  If Newt can win in Florida, it will be a big, big victory.  A great debate would’ve made that an almost certainty.  He didn’t have that, and unfortunately that could mean he doesn’t win Florida. 

And then, just as I was feeling a little glum about Newt, I got the tweet that Herman Cain would endorse Newt, and that’s a big endorsement for Speaker Gingrich.  Combine that with the endorsements this week with the endorsements of Michael Reagan and Nancy Reagan, Speaker Gingrich has some solid conservatives endorsing him.  Then Newt said something that, not surprisingly gave me chills.  He alluded to having Senator Marco Rubio in mind as a running mate.  I will not count out Newt in Florida, as of now I’d say it’s anyone’s game (between Newt and Mitt).

Ron Paul - Sold (Sold):        

Ron Paul was asked early on if he was going to run as a 3^rd Party candidate.  Congressman Paul has said over and over again that he won’t run 3^rd Party.  (I’ve got an article telling you why I will guarantee with almost absolute certainty that Ron Paul won’t run 3^rd Party…but I’ll make you read it when the news cycle allows.)  Rather, Congressman Paul showed really why he’s staying in this thing in his response about backing a theoretical nominee Speaker Gingrich:  He said that the Speaker has picked up on Congressman Paul’s beliefs on the Federal Reserve and a Gold Standard.  As I’ve said, Congressman Paul wants his policies on the 2012 Republican Platform, and if it’s economic and monetary policy, I absolutely welcome those policies.

Ah, Ron Paul.  Congressman Paul had his moments where I shook my head as he talked about Happy Imagination Land, for example, when talking about self-determination for nations when it comes to self-determining themselves into Communism and thus becoming our enemies and attacking their own people.  Then he talked about his fiscal policies and I stood up and cheered.  I’d love to see Congressman Paul in the new Republican Administration as the Treasury Secretary, or perhaps as the Chief of the Federal Reserve.  As I’ve said, I’m glad Congressman Paul is in my party, but I’m also glad he’s not going to be our nominee. 

Mitt Romney– Buy (Buy):   

Mitt tried to attack Newt.  I didn’t think it worked.  Honestly, it sounded like he was begging Republicans to settle for him.  Now I’d like to say that Mitt did not come off as strong in defending against Newt and was even weaker at attacking.  My friends, I’m not saying Mittens can’t beat Obama, because as I’ve said dozens of times, Foghorn Leghorn (R) will beat Obama.  Obama has been an awful President, and he’s going to lose.  So I won’t say that Mittens can’t win.  BUT, if Mitt’s going to be the Republican nominee, he’s got to get a whole lot stronger.  Or, Option B, we can simply NOT run a Rockefeller Republican (a better label I believe than “Massachusetts Moderate” in my opinion).

Mitt sounds Presidential when he’s given the chance to talk on his own about his policies and his free enterprise experience.  When he’s responding to attacks, he becomes less strong.  I love when Mitt says “I’m not going to apologize for being successful.”  He’s right.  Mitt earned his money.  He worked his tail off, he took risks, and he’s earned his wealth.  That’s called the American Dreams.  If Mitt becomes the nominee, he should thank Newt and Santorum for teaching him how to respond to those attacks.

Mitt, Mitt, Mitt.  You are just not going to make this easy on me if you’re the nominee, are you?  You really ticked me off in this debate.  He needed an “I believe in Harvey Dent” button on.  He gets indignant about attack ads, which I find the height of hypocrisy, because Mitt flat out knocked Newt out of the race in Iowa with those precise types of attack ads.  He had a pro-Romney crowd in that place.  Newt thought it was intentional.  Honestly, I can see how Newt felt that way.  Clearly, the Romney Attack machine has been working hard.

On the bright side, Mitt did deal with attacks in a way that will be necessary against Obama.  But Romneycare is going to be tough for Mittens against Obama.  I posted a commercial that Winning the Future PAC created about Obama’s Dream Debate (vs. Mittens) about Romneycare.  I think that’s going to be a tough, tough issue.  More importantly, we’ve got a stronger conservative available in this race. 

When Mitt wasn’t ticking me off he was Presidential and solid.  THAT Mitt I could get behind in a general election, if I can’t get my preferred, more conservative candidate.  Furthermore, if Mittens does use the same level of attacks on President Obama as he does on Newt, it’ll be a strong run and probably a landslide, but that’s because every single one of these candidates will beat Obama handily. 

Rick Santorum - Hold (Buy):

Ah Senator Santorum.  I like him.  I’m beginning to believe increasingly that he’d be a great George Bush (41) to Gingrich’s Reagan, while actually being genuinely conservative (which Bush 41 failed to be).  He’d be an excellent balanced to a guy like Newt.  As far as winning the nomination, Santorum has an uphill battle.  He doesn’t have the ability to use the retail politics that won Iowa in Florida and the upcoming states.  I think he’s back where I originally predicted him: a Vice Presidential option at best.

Santorum had a great debate.  I especially enjoyed when he made the point that Speaker Gingrich chose to use his experience to advise Fannie Mae and Governor Romney worked hard and earned his money and is very wealthy.  Senator Santorum was correct.  He did a fine job and I’m going to say this officially: Gingrich/Santorum 2012.  There.  I said it.  I think Senator Santorum would be the perfect running mate for Newt if he was our nominee. 

I like Santorum.  I like when he talks about his faith, because he, (like Newt and Ron Paul) are my brothers in Jesus Christ.  (I’m not going to delve into the differences between Christianity and Mormonism and why Mitt Romney and I do not share the same faith, save to say that my Jesus isn’t the same Jesus that Mormonism teaches.  Email me if you’d like a further explanation.)

I do suspect we’ll see Santorum drop out of the race after Florida, given the fact that he’s polling at one third of what Gingrich and Romney are getting.  I only hope he does right by the conservative values he espouses and endorses Gingrich. 

---------------------------

I watched this debate hearing how Mittens took it to Newt and how Mittens won the debate hands down.  I watched this and purposely did not judge based on audience reaction, and I honestly did not agree. Honestly, I didn’t think you could call any one man the winner of that debate, so I won’t.

Florida is going to be interesting.  Romney’s attacks are working, but not as well as they did in Iowa, mainly because Newt’s got the bank roll to fight back. Either way, this is going to be a long fight.  Remember, only three states have voted and Florida is the fourth.  So far Mittens has 33 delegates and Newt has 25, out of 700+ needed to win.  Florida is a fairly large prize at 50 delegates, but remember there are still 46 states left to vote.  So whether Newt wins or Mitt wins, there will still be a long drawn out fight in front of us.  Time will tell the rest.   

Why Are Obama’s Media Supporters So Clueless?

Just in case you’re actually steel willed enough to ignore anything that comes out of Newsweek and therefore have managed to block out the ridiculous article that graced the cover of that disgrace of a publication: the cover story of Newsweek recently asked the question “Why Are Obama’s Critics So Dumb?” 

Apparently Newsweek, a Drive-By Media anchor, has decided to turn away from page one of the Democrat Playbook (aka Republicans are cruel and want old/poor people to die) and have turned to page two (aka Republicans/Conservatives are dumb).  The claim is always that Democrats and liberals are brilliant and Republicans and conservatives are stupid.  The author of the article is the supposedly conservative (but only in a world where conservatism is synonymous with being anti-Israel, promotes redefining marriage to shoehorn in gay couples, supported Barack Obama in 2012 and one who calls himself a faithful Catholic yet lives a lifestyle that the Bible refers to as a “detestable sin”…these are traits of strong conservatives right?) Andrew Sullivan.  (Sadly, this is what passes for a conservative at Newsweek.)

Yes, the same guy who spent months obsessing about Sarah Palin’s uterus and asserting that Trig Palin wasn’t really Sarah and Todd’s child, throwing out such outlandish possibilities as “he’s really Bristol Palin’s son “ (even though Bristol was pregnant with her son Tripp at the time, and we can clearly see both children).  This is what the Drive-By Media considers a real journalist.

I’m not going to dignify this article with an analysis.  It’s a the typical baloney the Drive-By Media uses to prop up their candidates.  They used to get away with it.  Not anymore.  There is a Conservative Media now.  Back in the early 1990s when the Right-Wing Media consisted basically of Rush Limbaugh, the Weekly Standard, the Heritage Foundation and a few local talk shows, they got away with this baloney.  Now there’s not just Rush but Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, and so very many others on radio; Fox News; podcasts galore, and of course, lowly bloggers like yours truly.  There are people by the tens of thousands rebuking the Drive-By Media’s attempt to cover up the Obama Administration’s absolute failure. 

So here’s the truth, friends:  Obama’s signature bill, Obamacare, is so wildly unpopular the President won’t even talk about it.  Anyone remember how George W. Bush never talked about his signature tax cut, or how Ronald Reagan never talked about his tax overhauls, or how Bill Clinton never talked about Welfare Reform?  Me neither.  Yet the President won’t mention his Healthcare law, because he knows it’s toxic.  Economic recoveries don’t take the form of a hundred thousand jobs a month, and don’t take two years for the unemployment to drop .5%...unless they are so horribly mismanaged that business is unwilling to hire for fear of liberal punishment of success.  Successful presidents don’t get thrown out of countries that they’ve liberated and they don’t back the overthrow of a maniacal government that is friendly to our country in favor of a maniacal government that is equally repressive and also unfriendly to our country. 

Obama is a failure.  Pure and simple.  And yet his supporters blindly back him.  They can’t accept their own stupidity in backing a man who was brought to power on promises of Hopey-Change and has only made changes people don’t want that have not helped the country.  And yet his supporters blindly back him.  Obama has failed.  But rather than admit their mistake in voting for him, Obama’s supporters instead call those of us who saw through Obama in the first place stupid. 

So I must ask the question: Why are Obama’s Media supporters so clueless?



This ad was not paid for by any political campaign. It has been embeded by the editor of this blog as part of his personal endorsement of Newt Gingrich and is therefore not subject to equal time requirements.

Reactions to the State of the Union Address

Unelectable. It’s a term that’s been thrown around at every Republican candidate who isn’t a wimpy moderate. I’ve said multiple times that there wasn’t a Republican in the field that couldn’t win in 2012. There is one candidate who is indeed unelectable: Barack Obama.

Last night’s State of the Union address proved it. Considering we’ve seen this speech multiple times. He said “pay their fair share” four times, he used class warfare twenty-three times, blamed Congress sixteen times, and he blamed others twenty-two times. He proposed raising taxes eight times and demanded/requested more executive power to go around Congress five times. He asked for increased spending sixteen times. Then he proposed a few policies that he knows very well don’t have a snowball’s chance in July of passing into law. He talked about investing in “Green Energy” that is not even close to being a fitting replacement for fossil fuels (while not noting that his previous investments in “Green Energy” already resulted in bankruptcy – see Solyndra). This President doesn’t have a new idea. All he wants to do is spend more money that we don’t have. That’s all he’s got. He’s doubling and tripling down on the same bad policies that have failed. The only thing he was correct on was saying that it’s unlikely anything will get done in Congress this year. Of course, he didn’t mention that it’s his party that obstructs good policies and forces bad.

Of course, the President didn’t take the blame that is deservedly his. He blamed everyone else. He blamed everything in the economy on failures that happened before he took office. Big shock. He did not mention that he’s had three years and he’s done nothing to help. Don’t worry, there were also bad ideas in this speech, like trying to levy a tax on businesses that outsource. Because the best way to keep people from leaving a bad economic climate is to make it worse. Oh, and how are you going to enforce it? How you going to tax people who don’t live here or earn their income here? Oh…I forgot…we’re not supposed to use logic with Obama policies. He also demanded a new bureaucracy that was going to somehow stop a foreign nation from stealing. And he’s going to enforce it how? Oh right…don’t scrutinize.

Then he insults our intelligence. Last night’s speech was not about the State of the Union. Last night’s speech was a campaign speech. Obama used the House chamber to attempt to cover up one very important fact: Obama is a failure. He has spent trillions of dollars in borrowed money, spending that he guaranteed if we spent we wouldn’t see unemployment above 8%. That was three years ago, and we’re still above the promised unemployment. (Oh, by the way, if the only reason unemployment is at the 8.5% rate that it is recorded at is because the number of available jobs has shrunk significantly since Obama took office.)

Friends, if the State of the Union showed anything, it showed that we Republicans should nominate the strongest conservative available. The Democrats are planning on running OBAMA! They are planning to run an unelectable failure of a President who doesn’t know how to create jobs and wants to push through laws like Obamacare that the American people didn’t want then and don’t want now. This President is a miserable failure. Last night proved it. I can’t wait until we fire Obama, because he’s failed to do his job. I can’t wait until we get a President who believes in America as founded. I can’t wait until we get a President who recognizes that government is not the solution to our problem, government IS the problem. So let’s elect that next President, so we never have to listen to another Obama State of the Union.



This ad was not paid for by any political organizattion. It has been embeded by the editor of this blog as part of his personal endorsement of the National Republican Senatorial Committee and is therefore not subject to equal time requirements.

Reactions to the NBC-Florida Debate

Last night, NBC hosted a debate in Florida, the first of two this week.  First and foremost, I want to give NBC the award for stupidest debate presentation ever.  What is below is the TV Guide for LAST NIGHT as of 6 pm:

That’s right, gang, not only did NBC NOT list the debate as “Republican Debate” or some other such thing but instead listed it as “Rock Center with Brian Williams” (yeah, the place where the debate was held)…they also did not actually LIST THE THING as starting at 9!  Nope, the TV guide showed “Fear Factor.”  Brilliant, NBC, brilliant.

In all seriousness, NBC is either run by the biggest dunces in the history of ever or they were trying to under promote this thing (after all, a real conservative is winning and gaining support from debates.)  Honestly, I’m inclined to believe that it’s both.

Now to the moderators: I’m going to give Brian Williams some credit.  I believe he did a pretty good job of being fair.  He brought up the pertinent issues of the debate and actually gave the candidates a chance to respond to each other’s attacks.  I also appreciate him letting Gingrich and Romney go back and forth. 

Now, let’s take the time to play a game of Buy, Hold, Sell and Sell All.  In addition, I’ve included another comment for each candidate; what individual(s) I believe would be the perfect Vice Presidential nominee if that candidate was our Presidential nominee:

---------------------------

Newt Gingrich – Buy (Buy):   

First of all, Newt hit the cover off the ball with his response to the “open marriage” accusations from his ex-wife.  The reality is exes can say false things because divorce can be a painful thing.  But he answered it perfectly. He shut down this so fast it should give the Drive-By Media whiplash.  The Media will try their best to pin this story, but it simply is a distraction and Newt is going to give the Drive-Bys the kind of smackdown they deserve and that most conservatives fail to give.  He got a standing ovation from the live audience for his response.  It was absolutely the best response to such attacks I have seen in now 19 years and nine national elections of paying close attention. 

Beyond that, Newt had another very good debate.  His moments were excellent.  He really showed himself to be the Newt that I endorsed three weeks ago.  I would love to see him debate Obama, and I believe he will mop the floor with the Bamster in 2012 if he’s our nominee.  Don’t buy into the “unelectable” line, friends.  The same type of pundits said Reagan was unelectable.  Conservatism wins, and Newt will win if he’s the nominee.

Newt came out of South Carolina on Saturday the big winner.  20+% swung from Mittens to Newt, largely on the strength of the two debates leading up to South Carolina.  Now we’re on to Florida, with again two debates before the primary. 

At the beginning, Newt said something I’ve said again and again: Ronald Reagan was called “unelectable” too.  How’d that work out?  Reagan crushed Jimmy Carter in 1980.  That’s because real conservatism wins every time it’s effectively communicated.  That’s why Newt is rising, friends, he’s effectively communicating conservatism.

Mittens tried to go after Newt on his record, and Newt dodged and weaved with skill reminiscent of Mohammed Ali. I think he did a great job of responding to Mitt’s attacks.  I think Newt was more relaxed this debate, but do not confuse that for failure to be strong.  He had more of a Ronald Reagan “There you go again” mentality with Mittens, yet stronger.  He showed why he can absolutely smack down Obama’s guaranteed lies and spin in a way that will be convincing while also effectively communicating conservatism.

Best Running Mate:  Rick Santorum, LA Governor Bobby Jindall – (Both would bring a calm but strongly conservative balance to Newt’s attack dog style).

(Or, FL Senator Marco Rubio.)

Ron Paul - Sold (Sold):        

Hey…Ron Paul was at this debate!  I kid, but Congressman Paul was somewhat to the side of the three way battles that happened between Gingrich, Santorum and Romney, and sometimes he contributed some really great points.  Like his statement about the cost of a Made in China product vs. a Made in America product.  (I’ve noted before that a Made in America iPod, for example, would cost over $1000, and that’s for a 2 GB one.)  It was an excellent metaphor for the Paul campaign.  He’s here to promote ideas.  I think Congressman Paul knows that he’s not going to be the nominee, but he’s in this to rack up as many delegates as he can to force his ideas onto the platform, and provided they are the economic policies I want Ron Paul ideas on the platform. 

Side note: I never realized Dr. Paul practiced medicine as an OBG/YN…in my mind’s eye I saw him as a family practice doctor…and honestly (and yes, I know this is silly, I don’t hold any credence to this thought)…it’s just a weird thought to wrap my head around. 

Ron Paul was asked early on if he was going to run as a 3^rd Party candidate.  Congressman Paul has said over and over again that he won’t run 3^rd Party.  (I’ve got an article telling you why I will guarantee with almost absolute certainty that Ron Paul won’t run 3^rd Party…but I’ll make you read it when the news cycle allows.)  Rather, Congressman Paul showed really why he’s staying in this thing in his response about backing a theoretical nominee Speaker Gingrich:  He said that the Speaker has picked up on Congressman Paul’s beliefs on the Federal Reserve and a Gold Standard.  As I’ve said, Congressman Paul wants his policies on the 2012 Republican Platform, and if it’s economic and monetary policy, I absolutely welcome those policies.

Best Running Mate Options:  FL Congressman (Colonel) Allen West – West would give Paul what he would desperately need…military strength.  Colonel West would be a perfect option.

(Or, FL Senator Marco Rubio.)

Mitt Romney– Buy (Buy):   

Mitt kicked off this debate talking about capitalism.  He reminded me again why, if I can’t have my preferred candidate, I can live with Mittens. He did an excellent job of articulating the difference between conservatism and what President Obama believes.  We believe that it’s good to take risk with money and make a profit.  We believe it’s good for those who take risks to make a profit, because that profit goes into purchasing goods and services and often gets reinvested into that company and that means jobs either way.  Capitalism and investment are good things.  Business is what create jobs, not government. 

Mitt said something last night that I’ve been waiting for him to say: “I’m not going to apologize for being successful.”  Amen!  Mitt should not apologize for succeeding.  He is a man who has worked hard, taken risks, and succeeded, and he should be proud of it.

Mitt tried to attack Newt.  I didn’t think it worked.  Honestly, it sounded like he was begging Republicans to settle for him.  Now I’d like to say that Mitt did not come off as strong in defending against Newt and was even weaker at attacking.  My friends, I’m not saying Mittens can’t beat Obama, because as I’ve said dozens of times, Foghorn Leghorn (R) will beat Obama.  Obama has been an awful President, and he’s going to lose.  So I won’t say that Mittens can’t win.  BUT, if Mitt’s going to be the Republican nominee, he’s got to get a whole lot stronger.  Or, Option B, we can simply NOT run a Rockefeller Republican (a better label I believe than “Massachusetts Moderate” in my opinion).

Mitt sounds Presidential when he’s given the chance to talk on his own about his policies and his free enterprise experience.  When he’s responding to attacks, he becomes less strong.  I love when Mitt says “I’m not going to apologize for being successful.”  He’s right.  Mitt earned his money.  He worked his tail off, he took risks, and he’s earned his wealth.  That’s called the American Dreams.  If Mitt becomes the nominee, he should thank Newt and Santorum for teaching him how to respond to those attacks.

Best Running Mate Options:  SC Governor Nikki Haley, LA Governor Bobby Jindall - Both would give Mitt a strong Tea Party running mate to shore up the conservative base as well as a Southern support. 

(Or, FL Senator Marco Rubio.)

Rick Santorum - Hold (Buy):

Santorum gave Mittens a smack on Romneycare and really nailed it.  He also went after Newt on the topic.  I felt the punch landed with Mittens and hit the gloves on Newt. (For those of you from Palm Beach County, FL, in boxing when a boxer blocks an incoming punch from his opponent.  Newt blocked it.)  When Newt responded, I watched the split screen between Newt and Santorum, and Santorum had a look of “oh darn he handled that” when Newt responded. 

Overall, Senator Santorum had a strong debate. He was good.  He came across as strong and solid, and believe me I would be fine with a President Santorum.  I did like Senator Santorum’s response to the tax release question: “I do my own taxes and I’m not at home.  They’re on my computer.  When I get home you’ll get them.”

I’ve commented that Governor Romney sounds Presidential.  Senator Santorum sounds like a great #2.  He sounds like a Vice President.  I do like the idea of Rick Santorum as Vice President.  He’d be a good strategic move because he can bring in Pennsylvania.  The only better Vice Presidential options I can think of are Michelle Bachmann (who can truly bag the Tea Party vote), Herman Cain (if he’s not so damaged after the baloney smear scandal) and…legitimate shivers of excitement…Senator Marco Rubio.  If I get my wish and Newt Gingrich is the nominee, a Vice Presidential nominee like Santorum would be a good balance.  If Mittens is the guy, we’ll need someone like Bachmann. 

One final note on Senator Santorum.  I realized something last night: Of all the candidates remaining, I do believe I LIKE Rick Santorum as a person the best.  He does seem like a genuinely kind, good hearted Christian man, the type of person who I’d love to have as my next door neighbor.  In a different time (like following a transformational President who got this country going strong again) he’d be a good President. 

Ah Senator Santorum.  I like him.  I’m beginning to believe increasingly that he’d be a great George Bush (41) to Gingrich’s Reagan, while actually being genuinely conservative (which Bush 41 failed to be).  He’d be an excellent balanced to a guy like Newt.  As far as winning the nomination, Santorum has an uphill battle.  He doesn’t have the ability to use the retail politics that won Iowa in Florida and the upcoming states.  I think he’s back where I originally predicted him: a Vice Presidential option at best.

Best Running Mate Options: MN Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann  or KY Senator Rand Paul – Senator Santorum would need excitement behind him, the Tea Party, and a powerful attack dog and the power of the Tea Party.  Bachmann would bring all three. 

(Or, FL Senator Marco Rubio.)

---------------------------

Debate Winner: Newt Gingrich, by a nose (over Mitt Romney)

Florida has swung to Newt Gingrich in the most recent polls after his South Carolina win.  I felt Newt at least maintained his momentum tonight.  It’s going to be interesting, and it’s tough rounds to call right now.



This ad was not paid for by any political campaign.  It has been embeded by the editor of this blog as part of his personal endorsement of Newt Gingrich and is therefore not subject to equal time requirements.

Reactions to the South Carolina Primary

WHO WON THE PRIMARY?  NEWT! NEWT! NEWT! WHO WON THE PRIMARY?  NEWT! NEWT! NEWT! (To the tune of “Who Let the Dogs Out?”)

Well, I never did claim to be balanced and unbiased, friends, now did I?  I am very pleased, because it shows what we do not have to just roll over and accept Mittens.  It means that the Tea Party is alive and well.  (After all, 7 out of 10 Gingrich supporters were Tea partiers).  It means that conservatism has a shot.  It means that Americans are still paying attention.  It means that a genuinely good communicator can outdo the Leftwing Media and make it null and void.

Newt has shown what he really needs to do is be strong and not try to be nice.  He lost in Iowa, I believe, because a) he stayed positive and didn’t respond to attacks and b) because Mittens spent a whole lot of dough on attack ads.  Now Newt’s got the money to fight the fight back and a plethora of debates to continue to establish his strength and show why he is the true conservative option in this race. 

Mittens isn’t guaranteed to be the nominee, friends, not by a long shot.  Newt showed on Saturday that he can consolidate the conservative vote.  He has demonstrated a point I have said so many times: Real conservatism wins every time it’s effectively communicated.  On Saturday, real conservatism won.

Mittens came in second place.  It’s absolutely a disappointing performance for Romney, because he was expected to run away with it a week ago.  Mitt’s inability to properly answer questions about his tax returns and other issues are hurting him.  Even if Mitt does become our nominee, he better use this time to learn how to answer these types of questions, because you can guarantee Obama will use far stronger class warfare. 

Now we come to Rick Santorum.  Santorum finished a distant third.  It proves what I’ve been saying all along:  Santorum won in Iowa on the strength of retail politics.  The coming states won’t give you the time to go to multiple states and visit every county in those states.  It’s time for Senator Santorum to step back and consider leaving the race.  We can stop Mittens, but only if Santorum leaves the race and lets Newt consolidate the conservative vote.  Newt can win this thing.  I honestly don’t believe Santorum can win.

Finally, we come to Congressman Ron Paul.  Congressman Paul picked up 2-3 delegates in his quest to push his policies into the Republican platform.  I’ve said it all along, I want Ron Paul to push his conservative economic policies into the platform, so whatever influence he can gain is a good thing.

South Carolina has made one major thing clear:  We have a race.  Three primaries, three different winners.  Mittens isn’t getting anointed just yet.  Small government conservatives are still going to make a difference in this election.  The Tea Party is going to make a difference.  Congratulations to Newt Gingrich for making this win happen.  Game on.

         

This ad was not paid for by any political campaign.  It has been embeded by the editor of this blog as part of his personal endorsement of Newt Gingrich and is therefore not subject to equal time requirements.

Reactions to the CNN-South Carolina Debate

Last night, the final four Republican Presidential candidates met in South Carolina before the South Carolina primaries on Saturday.  CNN made the decision to kick off the debate by addressing the newest smear on former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich.  Newt took it as an attack, and I can see that being the case…but it more seemed to me as CNN giving Newt the chance to clear the air and move on.  (I have minimal faith in CNN to be fair, but it did come across from John King just clearing the air and giving Newt a chance to respond).  Either way, I want to give kudos to Senator Rick Santorum, Governor Mitt Romney and Congressman Ron Paul for refusing to engage in that attack.  Senator Santorum spoke about Christian forgiveness and how we are all fallen people, Mitt Romney refused to discuss it, and Ron Paul talked about Media Bias.  Kudos to all three of those men for living within the boundaries of both Ronald Reagan’s 11^th Commandment and good taste.  Furthermore, CNN did not do what it’s other counterparts in the Drive-By Media has done in debates…they were actually pretty fair and balanced. 

Now, let’s take the time to play a game of Buy, Hold, Sell and Sell All:

---------------------------

Newt Gingrich – Buy (Hold):   

Newt started off talking about why he was going on the attack against Mittens.  He did just an ok job at first explaining why he was making those attacks.  I didn’t like that Newt at first seemed like he was admitting to playing spoiler and not trying to win the nomination.

And then Newt turned back into Newt.  When he said regarding the length one can receive unemployment benefits, Newt said (accurately) that 99 weeks is an associate degree.  I also loved when Newt explained conservatism thusly: “Saying to someone I’ll help you IF you’re willing to help yourself is good, and we think unconditional efforts by the best Food Stamp President in American history to maximize dependency is terrible for the future of this country.”  Bingo.  That’s the Newt Gingrich I endorsed!  Conservatism is not about telling people they can starve, but it’s also not about just giving people benefits forever.  Welfare and unemployment are meant to be an insurance…a just in case situation. 

I have car insurance.  I pay my premiums hoping that I’ll never have to use it again.  I’ve had to use that insurance a few years ago when I was in a bad accident, including receiving short-term disability coverage when I was out of work.  (This insurance was private insurance that I paid for, not government insurance, by the way.)  However, as soon as I was able I went looking for a new job because I was physically unable to perform the job I had at the time.  I went to work as soon as I could.  I didn’t milk it for every penny so I could not work.

Another place where Newt nailed it was this: “I’d like to see us reduce government to meet the revenue and not raise revenue to meet the government.  He also had a great point to Juan Williams’ attack on Speaker Gingrich’s point on letting kids work to help clean their schools.  His story that his daughter worked cleaning their church at 13 and was pleased to do that job and learn that when you work you get paid.  It’s a great point. 

When I was younger I was taught that work pays.  As I child I created a few “businesses” making crafts and things which I sold and even enlisted neighborhood kids to help me sell those items, splitting the sale with them. Many times my father gave me the opportunity to work for a few hours with him at his office sorting papers and other odd jobs in exchange for some money.  My mother once paid me to clean the living room carpet rather than paying a professional.  I was a babysitter for a while as well.  When I was 14 my father gave me a job for 5 hours per week doing data entry for his company.  When I was 16 I got a part-time job and have worked ever since. 

Jobs are good for kids.  They have to be responsibly regulated.  When we talk about kids doing janitorial work at their school, that should mean things like sweeping and mopping, not doing maintenance on the boiler.  But it’s a good policy.

Best Newt moment of the night: “I know among the politically correct you’re not supposed to use facts that are uncomfortable,” to Juan Williams.

This debate was exactly what I meant when I said that the debates could give Speaker Gingrich a boost.  Let’s see if it pans out, but I do believe you could see Newt win South Carolina and reinvigorate his campaign, especially if he has this strong of a debate on Thursday night.

When asked what the highest tax rate people should be asked to pay Newt said: A 15% Flat Tax.*

First of all, Newt hit the cover off the ball with his response to the “open marriage” accusations from his ex-wife.  The reality is exes can say false things because divorce can be a painful thing.  But he answered it perfectly. He shut down this so fast it should give the Drive-By Media whiplash.  The Media will try their best to pin this story, but it simply is a distraction and Newt is going to give the Drive-Bys the kind of smackdown they deserve and that most conservatives fail to give.  He got a standing ovation from the live audience for his response.  It was absolutely the best response to such attacks I have seen in now 19 years and nine national elections of paying close attention. 

Beyond that, Newt had another very good debate.  His moments were excellent.  He really showed himself to be the Newt that I endorsed three weeks ago.  I would love to see him debate Obama, and I believe he will mop the floor with the Bamster in 2012 if he’s our nominee.  Don’t buy into the “unelectable” line, friends.  The same type of pundits said Reagan was unelectable.  Conservatism wins, and Newt will win if he’s the nominee. 

Ron Paul - Sold (Sold):        

Let’s be honest with ourselves as to why Congressman Paul is in this race. He wants to get his policies onto the eventual Republican platform.  Provided he realizes that his foreign policy doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in July of being part of the GOP platform, I would LOVE to have Congressman Paul’s policies in our ticket.  I want Ron Paul’s economic policies to become part of the platform.  Make no mistake about it: The Tea Party has pushed the GOP to the right, and people like Ron Paul deserve a share of the credit for that.

In the debate, however, Ron Paul did his usual out of touch with the GOP foreign policy statements.  Again, this is why he won’t be the nominee.  The audience booed him in many places, then others cheered his desire to end wars.  It’s a great example of the Ron Paul phenomenon: 75% of the room boo his foreign policies, 25% cheer.

When asked what the highest tax rate people should be asked to pay Congressman Paul said: We should have the lowest tax we’ve ever had and up until 1913 it was 0%, what’s so bad about that? (Note: This would require reinstituting widespread tariffs, but hey, sounds good to me!)

Hey…Ron Paul was at this debate!  I kid, but Congressman Paul was somewhat to the side of the three way battles that happened between Gingrich, Santorum and Romney, and sometimes he contributed some really great points.  Like his statement about the cost of a Made in China product vs. a Made in America product.  (I’ve noted before that a Made in America iPod, for example, would cost over $1000, and that’s for a 2 GB one.)  It was an excellent metaphor for the Paul campaign.  He’s here to promote ideas.  I think Congressman Paul knows that he’s not going to be the nominee, but he’s in this to rack up as many delegates as he can to force his ideas onto the platform, and provided they are the economic policies I want Ron Paul ideas on the platform. 

Side note: I never realized Dr. Paul practiced medicine as an OBG/YN…in my mind’s eye I saw him as a family practice doctor…and honestly (and yes, I know this is silly, I don’t hold any credence to this thought)…it’s just a weird thought to wrap my head around. 

Mitt Romney– Buy (Buy):   

I want to go on record as saying I do not buy into the attacks on Bain Capital being levied against Mitt and I think they are bad for the country.  I think it was good that Speaker Gingrich retracted and instructed his Super PAC to back down from this attack. 

Mitt was under fire tonight.  He did a pretty decent job responding to the attacks.  I find it interesting that Mitt was absent in a lot of places in the debate.  He was steady and strong, and as I’ve said before I can live with Mitt, but I want better.  I do think Mitt had a weak debate.  I do not believe he scored as many points as he could have.  Mitt was Presidential in the debate.  His best moment was when he talked about the difference between himself and President Obama (and also Ron Paul) in foreign policy.

When asked what the highest tax rate people should be asked to pay Mitt said:  I’d like to get it down to 25%.

Mitt kicked off this debate talking about capitalism.  He reminded me again why, if I can’t have my preferred candidate, I can live with Mittens. He did an excellent job of articulating the difference between conservatism and what President Obama believes.  We believe that it’s good to take risk with money and make a profit.  We believe it’s good for those who take risks to make a profit, because that profit goes into purchasing goods and services and often gets reinvested into that company and that means jobs either way.  Capitalism and investment are good things.  Business is what create jobs, not government. 

Mitt said something last night that I’ve been waiting for him to say: “I’m not going to apologize for being successful.”  Amen!  Mitt should not apologize for succeeding.  He is a man who has worked hard, taken risks, and succeeded, and he should be proud of it.

Rick Santorum - Hold (Buy):

Senator Santorum was steady tonight.  He had a couple good moments, but he was otherwise kind of tepid.  I do love that Senator Santorum stands up for marriage and for strengthening the American family.  His statement from the Brookings Institute Study that people who do 3 things have a 98% chance to avoid poverty: Those things are 1 – Work 2 - Graduate from High School 3 – Get married before you have children.  Aside from the fact that “people who work are less likely to be in poverty” is a DUH statement, it’s a great point.  The traditional path for life is one that leads people to be functioning, self-sufficient members of society. 

I’m coming back to my belief that Santorum is more likely to be Vice President than President.  (Again, if the Vice Presidential nominee comes out of the field of candidates, I believe it’ll be either Senator Santorum or Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann).  But I don’t think he gained any points tonight.

When asked what the highest tax rate people should be asked to pay Santorum said: My plan has two rates, 10% and 28% which was the highest rate under Ronald Reagan.

Santorum gave Mittens a smack on Romneycare and really nailed it.  He also went after Newt on the topic.  I felt the punch landed with Mittens and hit the gloves on Newt. (For those of you from Palm Beach County, FL, in boxing when a boxer blocks an incoming punch from his opponent.  Newt blocked it.)  When Newt responded, I watched the split screen between Newt and Santorum, and Santorum had a look of “oh darn he handled that” when Newt responded. 

Overall, Senator Santorum had a strong debate. He was good.  He came across as strong and solid, and believe me I would be fine with a President Santorum.  I did like Senator Santorum’s response to the tax release question: “I do my own taxes and I’m not at home.  They’re on my computer.  When I get home you’ll get them.”

I’ve commented that Governor Romney sounds Presidential.  Senator Santorum sounds like a great #2.  He sounds like a Vice President.  I do like the idea of Rick Santorum as Vice President.  He’d be a good strategic move because he can bring in Pennsylvania.  The only better Vice Presidential options I can think of are Michelle Bachmann (who can truly bag the Tea Party vote), Herman Cain (if he’s not so damaged after the baloney smear scandal) and…legitimate shivers of excitement…Senator Marco Rubio.  If I get my wish and Newt Gingrich is the nominee, a Vice Presidential nominee like Santorum would be a good balance.  If Mittens is the guy, we’ll need someone like Bachmann. 

One final note on Senator Santorum.  I realized something last night: Of all the candidates remaining, I do believe I LIKE Rick Santorum as a person the best.  He does seem like a genuinely kind, good hearted Christian man, the type of person who I’d love to have as my next door neighbor.  In a different time (like following a transformational President who got this country going strong again) he’d be a good President. 

---------------------------

Tomorrow is the South Carolina Primary, and last night’s debate made one thing clear…the primary is going to be CLOSE.  My gut says that Newt could win, and will at the very least come in a strong second place.  This race isn’t over, not by a long shot.  There’s a lot to happen.  But at the end of the day I want to say without a doubt that I will take any one of these four men remaining over Barack Obama any day of the week and twice on Sunday (yes, even Ron Paul).  Every one of these candidates would be a far better President than the one we have now. 

Debate Winner: Rick Santorum

This ad was not paid for by any campaign or political group.  It has been posted by the editor of this blog in support of the Employee Rights Act, and therefore is not subject to equal time requirements.

Rassmussen Shows Newt Rebounding Post-Debates

It's been a rarity in this election, but for once, I was right. Two weeks ago, I predicted that Newt Gingrich would rebound after six debates in three weeks.  Yesterday, Rasmussen showed I was correct.  In a new Rasmussen poll of Likely GOP Voters, Mitt "Mittens" Romney is gaining 30% of the national vote to Newt Gingrich's 27% (a virtual tie given the +/- 3% margin of error).

As of this poll, Mitt's still winning in South Carolina by 14 points, but remember, Rasmussen has not conducted a South Carolina poll since the debates.  Given that Newt has gained 11 points in Rasmussen's national polls, it is reasonable to guess that he has gained at least proportionally in South Carolina (if not more, since South Carolina is a staunchly conservative state and is the neighbor to the north of Newt's home state of Georgia. 

There's still another debate coming tonight before South Carolina, so there's time for Newt to continue his precipitous climb.  A few things need to happen to see Newt climb back into the driver's seat:  He needs to win or come in a close second in South Carolina; and Rick Santorum needs to recognize that his win in Iowa is unlike to be repeated given the inability of the Senator to continue his retail politics plan that worked in Iowa.

If we can do that and combine the "Not Mitt" vote behind one candidate (and I continue to believe Gingrich is the best Not-Mitt available - since he has a significant lead over Santorum in SC and nearly twice Santorum's support in FL) we can still see a major challenge to Mittens. It won't happen in South Carolina, but in Florida it could make a big difference.  Take the current Real Clear Politics Florida Average and do a little math.  Rick Perry dropped out today and endorsed Newt, and I think you can expect the vast majority of Perry's votes to go to Newt.  Hypothetically, if Santorum drops out and 3/4 of his voters go to Newt and 1/4 to go to Mittens (I don't expect solid conservatives to float to the libertarian Ron Paul) , then figure Jon Huntsman's voters split evenly between Mittens and Newt, you're looking at Newt with 42.5% and Mittens with 46%.  That can be overcome, especially with two debates leading up to Florida. 

Bottom line, my friends, is we can still combine the Not-Mitt voters and defeat Mittens in favor of a stronger conservative. But I am telling you now that if we're going to beat Mittens, it's going to be Newt.  Either way, Newt is on the incline. Game on.

This ad was not paid for by any political campaign.  It has been embeded by the editor of this blog as part of his personal endorsement of Newt Gingrich and is therefore not subject to equal time requirements.

Biblical Conservatism Bids a Fond Farewell to Jon Huntsman’s Campaign

Hours before this week’s Fox News Presidential debate, former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman ended his campaign and (shock of shocks) endorsed fellow moderate Mitt Romney. So in honor of the departure of my favorite wimpy moderate Republican joke target, here are the highlights of my past teasing of Governor Huntsman with humorous links as placebos for actual analysis since Huntsman was never worth it.

But before you do, please click this video

 

for the appropriate background music (wait for the preceeding commercial before you start to read):

 

(After the 9.8.11 MSNBC Debate)

Seriously…I’m a busy man with stuff to do. I’m not wasting my time with Hunstman when I could be defrosting my freezer or scrubbing my cat’s litter box. He’s a waste of time in this campaign. Jon Huntsman was a bad candidate when he was named John McCain, and he was a bad candidate when he was named Bob Dole. We don’t need a moderate wimp.

On the issue of man-caused Global Warming, Huntsman shot himself in the foot, twice, and managed


to leave only one bullet hole. (For those of you from Palm Beach County, FL, that means he shot himself in the foot so thoroughly that he hit the first hole a second time.)

(After the 9.13.11 CNN Tea Party Debate)

Seriously. Huntsman is a joke. He spent tonight quoting Nirvana songs and waxing intellectual as a biased moderate. I’m not even bothering making a joke about how much of a non-issue Huntsman is at this point.

(After the 9.23.11 Fox News Google Debate)

Take me out to the ballgame, take me out to the crowd, buy me some peanuts and Cracker Jack, I don’t care if I ever get back! Let me root, root, root for the home team, if they don’t win it’s a shame! For its one, two, three strikes you’re out at the old ballgame! (Huntsman is such a waste of time I decided to sing “Take Me Out to the Ballgame” instead of wasting time on him.)

(After the 11.12.11 Washington Post Bloomberg Debate)

I think the kids in those Peter G. Peterson Foundation commercials explaining how economics work would make better candidates than Jon Huntsman. Also, who names their kid Peter Peterson? Moving on.

(After the 11.10.11 CNBC Your Money Your Vote Debate)

I’m kind of glad Huntsman is in these debates. It gives me a chance to use the bathroom or make a sandwich.

(After the 11.14.11 CBS South Carolina Debate)

Rather than wasting time talking about Jon Huntsman and his magenta tie, I’ve decided to provide a link to a video of Abbott and Costello doing their classic routine “Who’s On First.”

(After the 11.23.11 CNN Heritage Foundation Debate)

Well, a pig flew by tonight because I agreed with Huntsman on one statement: We do need term limits for Congress. Then he proceeded to drive me so crazy through the debate that I felt I couldn’t just make a fun joke about Governor Huntsman. I’ve seen pieces of wet one-ply toilet paper with more tensile strength than John Huntsman’s spine. He’s a wimp, and we’ve already got a wimp in the White House.

(After the 12.12.11 ABC Your Money Your Vote Debate)

Huntsman’s absence left me without opportunities to use the bathroom or get myself a beverage. Of course, it did mean there was more real debate happening.

(After the 12.16.11 Fox News Iowa Debate)

Instead of wasting time on Jon Huntsman, I’ve decided to link to a video from one of my favorite sites, “How it Should Have Ended.” So here is How Wizard of Oz Should Have Ended for your viewing pleasure.

(After the 1.19.12 New Hampshire Debates) 

Huntsman didn’t even bother with Iowa. He had one Caucus supporter though at least, which Ron Paul drolly noted on Twitter. He’s thrown all his chips into New Hampshire and I believe he’s headed for a disappointment. He was called by the Drive-By Media a “serious” candidate before he entered, which is Liberalese for “wimpy moderate we can definitely defeat.” I also believe it was sad and incorrect that Huntsman was given as much time as he was in Saturday’s debate.


So again, rather than wasting my time with Jon Huntsman analysis, here’s a favorite stand-up comedy bit of mine, “Noah” by Bill Cosby.

So Jon Huntsman is out of the race. It was inevitable really. Even when he came in 3rd place in New Hampshire, it was still a nonissue. Huntsman never had a shot. This year’s election is about strong conservatism (as proven by the fact that this year’s Establishment Candidate was last election’s Conservative Alternative). So we at Biblical Conservatism wish the Governor a fond farewell. I hope life treats you well, Governor Huntsman. You seem like a decent human being. Thank you for the sandwich making and restroom breaks in the debate. Sincerely. Best of luck in all your future endeavors.