Last month, GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum got into a heated exchange with Rachel Maddow about his statement that the Supreme Court doesn’t “have the final say on anything,” including abortion rights and LGBT equality. He attempted to clarify his position at a campaign event in Iowa last week, explaining that while he is fine with the Supreme Court having judicial review powers, the president and Congress should simply ignore decisions that they think are wrong.
In comments captured on video by the conservative blog Caffeinated Thoughts, Santorum said, “There’s nothing in the Constitution that gives the Supreme Court the right or the duty or the obligation to determine what is constitutional and what is not.”
“Marbury v. Madison is a Supreme Court case where they granted themselves that authority,” he continued. “And for a couple of hundred years, roughly, we have seen that deference given to the court. I think the court is the right place to make these types of constitutional judgments. But what happens if the court makes an unconstitutional judgment? What happens if the court itself violates the Constitution? Is there a remedy?"
“Our founders clearly wanted it to be very hard to change the Constitution,” he said. “That’s why when you see the court change the Constitution in an unconstitutional fashion, in other words…amend the Constitution by creating something that’s not there, they’ve short-circuited something that was supposed to be very hard to do, and there should be some remedy of saying, ‘No, you can’t do that.’ And what is that? Well, what is that is the president or the Congress saying, ‘You’re acting unconstitutionally and we’re not going to pay attention to that law, we’re not going to pay attention to your ruling.’”
Speaking at an anti-Planned Parenthood rally in Iowa on Saturday, Rick Santorum compared the “poisonous, wretched, cancerous” legalization of abortion in America to the Holocaust, saying that both were “based on a lie.”
Santorum told the rally that he had recently read the book “How Do You Kill 11 Million People?” by Andy Andrews and thought it applied just as easily to legal abortion as to the Holocaust.
“The title of the book is ‘How Do You Kill 11 Million People?’ He could have retitled it ‘How Do You Kill 55 Million People Here In America?’” he said. “This book is about the Holocaust. And you know what his answer was, in one simple sentence? How do you kill 11 million people? You lie to them. Planned Parenthood, the abortion industry, Roe v. Wade, all of it is based on a lie about when a child becomes a human being.”
“We see the poisonous, wretched, cancerous result of that lie,” he continued. “Every lie, we all know, we tell our kids that when you lie that one lie leads to another lie, and another one, and another one, and pretty soon you just have this poisonous web that you can’t get out of. That’s where we are.”
The video was captured by the Iowa conservative blog Caffeinated Thoughts.
Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said last week that he thought it was “plausible” that the Environmental Protection Agency purposefully caused a toxic spill in the Animas River in Colorado in order to establish a Superfund site.
Earlier this month, a crew working for the EPA to clean up an abandoned gold mine accidentally caused three million gallons of contaminated water to spill into the river. The Denver Post reported this weekend that a “theory has been making its way around town that the EPA purposefully caused” the spill in order to ensure that the area is designated as a Superfund site. That theory, based on a letter to the editor of a local paper that some say “predicted” the EPA conspiracy, has begun to get national attention, including from the website of Fox News.
“I only saw the headline on that, so that’s all I know,” King responded, “but when you say this to me, what flashes through my mind is Fast and Furious, how plausible did that sound when it first emerged, and it sounded completely implausible and yet it turned out to be completely true. So I don’t want to make allegations about this particular incident, I certainly want to learn a lot more about it, and I will, but it’s plausible.”
Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said yesterday that he hopes that Congress defunds Planned Parenthood before there is a “full investigation” into its fetal tissue donation program, saying that Congress’ response to recent attacks the women’s health group should resemble its defunding of the community organizing group ACORN in 2009.
“When we hear people say, well we can’t defund Planned Parenthood because we don’t know all of the places that they’re getting money from and we can’t be passing judgment on this until we do a full investigation, I completely disagree with that,” King told Iowa talk radio host Simon Conway. “This is similar in the function of ACORN. When we saw what ACORN was doing inside the offices across the country from the videos that were put out there by Hanna [Giles] and James [O’Keefe], that was enough to be convincing for Congress to shut off all money to ACORN, which was far more complex than shutting off the money to Planned Parenthood because they had affiliates that were different names."
“We wrote language that was broad and that encompassed it and did shut off most of, and there are still, we didn’t quite get the people followed but we got the organizations followed to do that. We can do this with Planned Parenthood, and we must.”
Sen. Joni Ernst speculated in a radio interview yesterday that President Obama may have deliberately provoked a controversy over the lowering of American flags in honor of the service members killed in a shooting in Tennessee last week in order to distract from “the fact that terrorism remains” and from the recent nuclear deal with Iran.
Simon Conway, host of an Iowa conservative talk radio program, asked Ernst about the flag hubbub, adding, “I think there’s something else going on because I think he wants us talking about that and not the other thing, whatever the other thing might be.”
The Iowa Republican replied that she was “confused as well” and criticized President Obama for waiting five days to lower flags in honor of the slain service members.
She added that Conway might have been on to something with his conspiracy theory: “I do think that there are so many things going on right now that he doesn’t want us talking about, whether it is the fact that terrorism remains, whether it is the agreement with Iran. I think there are so many things that he would just rather he don’t discuss and focus on something else.”
Iowa talk radio host Steve Deace invited Florida Religious Right activist John Stemberger onto his program yesterday to push back against conservatives who are arguing that the government should just get out of marriage altogether after the Supreme Court’s marriage equality decision, which Stemberger argues would actually expand government by destroying families and expanding the welfare state.
This is all what liberals want, he told Deace: “The left feeds on broken marriages and broken families. When families are strong, when there’s an economic system there, they start to understand the implications of taxes and all the economic implications of actually work and reward.”
This prompted Deace to share his theory that the sexual revolution was an outgrowth of the welfare state because before the expansion of the social safety net, most people were too poor to “act out immorally” by having “multiple wives” and “gay lovers” since “no one was subsidizing [their] depravity.”
“We have that today, which is why the sexual revolution came after the welfare state, because once it was obvious that people were not going to be held directly accountable for their actions, we removed the inhibitions against human nature that we already had,” he explained.
Stemberger agreed with Deace’s assessment, adding, “People who are hard-working and have to be self-sufficient and are not going to be propped up by the government don’t have the luxury of doing stupid, immoral things.”
In an interview with The Hill newspaper today, Rep. Steve King defended Donald Trump’s comments calling Mexican immigrants “rapists” and drug dealers, echoing Trump in claiming that the risk of sexual assault for women crossing the southern border translates into Mexican and Central American men being rapists.
"So yes, they’re being raped, they’re being murdered they’re being brutalized,” he told The Hill, “and when I know I’ve been challenged on that, 'well you can’t conclude that (it's) Mexicans or Central Americans that are doing the raping,' well, can you conclude anything else? They are being raped, they are victims of rape, and the price for the transit sometimes is, often is and predominantly is their body.”
Interestingly, while Republican presidential candidates have been scrambling to distance themselves from Trump, they continue to cater to King.
Iowa Republican national committeewoman Tamara Scott, also the state director of Concerned Women for America and a lobbyist for The Family Leader, said on her radio program last week that the shooting of nine black churchgoers in Charleston, South Carolina, by a white supremacist gunman was not a “racial issue” but instead part of a “targeted assault” on Christianity exemplified by the Supreme Court’s legalization of gay marriage. She also criticized efforts to remove the Confederate flag from state property, saying that the flag is a Benghazi-like “diversion” from the real things dividing America: the media, public schools and rappers.
“There really was no debate” about the flag, Atkins said, up until the “secular media” used it as a distraction from the fact that the shooting actually “happened because of a lack of Christian influence in society”
Scott agreed, saying that the real cultural problems that led to the shooting are “a media that relentlessly pit groups against each other, voters in the elections where they pit voters into blocs against each other, or the education system that consistently creates a class warfare and an envy system in their children at an early age, or rappers with their racist rants about rape and everything else. There are several things that are feeding into this, but it’s not a gun and it’s not a flag.”
She added that until the recent debate, younger generations primarily associated the Confederate flag with the TV show “Dukes of Hazzard”: “For them the flag was a symbol of affection for a fun show and some culture known in the South. The unfortunate thing is this discussion is now creating a divide and a dialogue that would have died out decades ago had we not brought it up again over this. We’re continuing a problem that was actually, literally dying out.”
The Confederate flag, she concluded, is “the same distraction that the supposed video tape was for Benghazi.”
Scott discussed the issue with Atkins again on Tuesday, when she guest hosted conservative talk radio host Jan Mickelson’s program:
Atkins told Scott about another incident at a mostly white church in South Carolina, where a man had entered with a gun while a number of his family members were worshipping, which Scott said “we don’t hear about” in the media “because it can’t be made into a racial issue.”
She repeated her point that the shooting in a black church by a gunman with white supremacist views who specifically stated his desire to start a race war wasn’t as much a “racial issue” as an attack on religion. The Charleston shooting, she said, is “being made into more of a racial issue than it was,” when the shooter “could have gone anywhere – mall, sporting event, anywhere — and shot a race of people, but this was in a house of worship.”
Atkins agreed, lamenting that the shooting has led to an effort to remove the Confederate flag from statehouse grounds: “It’s gotten the issue off what the real issue was and put the focus on what the side issue was in this situation.”
“It’s not the presence of a confederate flag at a capitol,” Scott agreed, “it’s the absence of a Christian faith in a community.”
Scott then accused the Confederate flag’s critics of turning a symbol of “fun” into something divisive.
“Creating this stir about the flag now forces dialogue that I think had died out decades ago,” she said. “It starts the divide all over again in younger generations that otherwise would have had absolutely no ill feelings on this flag. For this generation that I know, it was a symbol of Dukes of Hazzard and fun and a culture of the South. So I hate this dialogue that has started that has created a new generation of divisiveness.”
Agreeing that the Confederate flag is “an issue that really was not an issue” until the current debate, Atkins warned that removing the flag from government property could set a precedent that threatens Christianity.
“It was a symbol that this individual used to promote his hatred toward a group of people,” he explained. “And if we’re not careful, what we’re going to see happen, you’ll take fringe groups like Westboro Baptist Church, who supposedly use the word of God to justify their hatred and animosity toward different groups, and if we’re not careful, groups like that will then in turn cause even the word of God to be used as a symbol of hate.”
Bob Vander Plaats, the influential Iowa Religious Right activist who spearheaded the effort in 2010 to unseat three state supreme court justices who voted for marriage equality, warned last week that the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling striking down state gay marriage bans will help to pave the way for the legalization of pedophilia and the criminalization of certain Bible verses.
Saying that the Supreme Court “undefined the institution of marriage,” Vander Plaats told the “View From a Pew” radio program that as a result “now polygamy can come back” and pedophilia will gain legal protections.
Claiming that “the University of Colorado now is saying they want to reclassify that as a sexual orientation and decriminalize it,” Vander Plaats said, “All of the sudden, when you get outside of God’s design for human sexuality inside of the bonds of one man, one woman marriage, it will be an absolute trainwreck.”
When the program’s cohost, Frank Thomas, asked Vander Plaats about the right-wing myth that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wants to lower the age of consent to 12, Vander Plaats repeated that pedophiles are now “going to follow the same route that homosexulatiy did about it’s a sexual orientation.”
He also brought up the specter of transgender people assaulting young girls in restrooms: “Here’s the thing about the identity of restrooms, male-female restrooms, you get to use whichever one you want. That’s a trainwreck waiting to happen, because there’s going to be a 21-year-old guy who says ‘I feel like a girl,’ he goes into a girls’ restroom, there’s going to be a 12-year-old girl who says ‘I feel like a boy,’ and something bad’s going to happen.”
Later in the program, Vander Plaats told American Christians that it’s “time to gird your loins” for persecution.
“We see Christians overseas getting beheaded, but it’s now coming right here to roost in our own country,” he said.
In response to a question about a for-profit business in Iowa that is being sued for refusing to host a gay couple’s wedding, Vander Plaats claimed that churches will soon also be forced to perform same-sex weddings and implied that certain Bible verses will soon be criminalized as “hate speech.”
“For the people to believe that the churches are off ground, there’s no way they’ll get touched, that’s absolute nonsense,” he said, “and Romans 1, Matthew 19, Mark 9, all that is going to be hate speech.”
Ben Carson reacted last month to President Obama’s remarks on the shooting at a black church in Charleston by accusing the president of using his bully pulpit to “create wars,” including “race wars,” “a war on women,” “religious wars” and “age wars,” which threaten to “destroy” American society.
Shane Vander Hart, who hosts a podcast for the Iowa conservative blog Caffeinated Thoughts, lamented to Carson that President Obama had “injected gun control” and “race relations” into the discussion of a mass shooting by a white supremacist, and asked the Republican presidential candidate if he would have “a similar approach” to “local events or state events.”
“No, I think I would use the bully pulpit to help people realize what we have in common rather than what separates us,” Carson responded. “What it’s been used for for the last several years is to create wars: a war on women, race wars, any kind of anything involving people of two different races, income wars, always class warfare, religious wars now, age wars. You know, these are exactly the kinds of things you want to do when you want to destroy a society, not when you want to bring people together.”
Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, told radio host Jan Mickelson on Tuesday that House Speaker John Boehner tried to punish him for bucking House leadership by denying him tickets to see the Supreme Court oral arguments in King v. Burwell, the Affordable Care Act case, but then Chief Justice John Roberts saved the day in the end by finding him a seat.
“He’s also trying to block me from hearing oral arguments before the Supreme Court, on Obamacare, for example, so I went to Chief Justice Roberts and he gave me a couple tickets on his special front bench and we went ahead anyway,” King told Mickelson.
Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, said yesterday that he would support impeaching Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan over their participation in the Supreme Court’s marriage equality case whenever “the public is ready” for such proceedings.
King, a guest on Iowa talk radio host Jan Mickelson’s program, took a call from a listener who said of the justices who voted to strike down same-sex marriage bans, “I submit that these are rogue justices and they can be impeached and removed by Congress.”
King told the caller that he agreed with him, but “impeachment itself,, we have learned throughout history, is a political decision” and the timing is “up to the will of the people.”
“That provision does exist, and let’s hear what the public has to say,” he added. “If that were put up before me today, and I think I mentioned Ginsburg and Kagan as being two that had been conducting same-sex marriages on their spare time and did not recuse themselves, I would put up the vote to remove them from office. And I’d like to see that case heard again and it would come down four-to-three and it in the end it would come back to the states for that decision, where it should be. But I don’t know if the public is ready for that.”
But in the near term, King said, the nation must turn to “nationwide civil disobedience” in defiance of the marriage decision. He also repeated his plan for states to “abolish civil marriage” in order to deny the benefits and responsibilities of marriage to gay and lesbian couples.
“By doing so we can avoid the litigation that’s coming at every one of our churches,” he said, claiming that gay rights advocates “will not stop until they can force a priest to conduct a same-sex marriage at the altar of a Catholic church.”
Earlier in the program, King went on a long tangent linking the U.S. Constitution not only to the Magna Carta and to Greek and Roman law, but also to the New Testament.
“You can go piece by piece of this all the way through the history of the foundation of western civilization to get to the underpinnings of the pillars of American exceptionalism,” he said. “And we seem to have forgotten about those underpinnings and now we’re at this place where there is no right and wrong and the rule of tyranny of whoever can get leverage in whatever form and five justices in the Supreme Court setting a policy that turns over thousands of years of human experience.”
“This Constitution is rendered an artifact of history if we let this stand,” he warned.
Iowa state Rep. Terry Baxter wrote in a Facebook post over the weekend that the Supreme Court “crucified both freedom of speech and the freedom of religion as guaranteed in our constitution” when it struck down state bans on same-sex marriage, claiming that preaching from the Bible “can now be prosecuted as legally incorrect.”
“Just as faithful Christians suffered in the coliseums of Rome for remaining true to the Bible and their religious conscience, so many Christians are about suffer in the legal coliseums of America,” he wrote. “Preaching the gospel just became a hate crime!” Except that it didn’t, and same-sex marriage has been legal in Iowa since 2009, and people like Baxter are freely able to denounce same-sex marriage without being thrown to the lions.
Welcome to the "United Corinth of America." Yesterday, for the first time our history, five unelected members of the Supreme Court officially placed our country in the final state of decline in our drift away from the God of Creation. (Please take time to read Romans 1:18-32. Pay special attention to verses 26-27.)
This debacle is about to give birth to the worse religious persecution in our 239 year history as a nation. Just as faithful Christians suffered in the coliseums of Rome for remaining true to the Bible and their religious conscience, so many Christians are about suffer in the legal coliseums of America.
Preaching the gospel just became a hate crime! Sins of sexual immorality are now constitutionally protected in the same category as age, race and gender. The problem is that God decides a persons [sic] age, race and gender, but human depravity dictates a persons [sic] morality.
Apart from a biblical definition of sin there can be no salvation. Why? Because Jesus came into the world to save sinners. Many forms of sexual sin are now constitutionally protected and will receive equal protection and promotion in our classrooms, curriculum, media, public sector and courts.
The definition of discrimination now includes preaching against sexual expressions. To preach the gospel and call for confession, repentance and conversion can now be prosecuted as a hate crime. Yet from my perspective, the greatest expression of love is to help a sinner turn from the error of their ways and find a new life in Christ.
The Supreme Court ruling yesterday crucified both freedom of speech and the freedom of religion as guaranteed in our constitution. For the past few decades the gospel has been viewed as politically incorrect, it can now be prosecuted as legally incorrect. As a Representative in the Iowa legislature, I have discovered that the sting of new legislation always shows up in the unintended consequences. The implications of this ruling are staggering.
Mike Huckabee, who vows to block the Supreme Court’s ruling on marriage equality if he becomes president, is urging state governors to do the same, telling Iowa talk radio host Jan Mickelson on Friday that if he were still the governor of Arkansas he would “respect” the court’s decision but would not “implement” it.
He urged governors to order county clerks to refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples “until such time as the people have spoken and affirmed the court’s decision.”
He added that “this is a defining moment for people in public office”: “We’re going to find out how many of them really believe in the balance of powers and the separation of powers and how many just decided they’re going to wave the white flag of surrender.”
Huckabee went on to tell Mickelson that the Supreme Court’s marriage decision actually violates the First Amendment by telling marriage equality opponents that “you can’t believe that anymore and put it in practice.”
“This is going to be about religious liberty, it’s not going to be about same-sex marriage,” he said. “A lot of people will try to make it about same-sex marriage, but it’s a bigger issue because, Jan, if the Supreme Court can tell people what the limitations of their beliefs and practices are, then the Supreme Court has just now decided that it can govern all of our liberties.”
Huckabee also argued that “it’s only a matter of time and not long away” before the court legalized polygamy, for which he said a “stronger case” can be made than same-sex marriage:
“Sadly more than a few Republicans ran for the hills, including more than a few candidates who are running for president in 2016,” he said. :Some of them chose that exact moment to go rearrange their sock drawer.”
But Ted Cruz, said Cruz, was made of stronger stuff.
“In my view, Indiana was a time of choosing. In my view, Indiana was, as William Barret Travis at the Alamo said as he drew the line in the stand, it was a moment to choose which side of the line you stand.”
Cruz previously referred to opposition to Indiana’s measure as a gay “jihad.”
King acknowledged that mass shootings are more frequent in the United States, but said that American has a “higher calling” than preventing “one event of violence” and can only be “the bastion of western civilization” if individual gun rights are unrestricted.
“Yes, we have a Second Amendment,” the Iowa Republican said. “And even if some of this violence could be stopped by confiscating all the guns, we have a charge, our charge is to defend freedom and liberty. We are the bastion of western civilization, and that requires us to be able to defend ourselves against tyranny. That’s the charge that our founding fathers gave us, that’s in our culture, we know that, we’ve had to do that worldwide. So, it’s a much higher calling than believing that somehow we end one event of violence.”
Steve Malzberg invited Rep. Steve King onto his Newsmax program on Friday to discuss issues ranging from the church shooting in Charleston, which King blamed on prescription medication, to undocumented immigrants, whom he said have killed “multiples of the victims of the September 11 attacks,” to Caitlyn Jenner, whom he said illustrates “how far this society has gone from rational thought.”
The Iowa Republican also had some thoughts on Hillary Clinton’s slam of Donald Trump’s racist rhetoric in his presidential announcement. King said that Clinton unfairly made the “presumption that perhaps there will be some white people that might discriminate against some not-so-white people on the basis of being inspired by Trump’s speech.”
He also attempted to criticize the former secretary of state for inconsistency: “It’s Hillary that says ‘I’m not going to channel my husband,’ but she would channel Donald Trumps announcement speech instead to try to gain a political advantage out of that.”
Iowa talk radio host Jan Mickelson is up in arms about a recent agreement between the city of Dubuque and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to fix what HUD said was a racially discriminatory system for the way the city distributed federally funded housing vouchers and has been asking the GOP presidential candidates who come on his show to comment on it.
Last week, Mike Huckabee told Mickelson that the agreement, in which Dubuque has agreed not to discriminate in housing vouchers against people moving to the area from predominantly African American areas like Chicago and Milwaukee, amounted to “redistributing poverty.”
When Mickelson told him that the agreement means that “people in Eastern Iowa, for instance, have to recruit from Chicago their poverty-afflicted individuals to bring them to Iowa in order to qualify for Section 8 housing,” Carson was aghast.
“Right, this is just an example of what happens when we allow the government to infiltrate every part of our lives,” he said. “This is what you see in communist countries where they have so many regulations encircling every aspect of your life that if you don’t agree with them, all they have to do is pull the noose. And this is what we’ve got now. Every month, dozens of regulations — business, industry, academia, every aspect of our lives — so that they can control you.
“And this is exactly what Thomas Jefferson predicted. He said the people would become lackadaisical, they would not be vigilant, the government would grow, it will infiltrate every part of their lives, it will take over. But just before, just before we become another type of government, the people will wake up. I’m hoping that t
Last week, after Caitlyn Jenner introduced herself on the cover of Vanity Fair, prominent Iowa talk radio host Steve Deace told Republican candidates that if they wouldn’t speak out against Jenner’s transition, “you might as well just forfeit the 2016 election now.” When CNN’s Dana Bash asked Sen. Lindsey Graham about Deace’s comments in an interview over the weekend, he responded that while he’s “a pro-life, traditional marriage kind of guy,” Jenner is “welcome in my party.”
He then addressed Deace directly: “Here's what I would say to the talk show host: In the eyes of radical Islam, they hate you as much as they hate Caitlyn Jenner. They hate us all because we won’t agree to their view of religion. So, America, we’re all in this together.”
All of this, unsurprisingly, did not go over very well with Deace, who addressed Graham’s comments yesterday during his weekly discussion of presidential candidates with Iowa social conservative activist Bob Vander Plaats, saying, “If you’re not going to defend the idea of male and female, you’re not going to defend any of those other things that you just claimed to be for, Sen. Graham.”
Vander Plaats, an influential force in Iowa Republican politics, agreed, saying that if Graham wouldn’t speak out against people like Caitlyn Jenner, he could never fight radical Islam.
“The thing of it is, you can go out and you can have empathy and compassion for Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner,” he said. “However, you have to be able to stand up and say, but God still created us male and female. That’s the basic point here.”
“That’s our issue with Lindsey Graham,” he added, “is that you can say you’re pro-life, you can say you’re for God’s design for the family in marriage, you can say that he created them male and female, but when you never take a stand on those issues, it’s awfully hard for us to trust, then, that you’re going to take a stand against radical Islam or any other domestic matter or foreign matter that may come up during a presidency. That’s why I think in Iowa not many people take Lindsay Graham seriously.”
Former Arkansas governor and GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee stood by a joke he made at the expense of transgender people, telling Iowa talk radio host Steve Deace on Friday that his off-color joke was a “commonsense answer to the insanity that’s going on out there.”
In a speech to the National Religious Broadcasters convention in February, Huckabee joked that when he was in high school he would have liked to have pretended to be transgender in order to shower with the girls in gym class. The comment gained national attention after the conservative website WorldNetDaily posted it on YouTube last month, shortly before Caitlyn Jenner’s introduction in Vanity Fair put transgender rights in the media spotlight.
When Deace asked Huckabee if the criticism of his locker room joke was an example of the media’s “misplaced priorities,” Huckabee responded, “It’s absolutely an example.”
“And by the way, Steve, I take nothing back from that speech,” he added. “I’m kind of glad it’s posted because people, if they watch the whole clip, what they’re going to see is that I’m giving a commonsense answer to the insanity that’s going on out there. Because I hear people, everybody wants to be politically correct, everybody wants to be loved by the media and loved by the left and loved by the elitists. But, you know, I know I’m not going to be, so let’s just get it over with. I’d rather be a commonsense candidate for people who did take their brains to work today.”