I look forward to Katz's next column in which he dismisses Romney's Michigan victory as meaningless just as he failed to mention that Santorum lost a double-digit lead in 10 days.

Coulter is just learning that the big battle now is for who is the new "establishment" and it's not her or the "Bushie;" it's not the "nominate the strongest conservative who can win" crowd; it's the group that identifies a "RINO" and then supports anyone who can beat the RINO (whether he's a RINO or not). Its the new Establishment and I'm sure we'll hear no assumption of responsibility after the purged-of-RINO ticket of 2012 gets its clock cleaned by Obama bent on winning at all costs rather than espousing ideological purity.

Christy is a leader and made an administrator's decision within his rights that violates none of the core values of conservatives. For the life of me, I can't figure out why any conservative would want to pick a fight on Whitney Houston, other than to add another chapter to "Why We Self-Proclaimed Conservatives Lost Everything in 2012 Even Though We Rejected the RINO's Had a Super-Conservative Presidential Nominee and Can't Even Blame the Defeat on Moderates (though we will)." She had two movies'; one, the Preacher's Wife, was one of the few truly conservative value Hollywood movies starring huge stars (Denzel Washington) of the last several years. She always went back to the church no matter how lost she got. You pure-Conservatives who...

Establishment candidates: Every republican nominated in since LIncoln. What's your point?

Jimmy Carter was winning until less than a week before the election simply because Reagan kicked his butt in a debate. If Carter hadn't agreed to debate, he'd have been elected and he was as unpopular as Obama. If anyone thinks beating this Chicago gangland style politician supported by a BILLION dollars, the MSM, and the government unions will be easy they're in denial of immeasurable magnitude.

and with a socialist who doesn't care about re-election it will increase tenfold, and he'll appoint a socialist Supreme Court that will negate anything of consequence done by a conservative in the future. That's another way of saying Obama wins big for about a generation.

Yep, Huntsman is probably going to be nominated. The MSM has completely moved mainstream Republicans to enthusiastically support him. He is a shoo-in for the nomination. The surge of momentum for him has been the big story of the campaign. The guy has less-than-zero support in the Republican party whatsoever, but without him how could the Romney haters constantly use his name with Romney's all the time? For people who supposedly want to return honesty to politics, all this Huntsman-Romney conspiracy talk really exposes the business-as-usual nature of the self-proclaimed non-mainstreamers.

This is the kind of comment that is so ridiculous it's really hard to respond. If you hate Romney as a 'moderate" or a "RINO" or whatever fine. But to suggest he and Obama are the same is to ignore everything either has said. Plus, Obama definitely spends more on his suits, whether you like them or not.

Senator? Yes. Candidate, definitely not. By the time he left the Senate he personified the term RINO, except that he was cranky and extremely outspoken about his anti-conservative views. And he wasn't a very good presidential candidate in 1964 as his closest supporters acknowledged (read Buckley's writings about him if you disagree).so I doubt you'd want him as a candidate. But he was a great man whose views gave voice to the wonderful writings of the truly great William Buckley. He inspired a lot of young people to become conservatives and he gave Reagan the stage to give the greatest convention speeches in the modern era. Anyone who sees his 1964 loss as paving he way for a conservative victory in 1968 though if off base -- ...

How about Romney wins, Cain is VP and they apply busines principles to running the government : if you can't afford it you don't buy it.