One Rick is finally out, with the other Rick sure to follow after tonight's debate.  Rick Perry announced his withdrawal from the presidential race at a press conference in North Charleston, South Carolina. Perry stated "I have come to the conclusion that there is no viable path forward for me in the 2012 campaign, I know when it's time to make a strategic retreat."

Perry then endorsed Newt Gingrich by saying the 2012 campaign has "never been about the candidates" but about defeating President Obama and replacing him "with a conservative leader who will bring about real change." He called Gingrich "a conservative visionary who can transform our country."

As recent as December, Perry had this to say about marital fidelity:

"I've always kind of been of the opinion that if you cheat on your wife, you'll cheat on your business partner."

However, closing his statements at the press conference Perry noted, "The fact is, there is forgiveness for those who seek God, and I believe in the power of redemption," he continued. "I have no question Newt has the heart of a conservative reformer."

Full Story here.


Analysis:

Rick Perry's exit from the race leaves only four in competition for the nomination. Perry's endorsement of Newt Gingrich may help him in the short run, but new allegations by former wife Marianne may prove damaging to Gingrich's campaign again. Heading into the South Carolina primary, I see Romney in first, followed by either Paul or Gingrich, and last Santorum. This will all but force Santorum to drop out of the race leaving only three, leaving only Romney and Paul as true contenders. Gingrich and Santorum are both not on the Virginia ballot which hurts their progress. With the amount of candidates that have already dropped out by the third week of January, and one to definitely follow, it is clear the race will either be tied up for Romney before Super Tuesday or it will be a drawn out race between Romney and Paul. Look for continued media coverage claiming a three man race, excluding Paul.

__CNN POLLING:

According to the survey, if the November election were held today and Romney were the Republican presidential nominee, 48% say they'd vote for the former Massachusetts governor, with 47% supporting the president. Romney's one point margin is well within the poll's sampling error.

The poll also indicates Paul statistically tied with Obama, with the president at 48% and the longtime congressman at 46%.

Full Article:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/16/cnn-poll-obama-tied-with-romney-paul-in-november-showdowns/

_All this recent Bain Capital bashing from the Republican Presidential Nominees not named Paul seems a bit misguided especially when you peel back the layers on this story.

Take a look at the chart on the left (Original Graphic from Twiiter user: @Samuel_E_Amer located here: http://twitpic.com/86hxpn).

Now, to be fair, It is unclear whether or not Gov. Romney currently or recently had any dealings with Bain Capital. However, we do know that they have contributed to his various political campaigns. I am not saying this is a bad thing, we here at Libertyology do not fault companies or individuals for contributing to their candidate of choice. But what is suspect is the company's investment in Clear Channel Media. As many of you who follow conservative talk radio know Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. Hannity, and Mr. Beck who seem ideologically supportive of the liberty movement in their words and actions are taking a hardline anti-Paul stance. But seem to give Romney a pass. I have not heard them once mention that their parent company, Clear Channel is partly owned by Bain Capital, before launching into their attacks on Paul. I think this is an important statement for them to make, because they are not being upfront with their viewers. If you cannot provide an unbiased view to the electorate than you should not be providing your view at all. I understand they are providing their views from a conservative perspective, but does Romney speak to the soul of small government conservatives? I challenge all Republican voters, especially those in South Carolina to take a step back for a moment and ask themselves: Am I being influenced by people that are more interested in profit than principles?

Out of the three commentators listed above I give Hannity a pass, mainly because I do not believe he is capable of formulating his own opinion and he is just full of used and distorted rhetoric. However, the actions and statements by Limbaugh and Beck are inexcusable. I like many other young conservatives grew up listening to Rush, he shaped my political philosophy. My disdain for corrupt politicians probably came from ideas Rush preached on his shows in the 90s. Beck continues to label himself as an against the grain libertarianesque commentator when in reality he is probably closer to a big government shill and fraud. He endorsed Santorum and Bachmann; did he even look at their records?

Mark Levin is actually apart of the Cumulus Media Network, which I do not believe is associated with Clear Channel.

Draw your own conclusions.

My conclusion is that this does not bode well for the conservative movement or the Republican Party.

Thank you CNN, Fox, and MSNBC for reporting this. (Sarcasm intended)

For Liberty,

Diesel

Associated Links:

http://www.baincapitalprivateequity.com/Investments/429/Clear_Channel_Communications

_            Update: As recently as Saturday Huntsman had this to say about Romney-

            Courtesy ABC News:

            Reporters asked Huntsman if any of the Republican establishment  had reached out to him and asked him to tone down his criticism of Romney and his work with Bain Capital. Huntsman explained: “Nope. And listen. I have said what I have said. My problem is really a political issue. And that is, when you have a candidate that talks about enjoyment in firing people, talks about pink-slips, who makes a comment that seem to be so detached from the problems that Americans are facing today, that makes you pretty much unelectable. And I say, we want a nominee who can actually go on to win. That’s the issue … the bigger issue is one of electability.”




Jon Huntsman will drop out of the Republican presidential race on Monday, according to a campaign spokesman. A source close to him says Huntsman was "proud of the race that he ran" but "did not want to stand in the way" of Mitt Romney. Huntsman plans to endorse Romney at a press conference Monday in Myrtle Beach, SC.

Full Story:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-01-15/huntsman-withdraws-presidential-race/52587668/1

Wow! Huntsman dropping out, with Rick Perry sure to follow right behind after SC. This is the third rival Mitt Romney may have bought out with promises of appointments in exchange for their endorsements (Tim Pawlenty, Chris Christie, & now Jon Huntsman). The GOP has a very clear decision to make. Either reluctantly retreat from trying to find the alternative to Romney and line up rank and file for the perceived inevitable, or fight back with intestinal fortitude to match. The race is between two very different rivals. Ron Paul and MItt Romney.

Ron Paul needs to rally the anti-Romney vote behind him to combat the seemingly crooked endorsements immediately made by contenders exiting the Republican presidential race.

Is this it? Will the rest of the Rebpublican nominees, except of course Ron Paul, leading to an inevitable Romney nomination?

I hope not and I will do everything in my power to not let that happen.


For Liberty,

Gabe Sandoval

_@senatortomdavis My choice for #2012. @RonPaul http://pic.twitter.com/b5oMF0KK

_Sen. Tom Davis announced his endorsement of Ron Paul at the Pallisades Ballroom in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. The Palmetto State Senator claims "enough is enough":

    “I’m endorsing Ron Paul because enough is enough. Despite this wave of unprecedented government spending, our unemployment rate has remained above 8 percent for the last 34 months and 146.4 million Americans – one out of every two people in this country – are now classified as poor or low-income.”


“Government activism and government intervention clearly hasn’t fixed our economy – which is why the Republican Party needs a nominee who isn’t wedded to that failed approach. We won’t chart a path to fiscal solvency or victory in November by running toward the failed ideas of the left – we will achieve those victories by returning to the principles that the Republican Party once stood for.”

“That is why I am proud to endorse Ron Paul for president.”

“I’m also endorsing him because unlike what the pundits have led you to believe, he is the candidate who gives the Republican Party the best chance to beat Barack Obama in November.”

“We have a choice: We can keep electing candidates who talk about change only during political campaigns as a way to get elected, or we can finally elect a candidate who will walk the walk and make that change a reality – restoring our bottom line, our individual liberties and our national pride in the process.”

Davis commented that his endorsement is about the ideals that Ron Paul stands for.

Ron Paul took to the podium after receiving Davis' endorsement saying to a crowd at the Pallisades Ballroom in Myrtle Beach, "We will do well next Saturday."

Sworn in on January 14, 2009 after winning election in November 2008, Senator Tom Davis is committed to limiting the reach of government and expanding individual liberty, and to promoting economic freedom.

To learn more about Sen. Tom Davis and thank him for his support of Liberty:

Official Website
http://senatortomdavis.com/blog/

Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/senatortomdavis

Twitter
@senatortomdavis My choice for #2012. @RonPaul


For Liberty,

Gabe Sandoval

Hello All,

I found this link via Twitter earlier and wanted to share it:

http://www.dailypaul.com/204203/big-announcement-tomorrow

I took the liberty of calling the hotel and sure enough there is a
large Ron Paul event planned for tomorrow night.

The first of two SC Debates will be hosted in Myrtle Beach on
Monday night as well.

For Liberty,

Diesel