Friday Night Open Thread

The Associated Press has obtained two reports on the NYPD surveillance of Muslims. One is here and the other is here. The reports show widespread surveillance by the Intelligence Division's Demographics unit based on religion.

Gloria Allred apparently needs to get back in the limelight. She's sent a letter to Palm Beach prosecutors saying Rush Limbaugh should be prosecuted for his comments about Sandra Fluke. The basis: An 1883 statute: [More...]

§ 836.04. Defamation

Whoever speaks of and concerning any woman, married or unmarried, falsely and maliciously imputing to her a want of chastity, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

History: S. 1, ch. 3460, 1883; RS 2419; GS 3260; RGS 5091; CGL 7193; s. 990, ch. 71-136.

How to ruin a good movement: Get Gloria involved.

This is an open thread, all topics welcome.

< The FBI and Sabu: Who Got Hurt? | Rush Limbaugh Ad Withdrawal Spreads to Other Shows >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I just read that Netflix has (5.00 / 4) (#1)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Mar 09, 2012 at 09:00:53 PM EST
    stipulated that their commercials are NOT to be slotted in during Rush.  They don't buy advertising specifically during his show, but they have purchased blocks before where they were slotted into his show.  No More now......

    With every advertiser that falls away from him, and with every station that drops him his numbers get worse and worse and our ability to have him removed from AFN increases dramatically.  He gets slotted because up to now his numbers were so good, he was considered America's most popular radio talkshow persona.

    Thanks to everyone who has signed petitions and written to advertisers.  Thank you so much!  Every little bit helps.

    Leader of the Free World (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Edger on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 10:51:47 AM EST
    If you get out there and protest income inequities or wars of aggression or the constant erosion of your rights, Barack'll give you free room and board now. He even went out of his way, came into the office on a FRIDAY for effs sakes, and signed the bill into law to do that for you only yesterday.

    Only days after clearing Congress, US President Barack Obama signed his name to H.R. 347 on Thursday, officially making it a federal offense to cause a disturbance at certain political events -- essentially criminalizing protest in the States.

    H.R. 347, the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011, had overwhelmingly passed the US House of Representatives after only three lawmakers voted against it. 388 to 3.

    That'll show all those dirty filthy hippie occupiers, on top of making sure that the 2012 NATO Summit in Chicago, the G20 in Camp David, and the DNC in Charlotte remain squeaky clean and free of any undue influence from the peasants.

    Don't forget to click your heels and glow with pride next time you hear the Star Spangled Banner.

    This looks like it really benefits.... (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by EL seattle on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 02:46:02 PM EST
    ... anyone who's officially covered by Secret Service protection.

    ``(1) the term `restricted buildings or grounds' means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area--
    ``(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President's official residence or its grounds;
    ``(B) of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or
    ``(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and

    ``(2) the term `other person protected by the Secret Service' means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title or by Presidential memorandum, when such person has not declined such protection.''.


    I wonder how many people per year are covered by Secret Service protection, at least temporarily? I believe that most visiting heads of state are covered, including a lot of folks who'd attract protests whenever they visit the USA.


    The ACLU says that what is being circulated (none / 0) (#44)
    by Peter G on Sun Mar 11, 2012 at 09:18:52 PM EST
    about this bill (now an amended law) is untrue.  What is new is a small change (a bad one, but not what is being claimed) in the "mens rea" (mental state required for conviction).  The rest of it has been on the books since 1971. Here's the analysis.

    I did read the tthe other day (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Edger on Sun Mar 11, 2012 at 09:29:44 PM EST
    It does seem to open doors to a fair amount of potential abuse, from what they say in there, in terms of relegating protest to only where the Secret Service or the President decide to relegate it to, or to allow it to only where they decide they are comfortable with it.

    It seems that simply sending Secret Service agents to a location to provide "protection" anywhere the president decides should have it would satisfy the requirement of the act, wouldn't it?

    These restricted areas include locations where individuals under Secret Service protection are temporarily located, and certain large special events like a presidential inauguration. They can also include large public events like the Super Bowl and the presidential nominating conventions (troublingly, the Department of Homeland Security has significant discretion in designating what qualifies as one of these special events).

    Kind of takes the whole purpose of protest away, no?


    Even more advertisers leaving Rush (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Yman on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 12:29:12 PM EST
    ... and other talk shows.

    Limbaugh's Advertiser Exodus Expands Exponentially

    Radio-Info.com reported on Friday that 98 advertisers have told Premiere Radio Networks, which syndicates Rush Limbaugh's radio show, that they want to avoid advertising on Limbaugh's show and other programs with content "deemed to be offensive or controversial":

    The advertisers were reportedly included in a Premiere memo circulated to radio station traffic managers and obtained by Radio-Info.com, laying out the growing reach of the advertiser exodus, which has now ensnared other controversial radio hosts

    The Crufts vet inspections have (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 06:17:36 PM EST
    some upset today I see.  I think it is responsible and the right thing to do.  At Crufts now, when a dog wins best of its breed it must pass a vet inspection and testing or it loses the title.  Because Crufts winners go on to give birth to so many other dogs, it seems responsible to me.  The Clumber Spaniel, Pekingese, Bulldog, and the Mastiff did not pass.  They cannot move into group judging either.

    This is going to really change what breeders do and don't do from here on out.  Some breeders with more money will breed and show faulty dogs because they have the money to show and show and show and show, and in between grooming and training they will get that dog eventually finished.  Nobody will breed to such dogs though anymore when a vet at Crufts can just shoot your high flying fanny right out of the air for good.

    Credibility returned to Crufts too, congratulations Crufts!

    Well it's about (5.00 / 4) (#29)
    by Zorba on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 06:32:52 PM EST
    d@mned time that somebody with some clout showed some responsibility with regard to the horrible things that a lot of breeders are doing to dog breeds.  Good for Crufts and their vet inspections.

    They don't have the King Charles on (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 06:39:39 PM EST
    the list of breeds that must pass vet inspection.  I hope they know that won't stand with the Syringomyelia problem.  The GSD is on the list because of the exaggerations that breeders were introducing.

    the Westminster announcer usually (none / 0) (#34)
    by the capstan on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 07:39:40 PM EST
    remarks about how sleek and fast the GSD looks now. after the tinkering.  Wish he could have watched my dog switch from running to bunnyhopping or to the 'drunken sailor walk'  when paralysis started up her spine.

    DM has nothing to do with herding gait (none / 0) (#37)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 10:29:34 PM EST
    or lack of it.  Our dog that had it was out of working lines and most likely from Germany, he looked like he was and he had been turned in to the rescue by a military family.  He had no angulation at all.  DM is a recessive gene that or angulation and has been present in the breed for years and years, and now that we can test for it no German Shepherd ever needs to be born with the ability to develop it ever again.  Misinformation about the breeds is just as bad as what some breeders have done.

    After your last diatribe I contacted a Corgi person that I've been at shows with.  Corgis have bowed legs because they are genetically dwarves.  Every mammal that displays dwarfism has appendages that are bowed, as you see in human beings too.  She laughed when I told her that you highly approve of Swedish Vallhunds though, because they too are genetic dwarves and have bowed appendages because of that.  It causes a joint anomaly to occur that leads to a bowing.


    from research (Science Magazine) (none / 0) (#40)
    by the capstan on Sun Mar 11, 2012 at 09:15:44 AM EST
    The data set was divided into cases and controls "based on breed assignment with Pembroke and Cardigan Welsh Corgi, Dachshund, Basset Hound, Petit Basset Griffon Vendéen, Pekingese, Glen of Imaal Terrier, and Scottish Terrier considered "cases" and dogs from the remaining 64 breeds assigned as "controls".  Four breeds, (Jack Russell Terrier, West Highland White Terrier, Havanese and Sussex Spaniel) were assigned a "missing" phenotype because the standard description, history, or our own measurement
    data suggested that the leg length or shape was variable (2, 3).  Single marker chi-squared
    association, model-based Fisher association, and haplotype association was performed ...."

    Have no idea what you are trying to say (none / 0) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Mar 11, 2012 at 10:06:53 AM EST
    here, or why you wouldn't link to this whole article on this study of study.

    And I can't link to the German Shepherd Review (none / 0) (#42)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Mar 11, 2012 at 10:47:52 AM EST
    You must purchase the magazine, but there is the results of DM study in it this month.  DM isn't exclusive to German Shepherds but the largest portion of dogs suffering from DM exist in the breed.  A recessive missense mutation in SOD1 is associated with DM in several breeds to include the German Shepherd.  And DM is being proposed at this time to be an animal model for amyotrophic lateral sclersis (ALS), Lou Gehrig's disease.  It has absolutely nothing to do with angulation or gait until the dog can't walk properly because of spinal cord disorders, and then angulation and gait are very affected.

    Definition of Missense mutation (none / 0) (#43)
    by Militarytracy on Sun Mar 11, 2012 at 10:54:18 AM EST
    here.  My own son probably also has a missense mutation, they just haven't been able to come up with funds to find it on the genome because far fewer people suffer from Freeman Sheldon Syndrome than dogs suffer from DM, and breeders and owners that care.  Perhaps someday though I will be able to know exactly what mutated during conception with my son.  Neither of his parents "carries" what he has, his was a spontaneous mutation that has occurred on its own in enough documented people that we can track it and its now predictable anomalies.

    the AKC says that can't happen here: (none / 0) (#33)
    by the capstan on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 07:33:55 PM EST
    the parent clubs 'own' the standard and the AKC will uphold the right of the judges to select whichever dog they want.  Just spelled out on my new breed's list  how well that attitude served my old breed, the GSD.

    Does it really matter? (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 10:44:48 PM EST
    Not to serious breeders.  The Pekingese that was DQ'd was a litter mate to the Pekingese that won Westminster this year. I have no idea what you speak of where the AKC is concerned.  I don't know if they will adopt something similar, but I know of one of their board members who has been arguing for something of that nature for some time now.  I own one of his dogs too.....proudly.

    I anticipate that they will have to follow suit, and it has nothing to do with breed standards.  All the dogs that Crufts DQ'd met their breed standard and had been championed several times over, that's how you make it to Crufts. And they also had horrible physical impairments that should not be passed onto other dogs and Crufts said NO to them being Crufts winners.

    When Westminster gives BIS to a dog that can't breathe properly and then Crufts DQs its litter mate because it can't breathe properly, the global breeding world has changed dramatically for all of us.  As plainly seen, we are all sharing in the same litters and champions.

    There is one hell of a $hit storm though that is already and will continue to wail and sob, but as long as Crufts holds its ground....they've changed everything.


    That GSD at Westminster (none / 0) (#35)
    by nycstray on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 09:03:52 PM EST
    was so sad looking.

    What breed are you in now?


    breed: (none / 0) (#36)
    by the capstan on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 09:44:22 PM EST
    Vallhund (Swedish Cattle Dog):
    Comment about that GSD from a dunce: "Have you ever seen such a gorgeous stride?"

    I wondered how long until it needs a cart (dog wheelchair)--and if the owner will actually care for it when it no longer can stand or control bodily functions.


    Too bad they were not on Maui: (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by the capstan on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 07:24:13 PM EST
    there you just hop in the car and drive to another part of the island.  Was there during a downpour that turned Napili Bay red with mud.  We drove toward Hana that day; could have gone south instead.

    Yes, the tourists and the reporter were thoughtless.  Sometimes the real story gets told, however, like on Kauai during Iniki.  (We had just been there.)

    If I ever make it back to Maui, I shall be happy just to sit and look at the beauty, since snorkeling days may be over.

    Greece (none / 0) (#3)
    by Edger on Fri Mar 09, 2012 at 09:56:44 PM EST
    Has Defaulted: Here Is Where We Stand

    1)  Greece was able to write off 100 billion euros worth of debt in exchange for a 130 billion rescue package of new debt, of which Greece itself will receive 19%, or about 25 billion, so that it can continue to operate as an ongoing concern.  Somehow Greece is in a better position than before, with more debt and less sovereignty and still---by virtue of sharing a common currency---trying to compete toe-to-toe with the likes of Germany and the Netherlands, kind of like being the Yemeni National Basketball team in an Olympic bracket that includes the US, Spain and Germany.  At least a "within the euro" default prevented bank runs in Portugal, Spain, Italy et al.

    2)  As a result of the bond haircuts, Greece has many pension plans that can no longer even pretend to be viable, at least according to the original contracted scheme, but pensionholders still working can take heart in the fact that their current wages will be cut, too.

    Read 3,4,5,6,7 & 8 at the link.

    Economist Michael Hudson last summer, 2011...

    Greece a Dress Rehearsal for United States

    Cuts to [US] Social Security and Medicare and privatization at the state level mirror strategy imposed on Greece

    video interview & transcript

    Greece Offers to Repay Bailout w Giant Horse (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by Mr Natural on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 09:44:48 AM EST
    The horse, wheeled into Brussels wednesday night, measuring several stories in height, drew mixed responses from the finance ministers, many of whom said they would have preferred a cash repayment of the EU's bailout.

    But German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she "welcomed the beautiful wooden horse," adding, "What harm could it possibly do?"  

    Whatever happened.... (none / 0) (#4)
    by CoralGables on Fri Mar 09, 2012 at 10:01:10 PM EST
    to the New York Knicks?

    They are (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Makarov on Fri Mar 09, 2012 at 11:13:20 PM EST

    Brutal... (none / 0) (#11)
    by kdog on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 10:41:50 AM EST
    no interior defense whatsoever with Chandler and Jeffries sidelined...Amare & Anthony play matador D in the paint.  Teams are killing us on the offensive glass too.

    And when ya don't play D or rebound, ya can't hide all them turnovers.

    And still no set rotation...can Phil Jackson take the reigns right now?



    Friday night NFL update (none / 0) (#5)
    by Makarov on Fri Mar 09, 2012 at 11:12:22 PM EST
    Well, the Redskins are all in. 2012-2014 1st round and 2012 2nd round picks to move up 4 spots and take Robert Griffin III. As an Eagles fan, I might have some concern if not for seeing the Shanahans' coaching abilities the last couple years.

    Joking aside, it was a smart move to do the deal in advance of free agency. RG3 is going to help recruit some free agents. Washington has plenty of cap space to make some deals, $30M by one report.

    For unexplained reasons, the Jets extended Mark Sanchez 3 years for $40M, $20M guaranteed. I literally started crying I was laughing so hard. Seriously, I don't get that move. Not at all. That is not going to help season ticket sales.

    Pretty steep price for RG3, (none / 0) (#9)
    by Anne on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 09:55:05 AM EST
    but this is kind of typical of the Redskins.  They do have a ton of cap space, and there are some stellar free agents out there who could be lured with some big money.  Too bad they can't buy a new owner, though...

    As for the Sanchez extension, I think Rex's job will live or die on how well - or how poorly - Sanchez performs in the 2012 season.  

    And then there's the locker room...can't help thinking that the Sanchez extension isn't going to help there, either.


    I guess... (none / 0) (#12)
    by kdog on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 10:43:57 AM EST
    Manning ain't interested in Gang Green...but it still makes no sense.  

    If you believe (none / 0) (#16)
    by Makarov on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 01:02:32 PM EST
    some Jets fans, the move was primarily motivated to save cap space. That's logical except for the fact you could save more by just releasing Sanchez. With Sparano replacing Shotty at OC, bringing in Chad Henne would make a lot of sense. Hell, they may still bring in Henne. God knows they need someone better than Boller behind Sanchez.

    Sanchez did have leverage over any attempt to restructure or extend him, which is why $20M is guaranteed. Maybe he's just one of those guys that looks brilliant in practice, and less so on Sunday. I doubt it.


    Honestly... (none / 0) (#7)
    by Edger on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 07:21:10 AM EST
    How primitive the Afghans are!  A New York Times account of faltering negotiations over a possible "strategic partnership" agreement to leave U.S. troops on bases in that country for years to come highlights just how far the Afghans have to go to become, like their U.S. mentor, a mature democracy.
    Honestly, what kind of a backward country doesn't have a provision for the indefinite detention, on suspicion alone, of prisoners without charges or hope of trial?  As a mature democracy, we now stand proudly for global indefinite detention, not to speak of the democratic right to send robot assassins to take out those suspected of evil deeds anywhere on Earth. As in any mature democracy, the White House has now taken on many of the traits of a legal system -- filling, that is, the roles of prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner.

    Six months to learn all that (and how to burn Korans, too)?  I don't think so.  Or how about a really mature plan that, according to an Associated Press report, top Pentagon officials are now mulling over: to put whatever U.S. elite special operations forces remain in Afghanistan after 2014 under CIA control. The reason?  Once they are so lodged, even though their missions wouldn't change, they would officially become "spies" and whoever's running Washington then will be able to swear, with complete candor, that no U.S. troops remain in Afghanistan.

    --Tomgram: Ann Jones, Playing the Game in Afghanistan

    Zenyatta is (none / 0) (#10)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 10:01:37 AM EST
    Great College Basketball Weekend (none / 0) (#13)
    by Dadler on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 10:47:41 AM EST
    All the big conference tourneys wrap up, a few small ones also -- you know you're a gym rat when you'll tune in for at least a half of the Bethune-Cookman vs. Norfolk State tilt for the lowly MEAC Conference tourney title.  My old hometown SDSU Aztecs take on New Mexico for the Mountain West crown.  That game should be a burner.  Glad they didn't get UNLV in the finals, which woulda been a huge home court advantage for the Rebs.  Anyway, I'm gonna enjoy the squeak of the shoes today and tomorrow, then wait for Monday to find out which second-tier, nobody's ever heard of it, post-season tourney my USF Dons get into.  Should get at least one more game at War Memorial of the season, maybe a few more, which would be great.

    And if you're in the mood to read some darker Dadler fiction, a new piece is up at the story blog.  An executioner dictates his vocational musings.  Very light-hearted stuff.  Ahem.  (LINK)

    Live Link (none / 0) (#17)
    by CoralGables on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 02:00:20 PM EST
    to Kansas caucus results in what looks to be a Santorum romp.


    In a state (none / 0) (#18)
    by CoralGables on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 02:18:47 PM EST
    that is not winner take all, it's highly possible Santorum is going to take them all.

    And yet another reason (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Zorba on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 03:22:00 PM EST
    to ask "What's the Matter with Kansas?"  Remember, Mike Huckabee won the Kansas Republican Caucus in 2008 (and all the delegates) with 59.58% of the vote.  This is Kansas, after all.  

    Formula (none / 0) (#21)
    by CoralGables on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 03:31:31 PM EST
    for distributing the 40 delegates from Kansas:

    1) 3 are given to the candidate who receives the most votes statewide.

    All three to Santorum

    2)12 are assigned, three at a time, to the winners in each of the state's four Congressional Districts.

    All twelve to Santorum

    3)25 delegates are allocated proportionately by the statewide vote, but a candidate is required to receive 20 percent of the vote to qualify for a share.

    A 50/50 shot of Romney getting up to 7, with an equal chance of Santorum taking all 25. Everyone else is shutout.


    Kansas is Kansas (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Zorba on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 04:34:54 PM EST
    In Kansas, evangelical Christians represent nearly a third of the population, and will likely make up an even larger share of Republican caucusgoers. Moreover, Kansas has a long tradition of activism on socially conservative issues. "The Kansas Republican Party, its whole history, has had a very strong streak of moral issues, whether it's prohibition or abolition or pro-life issues," said Clay Barker, the executive director of the Kansas Republican Party. "Things like that tend to be very important to a lot of voters."

    Mr. Santorum has received broad support from evangelical Christians and other social conservatives. In Ohio, for instance, Republican primary voters who described their social philosophy as very conservative favored Mr. Santorum over Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, by better than two to one, according to exit polls. But there were too few social conservatives in Ohio to swing the state to Mr. Santorum. That is unlikely to be a problem in Kansas.

    The Romney and Gingrich campaigns appear to have all but surrendered the state. "Gingrich and Romney have pretty much given up," said Mr. Barker, with whom FiveThirtyEight spoke to get the lay of the land in Kansas.


    Romney was never going to win in Kansas, especially not considering the fact that they have the caucus system, which tends to favor the "true believers." Kansas in recent years puts "The Bible" in "The Bible Belt."  And by "The Bible," I refer to the Bible as interpreted by Evangelical Christians.  The results in Kansas are not a surprise, and it still doesn't mean that Santorum will win the Republican nomination.  


    LOL! (none / 0) (#27)
    by Zorba on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 06:04:33 PM EST
    Yes, that's pretty much Kansas.  The biggest buckle in The Bible Belt.  Don't tell your client that I said so, but I would never live in Kansas if they paid me a whole lot of money.  (And, yes, there are some other states I could name that I would say the same of.)

    Romney didn't campaign in Kansas (5.00 / 0) (#24)
    by jbindc on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 04:52:10 PM EST
    So far, according to RCP, Santorum picked up 20 delegates, but Romney has already picked up 12 from Guam and the Northern Marianas caucuses and is ahead in Wyoming.  Maybe the tide will turn for Santorum in the Virgin Islands.

    Too bad Romney already has 3 times as many delegates.


    RCP (none / 0) (#25)
    by CoralGables on Sat Mar 10, 2012 at 05:41:43 PM EST
    can say twenty. I'll say it's Santorum 33 - Romney 7 - Gingrich 0 - Paul 0 in Kansas

    Romney (none / 0) (#39)
    by jbindc on Sun Mar 11, 2012 at 07:22:45 AM EST
    Even says Santorum won 34 delegates in Kansas.  It doesn't matter.  You can hope and pray all you want and sprinkle fairy dust, but Romney has to win under 50% of all remaining delegates and Santorum has to win 65% of all remaining delegates.

    Your boy Rick will not win, unless the earth opens up and swallows places like Utah.

    Romney, many Republicans and even some of his own supporters acknowledge, may end June without hitting 1,144. Still, stopping him at the convention is a long shot.

    For starters, there won't an enormous cache of unpledged delegates up for grabs. And the same concerns about Santorum and Gingrich at the top of the ticket that are presently holding them back -- among them general election viability, temperament, organization, fundraising -- will still hold true at the convention unless either man is miraculously able to overcome his long-exhibited logistical and message hurdles by July.

    Of the upcoming contests, other than Utah, only New Jersey, Washington D.C. (where Santorum isn't on the ballot) and Delaware are winner-take-all, and none are Santorum- or Gingrich-friendly climates. Indeed, with the New Jersey ballot deadline approaching on April 2, it's possible that, given the state's somewhat complicated delegate-slate rules, Santorum could again have challenges.

    Illinois would be a test for Santorum on March 20, but even there, he has encountered familiar delegate problems.

    "Mathematically, obviously if Gingrich, or Romney for that matter, stepped out of the race you're going have a mass result from that to help the other ones," said Mississippi GOP chairman Joe Nosef, adding that both Gingrich and Romney have their strong supporters in his state. There are 28 other contests in addition to Mississippi and Alabama through the end of the cycle.

    If Gingrich dropped out, it would help Santorum with the popular vote. Even so, with the layout of the upcoming primaries and the lack of friendly winner-take-all states, it could also have the opposite effect -- Romney could simply get to the 1,144 needed to clinch the nomination with greater ease, since Santorum would be far from guaranteed winning all of Gingrich's support.