Skip to content

Nomination Excitations: Say It Ain’t So, Joe

31 January 2012 @ 17:57

NEWT DESTRUCTA EST!:

-Stacy McCain asks a damn good question in his most recent post title:

Newt Gingrich: Graceless In Defeat?

Yes, but he’s also graceless in de hands, de head, de heart, de soul.

-This morning Stacy filed a very good report ,over at The American Spectator, on what Newton Leroy has been saying lately and it really shows (1) how devoid of any honor or decency he is and (2) just how much of a raging Narcissist he is.

Two highlights:

He cited no evidence that Goldman Sachs was in cahoots with Romney, and the opacity of the “super PACs” which are pumping millions into this Republican primary campaign makes it impossible either to prove or disprove Gingrich’s depiction of the malevolent forces arrayed against him. Yet he repeated similar accusations in different forums throughout the day — on ABC in the morning, on Fox News in the afternoon, and at each of the five stops on his final whirlwind tour of the Sunshine State — as if endeavoring to convince his supporters that they are victims of a vast conspiracy. Newt seemed to be providing a pre-emptive excuse for what polls indicate will be a decisive defeat for him in Tuesday’s winner-take-all primary.

And…

“We’re in a very simple campaign,” Gingrich said. “We are pitting people power against money power. No question — you look at the list of top ten donors to Mitt Romney, that’s money power. That is the establishment. Those are the people who would be happy, as George Soros said, with either Obama or Romney, and they do not want a conservative. Those are the people who have led the assault on me over the last couple of weeks, by all sorts of folks whose number-one goal is to keep power in Washington the way it is now.”

The arguments Gingrich is using follow the same logic that Caesar used in his quest to rule Rome.  Caesar pitted himself against an Establishment that he himself was very much a part of and that he had handsomely benefitted from.  His is an ego that is out of control.

-Do also check out Stacy’s report from the Florida Campaign Trail yesterday.

-Newt is again advising Rick Santorum to get out of the race, claiming that the former Senator is drawing away votes from his magnificent self.  Ed Morrissey is having none of that [tip of the fedora to Stacy]:

Oddly, Gingrich didn’t appear as principled on the subject of conservative consolidation when Santorum won Iowa and Gingrich finished fourth, nor when Santorum narrowly edged Gingrich for fourth place in New Hampshire. If he was concerned about a conservative sacrificing to make sure a conservative alternative had the strength to beat Mitt Romney at that time, Gingrich didn’t pull a muscle leaping out of his chair to volunteer….

Please do take the time to read the full posting here, where you will also find Mr. Santorum’s response and Mr. Morrissey trying to bring Newt back to the Real World.

-Newton Leroy has become a major embarrassment.

ROMNEY DELENDA EST!

-While Willard hasn’t come right out and said it directly, Smitty has no doubt that Mandate Mitt will repeal Obamacare [no really!]:

Let’s have an end to these wildly inaccurate mis-statements about RomBamaCare. While we’re at it, let’s have an end to concerns about liberty, private property, and freedom of expression….

Jeez…I wonder if the Admiral Of The Afghan Seas is being sarcastic?

-Although he is very skeptical as well that Willard intends to repeal Obamacare, Paco plays it straight [in more ways than one, IYKWIMAITYD]:

How frustrating it is that genuinely conservative presidential aspirants, for whatever reason, can’t seem to gain traction, while this moderate Ken doll leads the rapidly diminishing pack. If conservatives can’t advance their cause in a presidential term that has seen the utter folly of liberalism brought to disastrous fruition across the board – and by its most arrogant, overhyped and inept exponent – what hope will we have if we ever again see a Democrat who is even marginally less left-wing than the current occupant of the White House?

It’s so damn frustrating.

Let me tell you: never giving into despair is getting harder and harder.

-Over at the Washington Rebel, Col. Bunny has a quote that sums-up one of Willard’s major defects that is also a damning fact [tip of the fedora to Political Clown Parade].

CHARACTEREM ET HONOREM MAXIMUS: SANTORUM HABET:

-Michelle Malkin has endorsed Rick Santorum.  A highlight [tip of the fedora to RSM]:

He rose above the fray by sticking to issues.

Most commendably, he refused to join Gingrich and Perry in indulging in the contemptible Occupier rhetoric against Romney. Character and honor matter. Santorum has it.

Of course, Santorum is not perfect. As I’ve said all along, every election cycle is a Pageant of the Imperfects. He lost his Senate re-election bid in 2006, an abysmal year for conservatives. He was a go-along, get-along Big Government Republican in the Bush era. He supported No Child Left Behind, the prescription drug benefit entitlement, steel tariffs, and earmarks and outraged us movement conservatives by endorsing RINO Arlen Specter over stalwart conservative Pat Toomey.

I have no illusions about Rick Santorum….

Neither do I.

-Mr. Santorum was recently the recipient of some advice de Gonzo [tip of the fedora to Smitty]:

Let us hope and pray, RS was not listening [and that the shirt did not blind him].

DIC ERGO NON EST ITA, SARAH:

In that report by Stacy over at TAS I referenced earlier, he writes:

…But as evidence mounted that Romney’s aggressive full-court Florida attack was succeeding — and after Gingrich fared poorly in two televised debates last week — it was Newt and his supporters who pushed the panic button, asserting that unless conservatives immediately rallied behind Gingrich, the “Establishment” would conspire to deliver the GOP nomination to Romney.

Among those who have helped spread that message is former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who last week issued a Facebook warning that “the GOP establishment [is] trying to anoint a candidate without the blessing of the grassroots” and “using Alinsky tactics to kneecap Governor Romney’s chief rival.” Palin yesterday reiterated that charge during an appearance on Andrew Napolitano’s Fox Business Network program, saying that “those inside the machine” are ganging up against Gingrich. For the first time during this campaign, Palin expressed a dismissive attitude toward another Republican challenger, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, telling Napolitano that the Republican choice is “one or the other” between Mitt and Newt, adding that it is “naively idealistic” to think either Santorum or Texas Rep. Ron Paul could mount a serious challenge to Romney.

I understood why Mrs. Palin told people in South Carolina to vote for Newton Leroy and then used the same logic regarding Florida voters, but, if she is so concerned with keeping the race going, why is she running down one of the candidates who could just help do that?  Why the dismissive attitude towards the candidate who is closest to her philosophically?  Maybe I’m just too dumb to see the reasoning that is guiding Mrs. Palin in making such seemingly dumb statements.

7 Comments
  1. 31 January 2012 @ 18:13 18:13

    Thanks for the link!

    • bobbelvedere permalink*
      31 January 2012 @ 19:07 19:07

      Get well, dammit!

  2. Rosalie permalink
    31 January 2012 @ 19:30 19:30

    At first, with SC, I thought that she was just playing her own game of Operation Chaos to keep everything going. Now, not so much. Although she hasn’t officially endorsed Newt, I think it’s pretty obvious where she stands. I wonder if it’s because he mentioned that he wants her for VP? I believe that he also mentioned other people too though. Who knows? She hasn’t changed my mind about Newt. I’m for Santorum.

    • bobbelvedere permalink*
      31 January 2012 @ 20:35 20:35

      I’m just hoping there’s some reasonable strategy at work here. I’d hate to think she’s gone and done something really naive and dumb.

      • Adobe Walls permalink
        01 February 2012 @ 00:47 00:47

        She’s an astute politician, and being an astute politician she knows Santorum will not be the nominee. Don’t know how anti Romney she is, but I suspect that would explain a lot.

        • Rosalie permalink
          01 February 2012 @ 14:30 14:30

          Even astute politicians make mistakes. No one knows for sure at this point what’s going to happen. It could end up being Santorum vs. Romney (but then I’m an optimist).

  3. 31 January 2012 @ 23:59 23:59

    Thank you for the link!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: