The Pack turns on the Grinch
Posted: December 12, 2011 Filed under: Republican politics, Republican presidential politics | Tags: Glenn Beck, MIchael Savage, Newt Gingrich 12 Comments
I wrote a bit this morning about Willard using Attack Barbie Anne Coulter against the Newster in Iowa. Well, there’s a sh#t storm of right wing media celebs ganging up to stop his big Mo going into January. You gotta love it when the pit bulls of the right turn on each other. Mind my links because most of them are going straight into the dog pounds of right blogosphere.
First up, Glenn Beck says that he’ll support Ron Paul in a third party run for president if Gingrich takes the Republican nomination.
Glenn Beck said this morning on his radio show that if Newt Gingrich is the nominee and Ron Paul runs third party, he’d consider voting for Ron Paul over Newt Gingrich, and he hates Ron Paul’s policies on the Middle East:
Michale Savage has offered the Grinch a million dollars to quit the race. Mind the caps, they come straight from both ends of the horse.
THE REASONS WHY GINGRICH CANNOT SUCCEED IN AN ELECTION AGAINST OBAMA:
WHEN HE WAS SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, GINGRICH FAILED TO DELIVER ON HIS SO-CALLED CONTRACT WITH AMERICA.
HE MADE ADS WITH NANCY PELOSI PROMOTING THE FALSE THEORY OF GLOBAL WARMING.
HE’S IN FAVOR OF AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS.
HE’S TAKEN HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FROM FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC, TWO OF THE MOST CORRUPT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS IN HISTORY.
HE’S CHEATED ON TWO WIVES AND LEFT BOTH OF THEM WHILE THEY WERE BOTH SERIOUSLY ILL, WHICH WILL DESTROY HIS CHANCES AMONG FEMALE VOTERS.
HE CALLED THE REPUBLICAN PLAN TO REFORM MEDICARE “RIGHT WING SOCIAL ENGINEERING.”
IN A PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE AGAINST OBAMA, REGARDLESS OF HOW WELL HE DOES, ON TELEVISION, HE WILL COME OFF BADLY COMPARED TO OBAMA AND LOOK LIKE NOTHING MORE THAN WHAT HE IS: A FAT, OLD, WHITE MAN.
George Will reminded every one of his Newtness in the 90s. This quote is from his Sunday appearance on This Week
“Newt Gingrich was a shooting star in this town, this prominent Republican from 1994 to 1998. He was, at that point, the most disliked politician in America, probably, and he was deposed by his own party. He says, ‘I’m the most electable.’”
Will called Gingrich a “rental politician” in the previous week’s This Week.
Gingrich’s is an amazingly efficient candidacy, in that it embodies almost everything disagreeable about modern Washington. He’s the classic rental politician. People think his problem is his colorful personal life. He’s gonna hope people concentrate on that, rather than on, for example, ethanol. Al Gore has recanted ethanol. Not Newt Gingrich, who has served the ethanol lobby. Industrial policy of the sort that got us Solyndra – he’s all for it. Freddie Mac, he says, hired him as a “historian.” He’s not a historian. Hire Sean Wilentz, hire Gordon Wood if you want a historian.
Huffpo has a gallery of who’s who of the Republican Political Punditry that’s out against Newt.
Prominent conservatives like Ann Coulter, George Will and David Brooks have started to voice concerns about the former Speaker of the House, comparing Gingrich to everything from a hand grenade to a 1960s-style reveler.
Peggy Noonan, writing in Saturday’s Wall Street Journal, posited that most observations about Newt are accurate.
“Ethically dubious? True. Intelligent and accomplished? True. Has he known breathtaking success and contributed to real reforms in government? Yes. Presided over disasters? Absolutely. Can he lead? Yes. Is he erratic and unreliable as a leader? Yes. Egomaniacal? True. Original and focused, harebrained and impulsive — all true,” she wrote.
I bet this delightful turn of events is enough to make David Pflouffe believe in Santa Claus. I’m just getting a huge belly laugh out of the whole thing.
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
ecocatwoman
grayslady
mablue2
JJ Lopez aka Minkoff Minx
NW Luna
peggysue22
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
“Yes, Gingrich should be immensely vulnerable. But he has a sort of emotional bond with the base — the shared snarl — that may well carry him through.” — Paul Krugman
I approve of that remark 🙂
I guess angry birds flock with other angry birds.
Krugman is way out of his depth here. He spends way too much time vilifying everyone who disagrees with him to be able to turn around and actually analyze their motives. Gingrich is up for the same reason that Bachmann, Perry, and Cain all rose and then drastically declined – the only other alternatives are Romney, whom many won’t vote for because he’s never met a position he didn’t like, and Paul, whom most won’t vote for because blowing up brown people is so gosh-darned fun.
That’s why Eye of Newt is up right now. Snarls have nothing to do with it.
I really want to believe that but I think there’s a religious sect that won’t vote for Romney because of the Mormon thing and because he’s not been a cultural conservative historically. They’d rather believe that white ol’ Newt got saved by the Pope and Calista. I think there’s a snarly, angry, bigoted group of religious nuts that sees Newt as viable because they don’t want any one not sanctified in a politically correct faith and willing to do anything for the religious right just to get the votes.
Yea, the bible-bangers are still bouncing around looking for someone. That’s going to be an interesting dynamic in the election because they aren’t going to find that candidate since ganging up on the homos or the scary Mooslims or whoever becomes a bit less interesting when you have actual problems to deal with
So either way the Republicans are going to get a nominee that most of them don’t like, unless someone else steps in at the last minute. I’m guessing the evangelicals don’t like Mitt or Newt very much.
I’m betting most of them are turning themselves inside out trying to find a way to really support Newt. Before they’re done most will eat the hypocrisy and climb aboard I imagine. For the far right, this is an anti-Obama election. I’m just glad there are hopefully not enough of them to elect a president.
This is the second presidential election in a row where the GOP has had enormous trouble finding a candidate that some major faction of the party didn’t despise.
So when are we going to get a President to pull the leaders of both parties in Congress in, and make them get serious about doing something to save a nation near crisis? When are we going to get a leader?
We need compromise. Yes, we need Republicans to give a little. We need everyone together. If we always elect a leader who is only a leader of their faction, we will not have leadership of our country, of which I am seeing an end real soon without leadership.
At this point I would say never. There are blocs of voters and corporate interests that won’t let that happen. The two worst blocs this last 30 years are religious extremists and the FIRE lobby. The continuing influence of the defense industry continues also.
Part of my background is Russian, so I’ve always been very aware of their shared longing for a good leader. It was fairly different from the US at the time, where the shared feeling about politicians was more like skepticism, if anything. (Which is different from contempt that we have now.)
I’d say the Russians show clearly that the answer doesn’t lie along their road.
He will come off looking like a old, fat, STUPID white man.