Posted on 01/26/2012 11:15:49 AM PST by Kaslin
Drudgereport has become a Newtbashingpoluzia today.
The only reason the left and the RION’s are so intent to wage war on Newt is because they all know that Newt can defeat the Kenyan-In-Chief this November and they also know that Romney absolutely will continue the tradition of Dole and McCain by losing to a Democrat.
Romney may have used a clever tactic in his attempt to minimize Gingrich's contributions or work during the Reagan years. The point may not be whether Reagan "mentioned" him, but where was Romney during that period and what contribution was he making to conservatism?
Methinks Romney supporters protest too much in their Pelosi-like efforts to discredit Gingrich. By doing so, they may discredit themselves and their authenticity as spokespersons for conservatism.
Hopefully, the unveiling of the video of Nancy Reagan's words might reveal Romney's misleading comments about Gingrich's links to Reagan and the conservative cause of that era.
Voters might ask, where were Romney's efforts in the conservative victories during those years. When Brian Williams asked about any such efforts, Romney seemed to think that raising a family and starting a business career in a "consulting firm" qualified as contributing to the "conservative movement."
In the meantime, during those same years, other business men and women were spending their dollars and their time out there warning citizens that if they didn't rein in their elected representatives in government and return to constitutional principles, the free enterprise system which allowed them the freedom to "raise a family" and "work in the private sector" might disappear from the earth.
Working in what Romney calls "the private sector" and working to preserve the Founders' "freedom of individual enterprise" principle which underlies all the other freedoms Americans enjoy are two very different things.
Romney has done the first: Gingrich has done the latter.
Krauthammer's frank assessment of the apparent incapability of Romney to explain conservative ideas is a telling evaluation. By the way, ordinary citizens out here know the difference between fast talk, blinking eyes, discomfort when asked to define "conservatism", shifting to another subject entirely, versus the Gingrich ability take a question, calmly set the answer in a context of understanding, and provide more depth of explanation than the questioner implied.
When viewing, it's like the difference between a used car lot salesman avoiding the CarFax question and a Lexus commercial. One just "gets" the difference.
Michael Reagan just did an interview with Megyn Kelly about an hour ago on Fox and backed Newt being a Reagan supporter. Said Elliott Abrams probably did not support tearing down the wall either like a lot of others and SO WHAT? Does that mean they did not support Reagan? No! I am waiting for that interview to post online and then I will put it up on FR.
Ronald Reagan didn’t believe in surrounding himself with “yes” men, he wanted lively debate between members of his administration on certain issues.
>>>Drudgereport has become a Newtbashingpoluzia today.
Drudge is giving Newt a full Alinsky.
If Reaganism means cut taxes and borrow then I’d be against that too. Those deficits cost us a lot of goodwill and W Bush didn’t help by following that formula.
Newt was the only one who gave us the winning formula of cutting taxes and balancing the budget. Of course, establishment Republicans don’t like that because it means giving up their pet programs.
“The only reason the left and the RION’s are so intent to wage war on Newt is ... “
Something is going on. Washington is filled with opportunists. If Newt were all that promising, there would be plenty of people trying to get close to him to cash in on his success.
Something isn’t right.
Michael Reagan was earlier on Megan Kelly’s America Alive and he confirmed that Newt has always been pro Reagan
Drudge is trying to rewrite history today.....
It was hard for me to figure out where Rush was coming from today, and what point he was trying to make by continually pleading his own ignorance of the facts. I kept waiting for him to conjecture on some explanation for the comments he was talking about being on YouTube, but all he said was that it was totally schocking to him that the comments had actually taken place.
Rush was quick to rush to Romney’s aid when the Bain ads came out, and he is equally quick to pile onto Newt, while claiming he isn’t doing that. It’s his show, and his business who he really wants, though he won’t admit it. This way he won’t have difficulty bashing President Romney when taxes go up, we get Mittcare and bigger government. He can always claim he didn’t endorse anyone.
Reminds me of how Stalin covered up the fact that Lenin warned the rest of the Politburo not to allow Stalin to succeed him, Stalin managed to rewrite history, claiming that Lenin had indeed hand-picked him.
He who controls the past, controls the future.
If someone other than Romney is the Candidate are all these characters going to join the Controlled Media chorus for the Total State and the Dear Leader? I couldn’t have imagined Tyrell throwing grenades at Gingrich in favor of Romney.
I did see it too, and will check for the video after the program
obviously it's a coordinated document dump here, opposition research dump. It's obviously coordinated. And this stuff, by the way, that's on Greg Sargent's blog, Plum Line, that's the thinly sourced stuff in the New York Times about Newt being emotionally unstable and Romney putting that out, that's why Romney is not liked by the Republicans that don't like him. It's that kind of stuff that his campaign puts out.
You're damned right about that, Mr. Limbaugh.
Problem is, this "dumping" is exposing all the dirty characters, and their dirty machinery, and their dirty waste. And with the most important election of our lifetimes at stake, maybe we don't want to "take it."
P.S. There's nothing "impeccable" about people who are out to bury good people.
Limbaugh gave Specter his microphone, to prevail in a GOP primary. Rush is a party man, when the chips are down.
He wasn’t rushing to Romney’s aid, he just didn’t like that Gingrich attacked capitalism and there were others who didn’t like it either
All this tells me is that Rush has gotten very lazy. He is more and more a reactionary all the time. He is uninformed and it is embarrassing for a former supporter like me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.