Ann Coulter: NEWT: SPEAK BOMBASTICALLY AND CARRY A TINY STICK (Romney: STUCK)

AnnCoulter.Com ^ | December 14, 2011 | Ann Coulter

[Syncro]

ANNCOULTER.COM

NEWT: SPEAK BOMBASTICALLY AND CARRY A TINY STICK

December 14, 2011

Fellow right-wingers: Is our objective to taunt Obama by accusing him of "Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior," of being "authentically dishonest" and a "wonderful con" -- and then lose the election -- or is it to defeat Obama, repeal Obamacare, secure the borders, enforce e-verify, reform entitlement programs, reduce the size of government and save the country? 

If all you want is to lob rhetorical bombs at Obama and then lose, Newt Gingrich -- like recent favorite Donald Trump -- is your candidate. But if you want to save the country, Newt's not your guy. 

Gingrich makes plenty of bombastic statements, but these never seem to translate into actual policy changes. 

After becoming the first Republican speaker of the House in nearly half a century, for example, Newt promptly proposed orphanages and janitorial jobs for children on welfare. 

It was true that welfare had destroyed generations of families shorn of the work ethic and led to soaring illegitimacy rates, child abuse and neglect. Maybe orphanages and child labor would have been better. 

But we didn't get any orphanages. We didn't get jobs for children in families where no one works. 

What we got was the cartoonish image of Republicans as hard-hearted brutes who hated poor kids. 

Ronald Reagan was also accused of waging a war on the poor. But that was on account of his implementing historic tax cuts that produced not only record revenues for the government, but decades of prosperity for the entire nation. 

With Newt, you get all the heat, blowback and acrimony, but you don't get the policy changes. 

To the contrary, his pointless bloviating about orphanages and child janitors harmed the chances for welfare reform, despite the fact that the American people, the Republican Congress and the Democratic president (publicly, at least), supported it. 

Indeed, when it came time to make vital changes to welfare policy, such as work requirements and anti-illegitimacy provisions, Gingrich tried to scuttle them. He denounced such provisions -- the very heart of welfare reform -- as, yes, "social engineering of the right" (e.g., Republican Governors Conference, Williamsburg, Va., Nov. 22, 1994). 

The guy who wanted orphanages for children on welfare suddenly called work requirements for adults on welfare right-wing "social engineering." 

Gingrich went on to lose almost every negotiation with Bill Clinton -- and that was with solid Republican majorities in both the House and Senate. His repeated capitulation to Clinton led former Vice President Dan Quayle to remark that the Republican "Contract With America" had become the "Contract With Clinton." (Not to be confused with Newt's book, "Contract With the Earth.") 

Perfectly good policies are constantly being undermined by Newt's crazy statements -- such as his explanation that women couldn't be in combat because they get infections, whereas men "are basically little piglets," who are "biologically driven to go out and hunt giraffes." 

Hunt giraffes? 

With Gingrich we get the worse of all worlds. He talks abrasively -- offending moderates and galvanizing liberals -- but then carries a teeny, tiny stick. 

We want someone who will talk softly and unthreateningly while implementing vital policy changes. Even when Gingrich doesn't completely back off conservative positions, his nutty rhetoric undermines the ability of Republicans to get anything done. 

CONT' AT WWW.ANNCOULTER.COM

[Syncro]

...you recommend to us John McCain with hair, movable arms...

Oh man you are soooo bad...

[Syncro]

Yea and it will be on par with the same stuff dems do on a daily basis with no repercussions.

The GOP should fight for their causes and their members.

They seem to hate strong conservatives, look what they did to B1 Bob.

Let a faux “hispanic” dem steal an election with illegal votes.

The would have fought hard for a moderate/liberal RINO I'm bettin’

[Syncro]

Yea and it will be on par with the same stuff dems do on a daily basis with no repercussions.

The GOP should fight for their causes and their members.

They seem to hate strong conservatives, look what they did to B1 Bob.

Let a faux “hispanic” dem steal an election with illegal votes.

The would have fought hard for a moderate/liberal RINO I'm bettin’

[Syncro]

You betcha!

[Syncro]

Good information, thanks!

See my post at number 42

[sodpoodle]

***Newt’s crazy statements — such as his explanation that women couldn’t be in combat because they get infections....***

Part of a discussion - based on some military General’s resistance to women in combat. Most likely supported by physician obgyn specialists who were asked to do a study on the physical status/medical implications of PMS and PID. Which makes sense - many women are frequently debilitated by gynecological causes. Note also how many have gotten pregnant while on ships & subs.

Not as nutty as it appears - but then again - think context. Grown men having to discuss menstruation in a Congressional debate on military preparedness.

Are you still laughing??

[presently no screen name]

Ann can’t handle anyone who is, obviously, smarter than she ‘thinks’ she is - and those who have proven leadership skills whether it be man or woman. Thus her attacks on Newt and Sarah. Ann has major hangups and too clueless to realize, she’s allowing the rest of the world to see them. She’s done nothing but write books about conservatism and - she herself said - conservatism sells.

She’d rather be around the weak or less knowledgeable so she can appear on top. Step down from your self-made pedestal, Ann, you have nothing to support it. Mitt has done NOTHING FOR America - he’s only selling himself much like you!

[Parley Baer]

This from the woman who yesterday on Sean’s TV program called Romney and Bachmann the two Conservatives in the race. Bwahahahaha. That is just to funny and shows how out of touch Ann is.

[FrankR]

[Psalm 144]

Deception? That’s below the belt . . .

[Syncro]

Thanks for reminding me!

Mitt, how about a little drinkie? Ahhh, ok Annie, but I already had...lessee....3...4...

[pallis]

Ann would have more credibility if she wasn’t a Mitt muffin.

[Syncro]

LOL thank God!

[Reagan69]

Didn’t she support the King of Bombast, Chris Christie.?

[TigersEye]

Coulter is peeing on our backs and telling us it's raining.

By itself criticizing Gingrich for political failures is no big deal. Doing so without mentioning the mountain of good things he has done is at minimum disingenuous. Criticizing Gingrich as a basis for calling Romney a conservative is blatant Marxist propaganda.

[Leto]

Ann threw the Tea Party under the bus for her elitist friends inside the beltway. She is a big girl, hopefully they will buy her books. Or maybe she wants more of a gig with B Maher attacking Gingrich in the General election.

This election is very informative in telling conservatives who our friends are. See the same people who attack Palin, then Cain and now Gingrich.

Bye Bye Ann I am sure the cocktail parties inside the beltway will be fun, but your act ain’t playing here no more.

[arthurus]

I understand she’s a romneyite which is totally mystifying to me but what she says about Gingrich pretty much expresses my concerns about him. When he was Speaker i came to more than a few whaterver-is-he-thinking?? moments. I do think he would be a good pick for VP but I really don’t want to see him as the Republican nominee. That said, I would vote for him in the election which I cannot say for Mr. Romney.

[Gator113]

Ann Coulter, EPIC FAIL.

[Gator113]

Yes and she still does.

[NVDave]

Both Coulter and Frum are Ivy League alum.

As is Romney.

Does that provide you with some insight on why they’re backing Romney?