Newt to RNC: Yank the Obama/Blago attack ad
posted at 2:13 pm on December 16, 2008 by Allahpundit
Good lord — he’s out-mavericked Maverick. Via Market Watch:
I was saddened to learn that at a time of national trial, when a president-elect is preparing to take office in the midst of the worst financial crisis in over seventy years, that the Republican National Committee is engaged in the sort of negative, attack politics that the voters rejected in the 2006 and 2008 election cycles.
The recent web advertisement, “Questions Remain,” is a destructive distraction. Clearly, we should insist that all taped communications regarding the Senate seat should be made public. However, that should be a matter of public policy, not an excuse for political attack.
In a time when America is facing real challenges, Republicans should be working to help the incoming President succeed in meeting them, regardless of his Party.
From now until the inaugural, Republicans should be offering to help the President-elect prepare to take office.
Furthermore, once President Obama takes office, Republicans should be eager to work with him when he is right, and, when he is wrong, offer a better solution, instead of just opposing him.
This is the only way the Republican Party will become known as the “better solutions” party, not just an opposition party. And this is the only way Republicans will ever regain the trust of the voters to return to the majority.
This ad is a terrible signal to be sending about both the goals of the Republican Party in the midst of the nation’s troubled economic times and about whether we have actually learned anything from the defeats of 2006 and 2008.
The RNC should pull the ad down immediately.
Interestingly, he seems as worried that the ad might work and end up kneecapping Obama than that it won’t and will explode in the GOP’s face. No need to fret, if so: The One’s approval rating has been rock steady for the past two weeks, with fully 68 percent confident in his ability to be a good president, near his all-time high. Exit question: Why not just hold the ad back until we know for a fact someone’s done something wrong?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
These tactics appear to have worked for the democrats.
jukin on December 16, 2008 at 2:17 PM
Yea Newt. This guy is gonna run for Prez next time.
kanda on December 16, 2008 at 2:17 PM
It was a pretty stupid as, and a reach. Why go after the guy when there’s no proof his done nothing wrong? There will be plenty of opportunities for petty political ads. This is not of those times.
therightwinger on December 16, 2008 at 2:18 PM
Meh. I love Newt, but he was wrong on global warming and he’s wrong on this.
progressoverpeace on December 16, 2008 at 2:19 PM
Oh, say, Newt, where were you with this “at a time of national trial” stuff for the past eight years when the entire liberal culture went gaga for Bush assassination fantasies?
Back off? Hell no. Now WE get to sit on the sidelines and throw soda cans at the people on the field. Let THEM get cursed and screamed at and spat on for a while.
Aitch748 on December 16, 2008 at 2:20 PM
I dunno Newt. Constant attacks on President Bush seemed to work pretty well with the Dems in getting power.
Or is is that the RNC isn’t savvy enough in making false front organizations like moveon.org to do the dirty work for them?
Skywise on December 16, 2008 at 2:21 PM
I forget… Newt and McCain.. are they republicans or democrats???
bullseye on December 16, 2008 at 2:22 PM
I like the ad, unfortunately it should have been the kind of thing we did before the election. Is Newt trying to replace McCain as Maverick?
Done That on December 16, 2008 at 2:22 PM
Is Newt aware the Democrats don’t need a reason to attack Republicans,(on a daily basis)
We are fighting for America, sometimes Republicans can’t always be the ones bending over.
christene on December 16, 2008 at 2:23 PM
Who is Newt trying to impress?
He does not fully realize that the press is no longer simply biased. The press is now fully corrupt.
I would argue that it was McCain and Newt’s methods that were soundly defeated in 2006 and 2008.
We can no longer hang our heads in shame at every GOP problem.
We must stay on offense, period.
No more apologizing. Attack.
faraway on December 16, 2008 at 2:23 PM
Newt is well positioned for 2012, since the Fool will fall on his face and the country will be looking for actions, not words.
But all he has to do on this is remain silent.
He must calculate some clear advantage for himself vs remaining silent. Maybe it’s a play to swing voters.
notagool on December 16, 2008 at 2:23 PM
Conservatism; The new pacifist
Gregor on December 16, 2008 at 2:23 PM
We will never know if we don’t ask.
zmdavid on December 16, 2008 at 2:23 PM
When I saw this ad, the first thing that entered my mind was “don’t they know the election is over?”
The only point of it is to undermine the public’s trust in Obama, which would be at least understandable if it were during an election.
But now that the election is over and considering there’s no evidence of any wrong-doing on Obama or his staff’s part, AND Obama promised to be forthcoming about all the contacts his staff had with Blago (not to mention the fact that justice will release it’s findings at some point) they are just looking to smear the incoming president (most likely unfairly) at a time of near national crisis.
Gingrich is absolutely right on this.
Tom_Shipley on December 16, 2008 at 2:24 PM
You can forget half my question about newt being a republican or democrat. I did a search on Gingrich palin. Seems newt didn’t have too many good things to say about sarah. Seems he’s more interested in licking obama’s shoe soles than he was in supporting Palin..
bullseye on December 16, 2008 at 2:24 PM
They have something we don’t: the media.
Esthier on December 16, 2008 at 2:24 PM
OH MY GOD, another TRAITOR like Powell in our midst… Folks like these wimps are why Conservatives get so pissy and mad at the Repub’s… Morons who want to play nice with the far left wack job Liberals are the reason we get hammered everytime… FIGHT THE FIGHT IDIOTS!!! Play dirty like the Libs do, stop pulling punches, like McStupid did with the Wright ads… Newt is a worthless RINO also, fair weather friend… Play nice and die at the hands of Nancy and Harry and BHO… What a jerk, STFU Newt, no one asked you… BHO is up to his HUGE ears in this mess and it is wise to point it out over and over and over and over and over just like the LibeRATs do against the Conservatives. The MSM will not cover this story unless it makes BHO look good, they will hide all damage, CONSERVATIVES must speak up, now is EXACTLY the time. Newt does NOT talk for me or the party I hope we become again…
Mark Garnett on December 16, 2008 at 2:24 PM
I agree with Newt. The campaign is over and we have a new president-elect. There is no ‘schadenfreude’ when our president is in a crisis. It isn’t joyous that we are here.
The Republicans won’t get anywhere with an attack ad AFTER the election. It is pointless and merely serves to undermine America. If there were violations, by all means prosecute. Absent that, no need to throw stones at America’s President-elect. We have foreigners and enemies to do that for us.
Do I agree with Obama? No, not hardly. Do I wish him ill? Not in the least. Do I approve of Chicago politics? no as it is a prime example of what is wrong with ‘democracy’. But we don’t need political crap now. We need to succeed as America.
ThackerAgency on December 16, 2008 at 2:25 PM
All that “holding back” has worked in 2006 and in 2008. Let’s be “nice” and repeat it, henceforth. It got McCain very far. A hero will die a laughing stock, while losing in the primaries for the AZ sen. seat. Alas, he can always be ‘popular’ on Letterman.
Hit them in the crotch, hard, every time. That’s where they play right now, including the media. It’s politics not ping-pong games. Besides, how nice are they, ever? Did Newt or McCain ask for “unity” under GWB, or any other time?
Entelechy on December 16, 2008 at 2:25 PM
I thought it best to hold back until something more substantial came out…I mean just today we found out JJ jr. was really the mastermind behind catching these guys…
right2bright on December 16, 2008 at 2:25 PM
The ad is preemptive, and unneccesary shhesh. Let the man make a decision first.
Theworldisnotenough on December 16, 2008 at 2:26 PM
Would this be the same Newt Gingrich that teamed up with Nancy Pelosi for that, “Global warming is going to kill us all,” advertisement? I tuned him out some time ago.
Somebody, please remind me why he would have been a better candidate than McCain??
The liberals are the ones that consider asking questions to be, “attacks.” Right?
Right?
JannyMae on December 16, 2008 at 2:26 PM
The RNC finally shows some stones and Newtie attacks them. Hells bells. This is why I could never support the guy for Prez. You never know which Newt Gingrich is going to show up. The one who gave the GOP Congress in ’94 or the one who praised Hillary Clinton and said she’d make an excellent president.
Percy_Peabody on December 16, 2008 at 2:26 PM
You prob thought the far left wack job Libs had the right to hammer Bush for the last 8 years, even in non-election cycles. BHO is NOT clean in this mess, your just a MSM junkie lapping at the butt of your Messiah. Not me…
Mark Garnett on December 16, 2008 at 2:26 PM
If you had any doubts, there’s your sign right there.
faraway on December 16, 2008 at 2:27 PM
Looks like out loveable NEWT! has gone back to the loveseat with Nancy Pelosi!
wise_man on December 16, 2008 at 2:27 PM
Newt is right and the RNC is a bunch of dopes. There’s a smart way to oppose Obama and a dumb way. Throwing rocks at a popular politician who has not been implicated in wrongdoing is the dumb way, particularly when the GOP’s own closet if filled with the likes of Duke Cunningham and Ted Stevens. This is just a continuation of the failed strategy that brought a leftist to the White House and lost Congress. Time to stop complaining and lead.
Kenrod on December 16, 2008 at 2:28 PM
It sounds so marvelous, and idealistic, dear Tom. Were you this magnanimous with GWB, or Reagan?
Entelechy on December 16, 2008 at 2:28 PM
LOL. You are a funny dude. Insane … but funny.
I guess the Precedent-Elect’s original “no contacts” statement just slipped by you.
progressoverpeace on December 16, 2008 at 2:29 PM
This reminds me of the GOP outrage when the DOJ decided to raid Democrat Congressional offices. They knew they couldn’t allow it, because they had trash buried in their own offices and it would only be a matter of time before the roles were reversed.
Gingrich most likely has many things to hide himself, and feels uneasy knowing he could, at some point, be on the other side of such an ad.
Gregor on December 16, 2008 at 2:30 PM
This exactly the kind of mushy headed thinking I am talking about right here.
We are always going to have nuts in the party. There will never be a time that we don’t.
Stop apologizing.
faraway on December 16, 2008 at 2:30 PM
/sad
Dissappointed in both of you guys… Whimps like you guys are the reason Conservatives lose or don’t get OUR real Conservatives nominated in the first place… We must FIGHT at every turn, not wait two / four years… BHO is a disgrace to American values and he’s unfit to be CIC, but he is and will be… But we do not have to sit down and be quiet while he destroys all we believe in…
Mark Garnett on December 16, 2008 at 2:32 PM
Newt’s statement was too heavy on the “hands across the aisle” stuff, but overall I agree that this ad is not particularly helpful to the RNC… NOT because I think that Obama is anything other than a lying liar who lies, but because the ad is not an ad at all. Advertisements are supposed to generate a response — but no action is requested at the end of this video. And, frankly, what action should the RNC expect to get from the public anyway?
It seems to me that it is the role of sitting Republican politicians to comment on the Obama Senate seat scandal and to push for remedies, like having a special election. Anything the RNC does is properly interpreted as strictly partisan politics (and, therefore, much less effective), whereas Republicans in office can legitimately say that they are working on behalf of the people who elected them.
The RNC’s focus right now should be to choose a new leader, do a thorough post-mortem on the election, and devise a strategy for winning in 2010. In addition, the RNC should be pushing on the Coleman-Franken recount situation, which is much more serious anyway. Finally, they should be doing their best to identify a strong candidate for Obama’s seat, should Illinois hold a special election.
So although I think Newt’s statement was a little verbose (which led to it be more supportive of Obama than necessary), I don’t think his position is some big betrayal.
What does Steele think?
Y-not on December 16, 2008 at 2:32 PM
Were you this magnanimous with GWB, or Reagan?
I was until Iraq with Bush (never liked him, but had the attitude of ThackerAgency). The instant I read the headline that he was thinking of invading Iraq, things changed. I became vocal in my opposition. But, I always kept (well, let’s say almost always just to be safe) my criticism to policy and his actions.
I liked Reagan because he liked Jelly Belly’s and I was more interested in trying to win The Legend of Zelda.
Tom_Shipley on December 16, 2008 at 2:33 PM
For Tom_Shipley, on the quiet, and contained, good ol’ Rahm Emanuel.
Entelechy on December 16, 2008 at 2:33 PM
And yet people on the Left continue to do this BS with Bush even to this day even though he will never run for president again.
Esthier on December 16, 2008 at 2:34 PM
More mushy headed thinking.
This is not some courtroom drama – it’s politics. In politics, you accentuate your positives and highlight your opponent’s negatives.
faraway on December 16, 2008 at 2:34 PM
Right – that is certainly something the Dems will recognize. Once more we hear about how we should be the good guys even after 8 years of Dem cr@p.
katiejane on December 16, 2008 at 2:34 PM
I guess the Precedent-Elect’s original “no contacts” statement just slipped by you.
He originally said he himself did not have contact with Blago or his staff (and still says that), but would not comment on what contacts his staff may or may not have had with them. He promised to do an internal review of those contacts, which he did, and Fitzgerald has asked its release to be pushed off until next week.
Tom_Shipley on December 16, 2008 at 2:35 PM
I was through with Newt a year or so ago when he had his little faux climate change debate with John Kerry. It wasn’t a debate. It was a love fest where Newt was kissing every square inch of Kerry’s ass. Then after that Newt toyed with the idea of running for the presidency which I suspect he never intended to do but just did it to get himself back in the public eye and maybe sell some more books.
Newt is old news. He should go retire somewhere with whichever wife he’s married to now.
t.ferg on December 16, 2008 at 2:36 PM
ThackerAgency:
If Obama is in a “crisis,” it is because he thought he could lay down with the dirtiest of dogs and not get fleas. Obama needs a wake-up call: This isn’t Chicago anymore; you can’t just grease the wheels of those who can put you in power and expect to come out smelling like roses instead of oil.
Shipley:
Undermine Obama? Wouldn’t dream of it. He’s already proven himself an amoral fraud willing to engage in the shadiest practices imaginable, as can be seen in his campaign finance pecadilloes.
Obama is a rookie, and everyone else on earth knows it. It’s time we stopped pretending he is some kind of great man who deserves the benefit of the doubt. Obama is an opportunist above all else, and will see any leniency as a weakness and opportunity to pull the wool over our eyes.
Don’t move an inch on Obama. He is dangerous and must pay the price for every mistep. The media won’t do it, so we have to.
BKennedy on December 16, 2008 at 2:36 PM
This, and other reasons, are why I like you way better than other liberals on HA.
Entelechy on December 16, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Newt running for President would be a gift to the Dims.
Of course, he doesn’t like knee-capping Obama. They’d have no trouble kneecapping him, with his track record.
Newt had his chance, and he blew it badly. He talks and talks even more than Hubert Humphrey did, and HHH’s blabbermouth cost him the White House. Additionally, Newt’s negative numbers in 1998 were horrific, and they will never get much better. Clinton played him like a violin and squashed the Republicans.
As Barry Goldwater said about Gingrich, ” That boy talks too much.”
Sanford/Jindal 2012
TexasJew on December 16, 2008 at 2:36 PM
excellent point – the Dems will rag Bush until the day he leaves office and in fact long after that.
katiejane on December 16, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Who cares? Like most RNC ads, it is not effective. Also, how many people are really going to be impacted by a web ad? C’mon, this is small potatoes and is not worth the time and effort to (i) create the ad; and/or (ii) make a big deal about yanking it.
I do note, however, that this new softly, softly approach to Obama by some senior Republicans is a TOTAL DISASTER in the making. If our leadership thinks that we are going to win back a majority in Congress by being nice to our opponents (and kissing their ars), then we really may never find our way of the wilderness.
I agree we need solutions and not shrill attack ads. However, the problem is that we need NEW LEADERS who can articulate bold solutions and at the same time keep their personal lives out of the tabloids/criminal blotters…
sayabule1 on December 16, 2008 at 2:36 PM
I thought that we already knew that someone, a whole lot of someones, had done something wrong.
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Is it just a web ad? Would anyone have heard of it if Newt hadn’t sent out a press release?
zmdavid on December 16, 2008 at 2:38 PM
And of course you believe every word he’s said on this. I’m sure you gave the exact same consideration to Bush when it came to Plame.
Esthier on December 16, 2008 at 2:38 PM
It depends on what the definition of “is” is…
Internal Review…. ROFL !!! More like rectal exam…
Keep covering for the Teflon Messiah Tom, you may get a job as Press Sec for the ONE…
Mark Garnett on December 16, 2008 at 2:39 PM
Only a con man or a totally demented person could still believe in Al Gore’s Apocalyptic Global Warming.
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 2:40 PM
Remember when liberals were considered pacifists, and conservatives were thought to be the warriors?
Was independence won through pacifism, or by force?
The roles have now reversed, and THIS is exactly why conservatives are now losing every battle.
What’s it going to take for conservatives to stand up and fight?
Gregor on December 16, 2008 at 2:41 PM
Entelechy on December 16, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Thanks… don’t think I ever won, either. Now, Contra on the other hand.
Tom_Shipley on December 16, 2008 at 2:41 PM
Right … What was said was much deeper than “no contacts”. He said that he had NO IDEA what was happening – and the “we” was in there, too.
Precedent-Elect: “I had no contact with the governor or his office and so we were not, I was not aware of what was happening.”
The idiot messiah was not even aware of what was happening with his Senate seat … uh huh.
Then we were treated to the “fact” that Axelrod had misspoken in his earlier interview (Axelrod, who is now in witness protection, evidently).
Even the MSM has been excusing the Precedent-Elect by saying that he was just mouthing the politically expedient answer. But you keep on believing, Sh!tley.
progressoverpeace on December 16, 2008 at 2:42 PM
I didn’t vote for the R party for my local Representative… I’ve had it with guys deciding that its so lovely to visit Syria against the wishes of the President and help bolster a dictator. What a swell guy…
That doesn’t wash. And I had deep misgivings on him in 2006 and now I know I should have voted with that gut feeling.
When Newt realizes that being a D-Lite party doesn’t get you anywhere, then maybe he would stop spouting nonsense. You don’t want a seat at the global warming table – you want to clear the moochers and miscreants away from the ‘free eats’ line. Looking at a President elect’s past is valid to do: the guy is a public politician and we would like to know the junk that is going on around him that he hasn’t talked about during his entire time in politics. If he had stepped up when he accepted to say.. “I am for a new kind of politics, and I am now going to do the one thing I couldn’t do in Illinois – take down the corrupt political machine in Chicago”… then I will give him a wide leeway.
He didn’t, hasn’t and wants the rest of America to look like Chicago, politically, by keeping his silence on the Machine ongoing. Thanks, but no. He has had plenty of decisions to make, and not doing anything is a decision, and speaks volumes by what he doesn’t do.
ajacksonian on December 16, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Maybe we’re going about this all wrong… We should take up a collection and buy the Presidency from Obama! Then we wouldn’t have to worry about campaign strategy.
zmdavid on December 16, 2008 at 2:43 PM
Drip, drip, drip works very well. Always has, always will.
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 2:43 PM
Calculated moderation ploy. Newt’s good for a few of those a year.
Akzed on December 16, 2008 at 2:44 PM
That sounds about right.
a capella on December 16, 2008 at 2:44 PM
They are ambidextrous.
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Dude, remember when we used to make fun of everyone who shouted BOOOOOOOSH! at the top of their lungs for anything that went wrong? You are just like them.
Obama will be our president. He will be your president. He will also be your commander in chief. That alone makes him less of a ‘disgrace to American values’ than you are.
And BKennedy,
If Obama is in a crisis now, then our president elect is in crisis now. Before the election his crisis was his crisis. After the election, his crisis is our crisis. Unless you would prefer president Biden or president Pelosi.
If wrongs were done, we need to prosecute. Other than that, there is no need for ODS until he actually DOES SOMETHING.
ThackerAgency on December 16, 2008 at 2:44 PM
You have no idea how much we could talk about this. For another time.
Entelechy on December 16, 2008 at 2:46 PM
A) Yes, the point is to undermine the public’s trust in Obama. Welcome to politics. Just as Democrats spent years attacking Bush in order to undermine the public’s trust in him. It worked.
B) Oh, Obama “promised”? Thank God. Because I’m pretty sure Blagojevich’s oath of office indicated that he’d try to sell Illinois’ Senate seat. We all know that politicians’ promises are never broken.
C) Since when are Democrats opposed to slamming a President at the time of a crisis? We’re in a financial crisis now and Democrats haven’t hesitated a moment to attack the sitting President. Get off your high horse.
amerpundit on December 16, 2008 at 2:46 PM
Yeah. Newt shocked me with his change on that. But I still like the guy and agree with the large bulk of his political ideas. At least, the Republicans who fall for the global warming scam are driven to building nuke power plants, so I give them a little slack, since getting nuke plants built is of utmost importance.
progressoverpeace on December 16, 2008 at 2:46 PM
And quite frankly, I think he’ll be a much better president than McCain could have dreamed to have been.
The problem is less Obama than it is the impotent and inept Republicans who don’t know what they believe in yet can’t understand why they can’t get other people to believe in what they aren’t sure they believe in.
the blind leading the blind.
ThackerAgency on December 16, 2008 at 2:46 PM
Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist.
- George Orwell
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 2:47 PM
It’s not a question of Republicans being soft on Obama or giving him some grace period (despite what Newt implies in his statement), it’s about being strategic in who delivers the message and in what context.
For example, I think a lot of us agree Holder is a questionable choice for AG. The conservative media have raised some of his history, with little effect. However, it would/will be devastating should Arlen Specter follow through and actually do some thorough vetting of Eric Holder, as a recent report suggests. Anything Specter squeezes out in those hearings is much more valuable politically because he’s a “moderate” and those hearings are the appropriate venue for Holder to be exposed for his past actions.
Similarly, Republican politicians who are holding public office should continue to keep the heat on the Democrats, and Obama as leader of the party and Emmanuel’s boss, over this Blago thing. They should hammer on the corruption of Illinois politics, make the case for the linkages to Obama, and talk about how concerned they are that the people of Illinois have been so poorly served by their elected officials, including JJ Jr., Emmanuel, and Obama, who helped prop up Blago all these years.
An ad by the RNC is much less effective because the RNC is inherently a political organization whose job is to advance the political power of Republicans, not serve all Americans. It’s simply not a strong tactic. And, frankly, it seems to me the RNC has other things that are its responsibility on its plate right now.
Y-not on December 16, 2008 at 2:48 PM
AMEN! As has been said before, the Dems didn’t worry about “Bush isn’t running” to constantly attack him, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, etc., etc., etc.
We’ve played too nice, too long… and playing constant defense? How’d THAT work out for us in 2006 and 2008? No frickin’ where. And now our country is going down a socialist toilet with Chicago crooks leading the way.
Anybody notice the number of cabinet positions are from Chi-(Lie)Town? Tools!
MsUnderestimated on December 16, 2008 at 2:49 PM
You sound very much like you think we shouldn’t oppose BHO on policy and demand the type of transparency he promised. In the event of a corrup governor, with whome BHO has been closely associated, is it too much to ask for a summary of contacts between the governor’s office and the transition team regarding the senate seat Obama occupied until one month ago?
You’re nuts if you think we should just roll over and let Obama say whatever he wants without question, even when what he says is totally illogical. It’s nuts to think that Obama, who wants to concentrate as much power as he can (just as any incoming president would) didn’t have an interest in who filled his seat and didn’t have some advice for the guy who would be making the appointment.
To call someone who disagrees with BHO a “discrace” is stupid and counterproductive.
t.ferg on December 16, 2008 at 2:50 PM
Lets just call it what it is. You can say anything about GW, including calling him Hitler. “Which makes one wonder if the left ever picked up a history book about WW 2″. And what do you get for spewing vile garbage at GW? You get a free speech award. Now any criticisms facing Obama will of course be rejected as racists, or not fair, with the MSM providing cover for him.
MDWNJ on December 16, 2008 at 2:51 PM
You’re surprised by this? Newt is a media hog. Sitting on a couch with Stretch Pelosi and all the other stuff. All he cares about is traveling with his wife hawking something. I saw this in him long ago. Why Hannity has him on his show all the time is beyond me. But then again, I am of the opinion that Hannity really isn’t a conservative either. He fell all over McCain, Newt, Huckabee and all the rest of the liberal Republicans. All Hannity can talk about is who is talking about Hannity and trying to make himself relevant. He’s a Rush Wanna Be and never will be. The only true blue conservatives on the radio that I know of are Rush and Mark Levin. Rock Solid. Ignore Newt, us conservatives do.
suzyk on December 16, 2008 at 2:51 PM
You’re too generous. To say you liked Reagan over his choice of candy (and fondness for a video game?) rather than admiring him for bringing down the Berlin wall is an attempt to trivialize him, not praise him.
Y-not on December 16, 2008 at 2:51 PM
I can buy into that a bit, however I still think the Repub’s in general need to take the offensive at every single opp.
The Dems have done that for 8 years and have SWEPT into power.
I want our leaders to take off the kiss ass gloves and kick some Obama butt at every chance.
Those are the only leaders I will follow anymore.
Mark Garnett on December 16, 2008 at 2:53 PM
His election as Precedent is our crisis. And we are all going to suffer. These other problems pale in comparison with what he plans on doing – bankrupting the coal industry is only the tip of the iceberg that the US will be run aground on.
Sure, Biden and Pelosi and Reid are all retards, but that doesn’t change the fact that a weakened Precedent BHO could only serve to help the US possibly survive.
progressoverpeace on December 16, 2008 at 2:54 PM
Why doesn’t anyone question the credibility of any request to hold the report of the investigation back longer? Was the request made because Fitz was afraid someone would find out that Blago was under investigation? I know Democrats are uniformed but how many of them are that stupid?
snaggletoothie on December 16, 2008 at 2:54 PM
Y-not, you take yourself too seriously. Believe me, I know, and T_Shipley knows full well what all Reagan did. Have some humor. I lost nearly all of mine, and it’s no way to live.
Also, others, please argue against Tom’s points, not his name. He’s polite, mostly, and we can be too.
The machine has to be greased. Those who brung him must be repaid. It’s just the beginning too.
The fools are us.
Entelechy on December 16, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Newt lost his speakership because he lacked the spine to stand up to the constant and unfounded attack on his character by the dems. Now he has gone over to the dark side and complained about the republicans challenginig Obama who said ” I have not been in touch with Blago” even though Emanuel and others had been in touch with Blago. If contact by his people was innocent why lie about it?
Only a fool would think that Obama would not have input into his replacement. In fact, input would be expected and warranted. I may distrust people like Obama who think that government is the soultion, but he has the right to influence the decision as to who his replacement is. Again why lie about it?? I fear that Obama may make the Clinton administaration look ethical.
chicken thief on December 16, 2008 at 2:56 PM
Where did I make a personal attack?
Y-not on December 16, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Were you able to get through Zelda without protesting the violence or demanding that Link be brought up on war crimes charges?
My God! Link didn’t even have a warrant for any of those creatures he killed, and none of them were even read their Miranda rights or given a trial!
Kensington on December 16, 2008 at 2:57 PM
No bastard ever won
a waran election by dying for hiscountryparty. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for hiscountryparty [updated].- George S. Patton
Nobody ever defended anything successfully, there is only attack and attack and attack some more.
- George S. Patton
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Dittos. In fact, though I’m a big Steele fan, I’m thinking Newt may be the best for RNC chief. He’s a big ideas man, and we could sure use some big (conservative) ideas about now. Not to mention that he put together the Contract with America victory.
petefrt on December 16, 2008 at 2:59 PM
I love how at the beginning Obama’s answer to the question is “YOU BETCHA” rotfl!!
TheMightyQuinn on December 16, 2008 at 2:59 PM
*Raising hand*
I’ll go sit in the corner for a “time-out” :)
progressoverpeace on December 16, 2008 at 2:59 PM
I think Newt has some valid points. Conservatives should be more focused on coming up with better ideas than in just pointing out how stupid and corrupt Democrats are. I don’t think this ad is really effective at doing anything. Obama may or may not have had anything to do with Blago selling a Senate seat but it should certainly be investigated (as it is).
I disagree with Newt on all this ‘lets come together for the good of our nation in a time of crisis’ crap – we should stand up for what we believe. He is correct, however, that we should do this in a way that we don’t become the howler monkeys that are the nutroots. Sure, Bush has been treated horribly by lefties for 8 years but I think we shouldn’t hold that up as our standard of behavior when we are the ‘patriotic opposition’. I’d hope that we are more mature than that. Lets stand up for ourselves without descending into madness.
gwelf on December 16, 2008 at 2:59 PM
I’m not easily offended, AP, but I have to say, it’s always rather… odd to hear an atheist say “good lord”.
RightWinged on December 16, 2008 at 2:59 PM
I play World of Warcraft with my Son and 140 other Conservatives in my guild, so yes, even hard core Conservatives have fun and can play fantasy games, but BHO is no fantasy, he’s America’s nightmare.
Mark Garnett on December 16, 2008 at 3:00 PM
It’s like Rush said these guys are Washingtonians they don’t care for anything done outside of their control.
roux on December 16, 2008 at 3:00 PM
Y-not, it wasn’t you – I specified that. Sorry for confusion.
Did you mean they’re uninformed – not that they’re as “uniformed” as socialists, lemmings, sheep, goats, turkeys and plankton bank members too?
Entelechy on December 16, 2008 at 3:00 PM
The Democrats have the goods on Newt. They had him under surveillance for a long time. You might remember some of the recordings they had of him years ago. That was the tip of the iceberg.
Anytime there is something out there damaging to the ‘rats, they will be calling on Newt to do damage control for them by having him demand that the right turns the spotlight off the scurrying critters.
Buddahpundit on December 16, 2008 at 3:02 PM
At least you’re a responsible grown-up, with humor. Thank you,
Entelechy on December 16, 2008 at 3:02 PM
Does he mean a political party cannot criticize and/or call for an investigation, because we should all be helping Obama? Does he say anything about the Democrats causing the need for bailouts by bankrupting the housing agencies through malfeasance? Does he say anything about Obama’s staff saying and then retracting they talked with the governor about candidates who would be viewed with approval by the president-elect’s future administration? And that those comments have now disappeared from the media? Does he not understand our country elected a thug, and that Obama is going to turn our country into a thug run 3rd world country?
No, no, no, no, and no.
rlwo2008 on December 16, 2008 at 3:05 PM
I think the timing is bad. Can we please at least allow there to be a hint that The One is involved before the ad start running? Apparently there are hours and hours of records and almost nothing has been released. The RNC needs to take a wait and see attitude.
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Bad Ad.
Apparently, RNC has leftover money since Juan wasn’t organized enough to spend it all.
Unlike most of the rest of you I agree to attack. I would possibly advertise and show him as guilty even if there is no evidence. How much evidence is there that President Bush lied? Went to war for oil? For Haliburton profits? That the “Mission Accomplished” banner meant that we won the war?
That is how the liberals go after Republicans. The One is from Chicago, there is a scandal there….and how transparent and straight has he been? EVER? I would toss his mysterious contributions in there!
This empty suit won because of the downturn, a poor campaign by Juan and the image His gang and the media sold the worldpopulation. Let us fix those things.
IlikedAUH2O on December 16, 2008 at 3:07 PM
kanda on December 16, 2008 at 2:17 PM
therightwinger on December 16, 2008 at 2:18 PM
Tom_Shipley on December 16, 2008 at 2:24 PM
ThackerAgency on December 16, 2008 at 2:25 PM
Kenrod on December 16, 2008 at 2:28 PM
/facepalm
*** All are off my Christmas gift list!
Mark Garnett on December 16, 2008 at 3:08 PM
We herd sheep, we drive cattle, [we castrate Newts], we lead people. Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way.
George S. Patton
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 3:09 PM
Entelechy — lemmings — didn’t you hear aboout them.
They don’t really do what people think they do.
IlikedAUH2O on December 16, 2008 at 3:10 PM
Some times I think Newt likes to hear himself talk, He sure loves the limelight.
KBird on December 16, 2008 at 3:10 PM
MB4 on December 16, 2008 at 2:40 PM
IlikedAUH2O on December 16, 2008 at 3:07 PM
RightWinged on December 16, 2008 at 2:59 PM
amerpundit on December 16, 2008 at 2:46 PM
progressoverpeace on December 16, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Esthier on December 16, 2008 at 2:38 PM
/salute
*** Added to my Christmas gift list!
Mark Garnett on December 16, 2008 at 3:12 PM
Actually, what is the point of running a commercial, particularly an attack ad, now? Its a long way to the next election.
Count to 10 on December 16, 2008 at 3:12 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »