National Review editorial: Just say no to Gingrich — and Perry

posted at 9:17 pm on December 14, 2011 by Allahpundit

They’re not endorsing Romney — yet. Right now they’re down to him, Huntsman, and Santorum as the final three worthy of “serious consideration.” But since the polling for those last two is stuck in single digits combined, you can guess which way the wind’s blowing here.

Ben Domenech tweets, “The editors of @nationalreview stand athwart history, mewling ‘please allow Mitt to pass.’”

Gingrich’s colleagues were, however, right to bring his tenure to an end. His character flaws — his impulsiveness, his grandiosity, his weakness for half-baked (and not especially conservative) ideas — made him a poor Speaker of the House. Again and again he combined incendiary rhetoric with irresolute action, bringing Republicans all the political costs of a hardline position without actually taking one. Again and again he put his own interests above those of the causes he championed in public.

He says, and his defenders say, that time, reflection, and religious conversion have conquered his dark side. If he is the nominee, a campaign that should be about whether the country will continue on the path to social democracy would inevitably become to a large extent a referendum on Gingrich instead. And there is reason to doubt that he has changed. Each week we see the same traits that weakened Republicans from 1995 through 1998: I’d vote for Paul Ryan’s Medicare reform; Paul Ryan’s Medicare reform is radical right-wing social engineering; I apologize for saying that, and no one should quote what I said because I was wrong; actually, what I said was right all along but nobody understood me. I helped defeat Communism; anyone who made money in the ’80s and ’90s owes me; I’m like Reagan and Thatcher. Local community boards should decide what to do with illegal immigrants. Freddie Mac paid me all that money to tell them how stupid they were. Enough. Gingrich has always said he wants to transform the country. He appears unable to transform, or even govern, himself. He should be an adviser to the Republican party, but not again its head.

Gingrich is not the only candidate whom we believe conservatives should, regretfully, exclude from consideration for the presidency. Governor Perry has done an exemplary job in Texas but has seemed curiously and persistently unable to bring gravity to the national stage. Republican presidential candidates have not been known for their off-the-cuff eloquence in recent decades, but conservatism should not choose a standard-bearer who would have to spend much of his time untying his own tongue.

That’s a fine, persuasive argument against Gingrich. Not so persuasive is the idea that we should rule out Perry because he’d supposedly spend “much of his time” as president doing damage control over gaffes. No one seriously believes that, which means the real calculus here is whether his record as governor is sufficiently impressive to warrant bearing the risk of rhetorical error in having him as president. NRO says his record was “exemplary” — in which case, why not assume the risk? And why, oh why, if Gingrich is disqualified for being untrustworthy does Romney somehow make the cut?

This isn’t the only endorsement (or anti-endorsement) from a prominent conservative publication that’s out tonight either. Over at the Examiner, home to Romney critic extraordinaire Philip Klein, they’re endorsing … Mitt Romney. Click and read at least to the part where we’re breezily assured that Mitt “knows he must accommodate to the GOP mainstream, not the other way around.” If you say so, guys. Rather than dwell on that unpleasantness, though, let me throw you a curveball: Second look at … Jeb Bush?

So a writer I follow who lives in New Hampshire just tweeted:

@publicroad: I live in NH & just got a robocall polling me about what I think about Romney vs. Gingrich vs. *Jeb Bush*.

Other folks are reporting the same polling is taking place in New Hampshire.

Other folks are indeed reporting that. Erick Erickson’s heard from three sources about it and the mayor of a town in New Hampshire claimed on Facebook that he was “just phone-surveyed about Jeb Bush for President.” Doesn’t mean that Jeb Bush is behind it — it could very well be (and probably is) an outfit like PPP trying to gauge how the frontrunners would fare in a hypothetical match-up — but times are sufficiently desperate right now that any murmur about a deus ex machina is worth blogging.

Perhaps Hitler has some insight here. Content warning.

Breaking on Hot Air

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 3 4 5

I’ve winnowed the field, too. Of course, I’m just a voter, not an establishment, entitled Republican mouthpiece. I’m a National Review subscriber, and I have always been impressed with their analysis of issues and the honest disagreements among their contributors, but let’s be honest … they suck at politics.

dxturner on December 15, 2011 at 9:49 AM

This stupid Texan needs to correct you.

TMOverbeck on December 15, 2011 at 9:43 AM

Well, I guess you are. No $h!7 Sherlock, you actually validated my statement. This is his fourth term as governor of Texas. One through succession, three through election. 1 + 3 = what. Or, is Texas math that far off y’all still come up with three?

That’s why he’s a 3 time governor of the state of Texas.

Dr Evil on December 15, 2011 at 8:38 AM

cozmo on December 15, 2011 at 9:49 AM

Typical yankee pap. Get a life Cosmo.

Spark Chaser on December 15, 2011 at 9:09 AM

Cozmo: Dude-it’s early. Quit effing with the noobs. LoL
Btw Spark…I’m a Perry supporter.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 15, 2011 at 9:52 AM

cozmo on December 15, 2011 at 9:49 AM

I’m gonna start calling you Bish if you don’t knock it off.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 15, 2011 at 9:53 AM

This back fighting is ridiculous. We all have our candidates, but this attitude:”my candidate or a third party run” is utterly destructive. Let’s defeat Obama with anybody! Cast your vote, accept the results, unite behind the winner and win the election.

chairman1057 on December 15, 2011 at 8:51 AM

Couldn’t agree more!

jistincase on December 15, 2011 at 9:19 AM

With the stinky field we’ve got, I can no longer make fun of folks for their choice of lesser of the evils, but I can’t stand anyone cheer-leading any of these turds.

Let’s work on defeating Obowmao, but don’t accept us to like who we have to vote for to do it.

Laura in Maryland on December 15, 2011 at 9:54 AM

Thought: Perry is unelectable because he’s a bad debater-

Sure, because that’s the only thing that goes into making a president. Not his politics, or record, or executive experience. We should elect the guy who speaks well. Because that really worked well for us last time.

IMO- Perry will start to string together a good number of debates in a row. Although he may not want to dwell on it, he’s finally recovered from his back surgery, and his recent success debating shows that.

Snakiis on December 15, 2011 at 9:55 AM

What’s with HotAir today? One National Review bloviator, who is afraid to sign his name, trashes Gingrich, and 2/3 of HotAir is ready to dump him when he has 33% support in the RCP average. From the reaction here, one would think that Newt was found in bed this morning with a woman not named Callista. Oh wait a minute, that was October’s hero, Herman Cain.

Gingrich is not perfect, and everybody knows that, and neither is Romney. But this will be a long campaign, and no one has actually voted for anyone yet, but the Republican candidate that some of us are brutally trashing now might win the nomination and be our only hope against a second term for Barack Hussein Obama.

Let’s all keep our heads, and compare our candidates calmly and rationally, and choose the candidate who has the best chance to beat Obama, without following a mad stampede over a cliff behind some no-name at NRO.

Steve Z on December 15, 2011 at 9:55 AM

I guess it’s all in the semantics, then. By the way, I’m NOT a Perryista – I really wanted Debra Medina to win in the 2010 primary. Perry wanting to continue past the customary two-elected-term tenure just smacks of power-hungry entrenched-politician syndrome.

TMOverbeck on December 15, 2011 at 9:55 AM

Cozmo: Dude-it’s early. Quit effing with the noobs. LoL

annoyinglittletwerp on December 15, 2011 at 9:52 AM

I saw a Paul pledge pin on his uniform.

If these noob’s cannot pay attention, the lefty’s will eat them alive.

Best to take them out with friendly fire. Its the only humane thing to do.

Ain’t this your Monday? Go away and let me play. The barrel is big the noobs fish are strutting their stuff, and I am loaded up again today.

cozmo on December 15, 2011 at 9:57 AM

The problem is that the establishment does not dislike him because he is a conservative, they dislike him because they remember him.

OrthodoxJew on December 14, 2011 at 9:31 PM

IMHO, the establishment GOP also especially hates Newt because they won’t be able to control him as they will be able to control Romney. It doesn’t take much to also assume that they are in cahoots with the Dems in controlling Obama. The charade of playing the passive, deferential other party is just that, a performance they put on for all of us while they play their little games behind the scenes.

Newt’s knowledge as a historian reinforces that view – he not only knows history, but can learn from it, a valuable quality, but an infrequent occurrence at best in Washington. And you better believe they know that Newt knows where all the bodies are buried, which is why they are scared out of their wits that he will expose them all. Newt is a threat, so he must be destroyed.

It’s nothing more than the establishment GOP and the Dems not wanting to see their little power trip come to an end. It remains to be seen, though, if we average voters conclude that we’ve had quite enough of the status quo, or if we’re going to be content to keep things as they are.

I know I’ve had enough of it.

PatriotGal2257 on December 15, 2011 at 9:57 AM

I have a life. It is to show to the world that Texas, and Texans, is/are a myth. That backwards little state has nothing when compared to the thoroughly modern progressive states that should be the model to rebuild America into a true leader in the world.

No one needs the things Texas has, or stands for.

God, guns, self reliance, every thing Texas and Perry stands for…how quaint.

cozmo on December 15, 2011 at 9:22 AM

Words spoken from a truly ignorant, sniffling little twerp, comin’ to ya live from Mamma’s basement. Tell me Cozmo, are they Spidey or Batman?

God? Check. Pray to him every day!

Guns? Check. 380 in the right hand pocket, 9mm in the master, 32 in my girl’s office (just in case they get past the German Shepard) and the Panther Firearms AR 15 is right under the bed, just because I LOVE SHOOTING IT!

Self reliance? You’re damn skippy! You might try it sometime. It’s very rewarding not to have mommy cook your 3 squares every day. Just a little clue, though. I would lose the term “quaint” when you do decide to join the big boys out here in the real world. Real men don’t talk like that, and someone might get the wrong idea.

No one needs the things Texas has or stands for? You mean 35% of the nation’s refining capacity, 25% of it’s agriculture, almost a billion in GDP, and some mighty fine women, I might add? Of course you wouldn’t be much interested in the latter, now would you cozmo?

Now take your toys and go home like a good little boy. I need to get back to running my business. Thanks to a conservative legislature and Governor Rick Perry, we have a new law called “loser pays”. It sure has cut down on the frivolous lawsuits down here. Combined with some of the lowest tax rates in the country, we evil capitalist pigs can actually make a buck or two.

Spark Chaser on December 15, 2011 at 9:59 AM

Four time, but Texans are stupid.

cozmo on December 15, 2011 at 8:44 AM

The problem is with the establishment republicans. They want a show horse, the country needs a work horse. This isn’t a typical election cycle, but they treat it as if it’s business as usual. This is how they processed the 2008 loss to the Democrats. If they had run Romney, and not McCain the Republicans would have won in 2008. This is the year 2011, they are fighting the last battle 2008, and they are going to repeat the same thing over, and over again by nominating a Moderate to Liberal Squish, hoping this time they will get different results. I repeat there is a reason the republican party is getting tagged the stupid party. They can’t get out of their own phony, elitist, trifling way.

Typical establishment republican is in the political desert, and dying of thirst.
Rick Perry comes by with a canteen of water, he says: here have a drink, I’ll get you back to civilization, and patch you up.
Establishment republican: What kind of water is it?
Rick Perry: Plain old H2O.
Establishment republican: You mean tap water?
Rick Perry: Yes.
Establishment republican: I only drink bottled water, and only bottled artesian well water.
Rick Perry: This will keep you alive, and you can get the brand of bottled water you want after I get you back to civilization.
Establishment republican: No thanks, I’ll wait until someone comes by with bottled artesian well water.

I am an Independent, and that’s what an establishment republican looks like to me. No sense of self preservation for their party, and clueless of how to adapt for their own party’s survival -viability. They should take a cue from the Dinosaurs, they couldn’t adapt to new landscape either.

Dr Evil on December 15, 2011 at 10:00 AM

Went to Texas to a major national medical center last year: MD Anderson – one of the finest in the country for sophisticated and advanced medical treatment/surgeries. Coming from a region also known for its superb medical infrastructure – we had nothing to compare to this Texas facility; it was amazing.

The airport and cities were clean and bustling, highways easy to navigate, and there were jobs! Did you hear Texas just announced a 1.8 billion dollar surplus for the year and has over a 7 billion dollar rainy day fund, and two major corporations relocated there recently? All under Governor Perry’s leadership.

Debates in the general are overblown, will only be 3 of them. And, Obama sans teleprompter and his terrible big government record matched against Perry’s job creation/limited government will not do well. Perry will call Obama out on his record and Obama will not be able to hide.

Newt & Romney have both supported many of Obama’s own disastrous progressive ideas (individual mandate; global warmning, Fannie & Freddie, etc.) and Obama will have a field day pointing them all out. The lame stream media, establishment Republicans, and East Coast pundits want you to believe that a solid, limited government Conservative can’t win in the general. Baloney. The people are dying for a real alternative. Perry is it and he can beat Obama.

Remember, Reagan was the “dumb” one too during the election – that’s all you heard. Thankfully, the people ignored the establishment then; the nation needs another miracle like that – and it ain’t NewtRomney. It’s Perry.

pacificisland on December 15, 2011 at 10:00 AM

iheld my nose for the gop 2008. if it’s romney i’m goimg back to my
movie collection and giving up on the so called conservative
movement.

rik on December 15, 2011 at 10:01 AM

cozmo on December 15, 2011 at 9:22 AM

So you have decided to Bish the newbies huh :)

Dr Evil on December 15, 2011 at 10:01 AM

What a relief it is to know the thoughts of DC Beltway insiders regardless of party or ideology.

I hope they tuck in warm and cozy tonight in their $350,000 house that somehow ends up costing $2 mil in the hyperinflated Metro area.

jangle12 on December 15, 2011 at 10:02 AM

Bend Over, Here Comes Mitt! 2012

SurferDoc on December 15, 2011 at 10:03 AM

Spark Chaser on December 15, 2011 at 9:59 AM

You is funny, cozmo like you.

And they are Wonder Woman you voyeuristic pervert.

Just one AR, what a wimp. And you don’t have a pistol unless it has “Desert Eagle” on the side.

cozmo on December 15, 2011 at 10:04 AM

Dr Evil on December 15, 2011 at 10:01 AM

I thought about doing something difficult like watering the lawn, but its raining.

I decided on an easier route.

Maybe the noobs are actually PAYING ATTENTION now.

Instead of preening about their imagined superior intellect. If not, this could get really fun.

cozmo on December 15, 2011 at 10:09 AM

What a relief it is to know the thoughts of DC Beltway insiders regardless of party or ideology.

I hope they tuck in warm and cozy tonight in their $350,000 house that somehow ends up costing $2 mil in the hyperinflated Metro area.

jangle12 on December 15, 2011 at 10:02 AM

And when Obama is reelected their taxes go up…it’s all good LOL!

Dr Evil on December 15, 2011 at 10:09 AM

cozmo on December 15, 2011 at 10:04 AM

Thanks for getting my blood boiling first thing this morning.

Desert Eagle = second mortgage just to re-qualify for the CHL. I like shooting guns, not looking at them.

Now, I really DO need to go back to work.

Skillet head.

Spark Chaser on December 15, 2011 at 10:11 AM

conservatism should not choose a standard-bearer who would have to spend much of his time untying his own tongue.

So maybe Mitt Romney can untie the following: “My views are progressive” or “We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them…I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.” or ‘I’m running for office for Pete’s sake! I can’t have illegals.’ or tells a bunch of unemployed people “I should tell my story. I’m also unemployed.” when he is a multimillionaire or “I bet you $10,000 bucks…” or does
dumb stuff like tying his dog to the roof of his car or signing into law the template for Obamacare.

Mitt Romney NEVER says or does ANYTHING dumb!!!11 /sarc

I am not anti-Romney, but to say that Rick Perry is the only one who has a gaffe on his record is simply dishonest. In fact, I am very suspicious of the gentle treatment Romney is getting from the media… including the National Review.

bitsy on December 15, 2011 at 10:14 AM

If Perry is still in the race in the Texas primary, I will vote for him as he has always been my choice. As far as Jeb Bush – please! If you think Perry has the problem of

not being George Bush

, consider Jeb??? No thanks. No more Bushes, Clintons, Kennedys.

Old Texas Chic on December 15, 2011 at 10:22 AM

Okay, apparently I am not getting the quotes thing yet. Newbie strikes again.

Old Texas Chic on December 15, 2011 at 10:24 AM

I am very suspicious of the gentle treatment Romney is getting from the media… including the National Review.

bitsy on December 15, 2011 at 10:14 AM

I’m not, they do their corporate master’s bidding. The corporations behind them, and the ones associated with them share common interest. Corporations chose Romney. I guess that includes the parent company of Fox News, that is constantly humping Romney as the only eligible candidate to beat Obama in the general, because Corporate America has a crystal ball or something. Right now we simply have Romney shills – shilling for Romney.

Romney is the one who has a Wall Street background, and he’s also the one who met recently with Jamie Dimon, of JP Morgan Chase and Obama adviser.

Dimon, a lifelong Democrat who was rumored to be on Obama’s short list for treasury secretary before he settled on Tim Geithner, met privately with Romney on Tuesday morning before a fund-raiser at Brasserie 8¹/2 hosted by Highbridge Capital, a JPMorgan-owned hedge fund.
Dimon, who was spotted “in a discreet one-on-one” discussion with Romney,
cannot publicly endorse a candidate because he sits on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. But he donated to Democratic candidates in 2008 and privately supported Obama.

The corporations and finance industry think the herd can be turned in their favor by running Romney. Last I looked Romney isn’t any kind of cowboy. He does look pliable to outside influence though.

Dr Evil on December 15, 2011 at 10:30 AM

Yes, When Perry runs he WINS. That’s why he’s a 3 time governor of the state of Texas.

Dr Evil on December 15, 2011 at 8:38 AM

Four time, but Texans are stupid.

cozmo on December 15, 2011 at 8:44 AM

You are both right, in a way. In Texas, Lt. Governor is a statewide elected position, separate from the Governor, which holds quite a bit of influence on it’s own. Perry was elected Lt. Governor once then Governor 3 times. Furthermore, it was already being speculated that Bush would run for POTUS and Lt. Gov would finish the term when Perry was running for Lt. Gov.

bitsy on December 15, 2011 at 10:31 AM

cozmo on December 15, 2011 at 9:57 AM

Keep ‘em in line during the debate, will ya?
The debate will be ending around the time I escape from work so i’m countin’ on you.
What?
Btw: With all the noobs…I imagine that tonight will be a bit like this…

annoyinglittletwerp on December 15, 2011 at 10:32 AM

Had to think about this for a bit before commenting. I know, I know.

What the NRO editorial misses, and indeed what the Romney camp seems to skip over, are the ramifications for the path of victory. Romney would win the Presidency by sacrificing conservatives in favor of “moderates.” Indeed, conservatives are probably more likely to stay home rather than go to a sweaty gym and choose between Obama and Romney. On the other hand, a Rick Perry or (G-d help me…) a Newt Gingrich would achieve victory by mobilizing conservatives rather than moderates, and that too is a valid victory path.

However, put aside the Presidential election. What would down ticket races look like if conservatives stayed home because of Romney? In a Tim Kaine/George Allen contest, who do you want out there voting? The moderates who think Romney is peachy, or the conservatives who reject milquetoast candidates?

This choice goes beyond who sits in the Oval Office. It impacts directly who votes for the Senate and House races that are just as important.

JohnTant on December 15, 2011 at 10:34 AM

Okay, apparently I am not getting the quotes thing yet. Newbie strikes again.

Old Texas Chic on December 15, 2011 at 10:24 AM

Just copy and paste your quote in the text window. Scroll over your quote to highlight it, and then press the “quote” button.

You should see HTML tags “blockquote” before and after your quote.

Hit the preview button to see what it looks like, and then hit “submit comment” when you’re done.

PatriotGal2257 on December 15, 2011 at 10:35 AM

No more Bushes, Clintons, Kennedys.

Old Texas Chic on December 15, 2011 at 10:22 AM

I agree with this. Much of the Beltway Ivy League set often seems to have as much a sense of privileged entitlement and government dependency as those government dependents of lesser, or no, means. The Zero Administration is chock full of Harvard know-it-alls certain they know the best solution for the peons based on vast experience with textbook examples where the answers are in the back of the book. Problem is, the real world typically is not textbook examples where the problem may be irrational people such as Qaddafi or Achmadenijad or con-men having no sense of laws (or can buy the laws) such as Corzine or Ted Kennedy etc. or natural events and disasters where fancy schooling and country-clubbing is no substitute for real world experience.

viking01 on December 15, 2011 at 10:38 AM

National Review has just lost me.

rbj on December 15, 2011 at 10:40 AM

I can’t help but cringe at all Perry’s stumbling. But on substance, I’ll go with him. And isn’t SUBSTANCE what we want in the White House.

And Newt says he’ll clean Obama’s clock in debates, but Obama is going to duck all the debates he possibly can if Newt is the candidate…so it won’t matter how good Newt can shine.

MAC1000 on December 15, 2011 at 10:42 AM

Taking into account that I’ll vote for ANYONE but Obama–here’s a simple rule I live by. NO MORE BUSHES!!!

MAC1000 on December 15, 2011 at 10:43 AM

JohnTant on December 15, 2011 at 10:34 AM

What are you saying, the establishment republicans are not the most brilliant political strategist evah?

Look at the 2010 Mid Term election the Independents swung back to the right(by large percentages) and it wasn’t for moderate Milquetoast. It was because of the TEA party movement, and the small government, fiscal conservative message. If people really want their country back then don’t vote for a progressive in either party.

Dr Evil on December 15, 2011 at 10:44 AM

annoyinglittletwerp on December 15, 2011 at 10:32 AM

Mornin, great cat’ch. :)

Dr Evil on December 15, 2011 at 10:46 AM

Is this pattern not evident to everyone? The media and establishment Republicans have done this to every candidate that has challenged Romney and it seems like no one has caught on.

Palin – Check
Perry – Check
Cain – Check
Gingrich – Che…(almost)

I like Cain. I think he is a good man who is not a polished politician. He is smart and appeared to be the only real outsider running and he was squashed with the implicit help of every so-called conservative that immediately jumped ship after all the unsubstantiated claims against him came out. Where are his accusers now? I haven’t heard one word about them since that last woman stated they were having an affair.

Now it is Newt. Everyone is getting antsy again. They want Romney. They want Romney. In case you missed it, they want Romney. Quit being sheeple and find a candidate to stick with.

What will happen in the general election when the sh!t hits the fan with Romney? All these steadfast supports who continue to run from one candidate to another now are going to run where as the democrats begin their assault?

JAGonzo on December 15, 2011 at 10:51 AM

Spark Chaser on December 15, 2011 at 9:59 AM

Awesome! So we’ll said I got nuthin more to add! Except Bwahhhaaahhaaa!

landowner on December 15, 2011 at 10:56 AM

If you haven’t seen this yet, suggest you watch it. Perry talking about the military, his family, etc. You’ll find the link about halfway down the page at Ace of Spades.

http://ace.mu.nu/

As Ace says, “It’s a long video but if you want a short clip, dial in to about 6:55, when the question appears “Do American citizens really understand what our troops are going through?”

I like the answer because it’s a little dark and textured. It’s grown up and honest. It’s not all happy talk about the Greatest Nation In History, Hallelujah, Golf Clap. It’s just honest, and he’s actually thinking.

It’s not the “right political answer” because it contains an implicit chiding of civilians like myself. But that’s what he thinks, and he says so.

And being a former serviceman, he can go a little more into honest, grown-up territory.”

http://ace.mu.nu/

pacificisland on December 15, 2011 at 10:56 AM

What I want to know is, did Romney’s campaign pay off Pawlenty?

I find the practice of paying off an opponent’s campaign debts in return for their endorsement to be despicable and I want to know if Romney did it.

huckleberryfriend on December 15, 2011 at 11:03 AM

If you haven’t seen this yet, suggest you watch it. Perry talking about the military, his family, etc. You’ll find the link about halfway down the page at Ace of Spades.

http://ace.mu.nu/

This link goes to Ben Howe’s article about the video. Howe was the one who shot the video for Veteran’s Day. I gather he requested video commentary from many pols, but Rick was the only one who provided an unscripted response.

Y-not on December 15, 2011 at 11:08 AM

What I want to know is, did Romney’s campaign pay off Pawlenty?

I did a quick Google Search and Pawlenty’s campaign (as of October) had about $400k in debt. They were expecting help from Romney, but not enough to pay off all of the debt.

Y-not on December 15, 2011 at 11:09 AM

To me Romney has zero room to criticize Gingrich. He has just as many skeletons in his closet. Just because he chooses to ignore them doesn’t mean they didn’t happen. Newt seems like an extremely arrogant man who has done some really idiotic stuff. I just can’t for the life of me imagine doing and saying the things he has if I were in the same position. The only time in my life where I may have agreed with AGW is when I was 11 and I watched FernGully on a field trip (liberal indoctrination now that I look back on it).

To me Perry is the best candidate based on what information we have on how any of the candidates would govern.

JAGonzo on December 15, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Positives
–Intelligent & well informed
–Great speaker/debater
–Highly experienced
–Recognizes the real enemy threat
–Potential for greatness

Negatives
–Not personally attractive
–Unpopular with colleagues
–Left high office under a cloud
–Personal vices
–Bullies subordinates
–Full of harebrained ideas

“Negatives outweigh the positives, I’m afraid. Looks like we’ll have to go with Neville Chamberlain this time. Sorry, Winston.”

spiritof61 on December 15, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Keep ‘em in line during the debate, will ya?

annoyinglittletwerp on December 15, 2011 at 10:32 AM

Oh heck no! Those things are a mess before the noobs.

cozmo on December 15, 2011 at 11:12 AM

huckleberryfriend on December 15, 2011 at 11:03 AM

I doubt coin is what Team Romney is using to get endorsements. A wink and a slap, followed by, you will be put on the short list for my VP running mate consideration. The other endorsements might have the promise of a cabinet position, I won’t forget your support when I become President……there are all kinds of things they can promise.

Dr Evil on December 15, 2011 at 11:12 AM

Amjean on December 15, 2011 at 5:35 AM

fossten on December 15, 2011 at 9:34 AM

Yeah, that’s right….obsessing on csdeven will solve your bitterness problem. You two are the biggest crybabies at Hot Air.

You whine about Palin. You whine about Perry. You whine about Cain. And now you attack the people who have been telling you for 8 months that you are misguided.

WE were right and you are wrong. Get over it.

rotflmmfao!!!

csdeven on December 15, 2011 at 11:16 AM

Okay-It’s time for real conservatives to pick one of the anti-Romney,Gingrich,establisment,RINO,elitist punditry and unite behind him or her.We are really idiots if we let the establishment keep control of the GOP.The question is who do we back?It seems Iowans will decide if any of the Conservative Trio gets a ticket out of the caucuses.If conservatives split between Bachmann, Santorum, and Perry in Iowa-none of them may survive,and we are screwed.So-who?

redware on December 15, 2011 at 11:20 AM

Y-not on December 15, 2011 at 11:08 AM

Unscripted? Perry is reading from a script! Watch his eyes!

Good gravy!

csdeven on December 15, 2011 at 11:21 AM

I would imagine that this news, combined with today’s Rasmussen polling showing Romney ahead in Iowa has got Eric Erickson’s panties all in a twist. And it’s probably a pretty dark day in the HA office as well.

We all need to do our part to pull President Romney to the right. But let’s face facts starting today: Romney is the nominee. No more “A second look at…” fill-in-the-blank columns. It’s Romney. We don’t have to like it, we just have to deal with it.

And one more thing: This business of no one seriously believes that Perry would spend much of his time as president doing damage control over gaffes is a nice try, but wrong. I believe that. Seriously. And so does everyone who doesn’t work at HA. He’s the classic “all hat/no cattle” Texan. The man is well intentioned, but unprepared for the times we live in.

rogaineguy on December 15, 2011 at 11:24 AM

Does anyone here believe Mitt Romney understands–and I mean viscerally–the poem “Invictus”? Does anyone doubt Newt doesn’t?

Mitt Romney is neither a visionary nor a warrior. I’m not even really sure he understands in that place between his head and his heart that driving human need for freedom which in turn drives mankind to explore and achieve. He also seems to have in common with Obama some personal traits I find disturbing.

Have any of you ever heard Mitt Romney admit to a mistake? A character flaw? A reevaluation of his own thinking? Personal growth of any kind? I’ve been blessed to have known quite a few extraordinary people and every one of them were flawed and reflective and grasped life by the lapels and simply lived and when they failed, they took Socrate’s advise and examined their lives. Those “perfect” specimens? Think George Custer.

Similarities between Obama and Romney give me pause. Both are physically attractive. They look the part. Slick. Neither sees personal flaws in themselves. Both are nasty and when the going gets tough they devolve to the lowest common denominator (Romney isn’t even giving the name-calling duties to surrogates); both expect absolute deference (Romney’s Bret Bair interview was very revealing). Romney rewrites truth. He called himself a “pastor” in his own church. Not even close. His church has no “pastors”. And why does he say he “served his church overseas” when he was simply a missionary? Why would he neutralize that word? And wit. Neither has any wit. None whatsoever. (Mitt’s famous funny story about putting his dog on top of the station wagon comes to mind. It was so embarrassing on so many levels). Neither “debates”; they regurgitate and rearrange facts. Neither can grasp the twists and turns of nuanced exchanges.

I’ve listened and considered the commentary from various of Newt’s colleagues. Those that stand out: a nameless staff member who thought he was smarter than the boss; a Senator who has a 65% conservative voting record. Bill Kristol, who should have lost his job as a prognosticator a long time ago. Last night Bill Brutus Benett assured us how much he liked Newt, admired him, a “dear” friend…but Newt always has to be the smartest man in the room (which leads me to believe that perhaps Bill has had his own pretensions shot down by Newt’s rapier tongue) . And then there’s the amazingly fatal accusation that Newt has “grandiose” ideas!!! (shocked, I am! “LeRoy, get back in the cave. We don’t need no stinkin wheel”). I’d really rather have grandiose ideas than little lies told by Romney to make his own personal history more grand—even miraculous. At least John McCain’s history was real.

And about that Mormon thing that’s too PC to mention: the Democrats have already started. Yesterday. You think that MSNBC falafel about Mitt’s adopting a slogan from the KKK was an error for which Chris Mathews apologized? You think that was just an unplanned outrage? Oh, no kids. They just cracked Pandora’s box.

Portia46 on December 15, 2011 at 11:28 AM

Oh how I miss William F. Buckley, Jr.
National Review is a shadow of its former self. As a long-time reader, and huge fan of WFB, it saddens me to see his legacy sullied by this endorsement of Romney, an unqualified, pseudo-conservative reminiscent of John Sununu’s SCOTUS recommendation to GHWB of David Souter to be one THE Supremes.

Mittens is not electable. People worry about Independents, well what about we conservatives who are sick and tired of RINOs?

Re: The Perry “gaffes” …
I distinctly recall being completely turned off in 2000 by GW’s television appearances, but once I heard him speak candidly, in the back seat of his ride to his next campaign destination, I was sold.
I may have been disappointed by some things, but he was the right man at the right time. And so is Rick Perry.
The last POTUS America needs is a Romney. There is war in the wind.
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on December 15, 2011 at 11:29 AM

Hold the champagne. 50% of Iowans say today that they have not made up their mind yet.

Romney is the nastiest guy on the R ticket. He certainly isn’t an R, as he said so himself.

Giuliani let him have it this a.m. Romney plays the old rules. Iowa folks hate nastiness.

Schadenfreude on December 15, 2011 at 11:33 AM

This blogger says yes to Perry. He is a young man who will be joining Perry’s Iowa Strike Force in January. I have more faith in people like this than in National Review.

http://caledonia.patch.com/blog_posts/rave-the-reason-i-campaign-for-gov-perry

cheetah2 on December 15, 2011 at 11:49 AM

From reading the comments at National Review, this may well backfire on them. People are angry about this article, including me. Conservatives are tired of having RINO candidates jammed down our throat. It is obvious what Romney, aided and abetted by the “conservative” media and talking heads, is doing. O’Reilly was obvious last night, playing right along with the rest of then. Here’s hoping conservatives have had enough of this, and revolt by nominating someone other than Romney. I haven’t decided yet, but Romney is just sleazy, and I will not support him. I personally hope Perry can make a comeback and be in the running.

silvernana on December 15, 2011 at 11:51 AM

With the GOP establishment long knives out to destroy Newt’s candidacy, it’s looking more and more like it will be Romney — Dole, McCain, and now Romney… see a pattern?

About the only reason GWB won twice is the challengers were weak. Plus Gore and Kerry were not incumbents. Even so, GWB lost the popular vote to Gore and barely squeaked by in the electoral college.

But, now we are trying to oust the incumbent First Black President.

So the Stupid Party strikes again, nominating the rich, plain vanilla moderate, next guy in line, who thinks Obamacare is just fine at the state level.

Obama’s campaign will massacre Romney — the rich guy who got that way laying off tens of thousands and whose state level health care plan was the model for Obamacare. And that’s just for a start.

farsighted on December 15, 2011 at 11:59 AM

Part of National Review’s problem and that of similar publications is their increasing detachment from life outside the DC Beltway. All the people they know and socialize with are Washington insiders playing insider games with the piles of money taken from flyover country’s unknowns generously, if not voluntarily, providing the poker chips with which the elitists play their games.

viking01 on December 15, 2011 at 12:04 PM

farsighted on December 15, 2011 at 11:59 AM

But don’t you understand!?!?!? Romney is the only elctable candidate in the whole field!!!11!1eleventy!!

JAGonzo on December 15, 2011 at 12:05 PM

By all means, lets pick Ron Paul because we need an alien, tarded Leprechaun for President.

stacman on December 15, 2011 at 12:23 PM

That clip was full of funny.

NRO is National Romney Online. They have yet to articulate why Romney is the guy we should all pin our hopes on. Plus they need to explain how he is the most conservative candidate in the race. All they have done is become the anti-Romney army and explained why we should not vote for anyone else.

Your dishonesty is showing folks and it just hit the floor like an over-sized pair of knickers. Besides the knicker, that sound you hear is Bill Buckley turning over is his grave.

Even worse is the polling on NH. If NH Republicans actually believe that Romney should be the candidate, it is just one more step towards their irrelevancy and proof they can’t get over the allure of their own part-time resident and former “next-door” governor. If honest evaluation trumped emotion, that would not be the case.

Marcus Traianus on December 15, 2011 at 12:31 PM

What would down ticket races look like if conservatives stayed home because of Romney?
JohnTant on December 15, 2011 at 10:34 AM

Nice post. I was noodling on the opposite of this.
Though they pretend to ignore it, the establishment has not forgotten the Tea Party/conservative’s decisive presence in 2010 elections.

Therefore, the GOP is counting on the strong conservative investment in down ballot races. That is, for conservatives to vote their conscience in local races but hold their nose and check the R Presidential box – no matter who the nominee is.

bettycooper on December 15, 2011 at 12:47 PM

NR has lost me. I understand there are serious problems with either Newt or Mitt, but I’m not ready to read one of them out of the party.

Or to dismiss Perry, though I find him more flawed than either Romney or Gingrish. Or, even, to dismiss Bachmann.

And, in the same breath to say we should take Santorum — who couldn’t even hold on to his Senate seat in Pennsylvania — and Huntsman — who actually took a job from Obama — serious, is beyond ridiculous.

No classical liberal can take NR seriously as anything other than an authoritarian conservative Catholic rag.

CatoRenasci on December 15, 2011 at 12:52 PM

I have a feeling that this election is going to be just like the last one- and an awful lot of conservatives are going to be asked to hold their nose and “vote for the lesser of two evils” (i.e. anyone but Obama).

Because that worked out so well the last time.

I really can’t believe that, at the moment, the choice is between Gingrich or Romney. Really, after four years of Obama that’s the best that the GOP can do?

Jay Mac on December 15, 2011 at 12:55 PM

No classical liberal can take NR seriously as anything other than an authoritarian conservative Catholic rag.

CatoRenasci on December 15, 2011 at 12:52 PM

“Catholic”?

spiritof61 on December 15, 2011 at 12:57 PM

Their favorite is a Mormon.

spiritof61 on December 15, 2011 at 12:57 PM

I hope that Gingrich does outstanding in the debate tonight, wins Iowa, and wins the nomination. To hell with National Review’s nasty little editorial.

Reggie1971 on December 15, 2011 at 1:14 PM

If Mitt becomes the nominee, I don’t think he can carry MA. Massachusetts is a slam dunk for Obama. It reminds me of Al Gore who couldn’t even carry his home state of TN.

Has anyone brought this up? I think it ought to be considered.

INC on December 15, 2011 at 1:57 PM

Face it, rotund Newt is going to get rolled by the White House. Corruption, payouts, K Street lifestyle, crazy quotes, marrying two mistresses, weird campaign strategies..

the better people know Newt Gingrich, the more they DISLIKE him!

AirForceCane on December 15, 2011 at 2:01 PM

I used to think nominating and electing Ron Paul would have great entertainment value, but I am now firmly supporting Rick Perry.

Four years of the Elmer Gantry of Texas in the White House would be hilarious.

He could do “healings” during Presidential press conference – “Economy, come on down and be healed!”

To raise campaign funds, he could sell bottles of Rio Grande water personally blessed by Ricky and the Lord.

Sheeeeeeeewwwweee! C’mon Repubs – Go for it! HaHaHaHaHa!

Horace on December 15, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Well let’s look at the field we have so far:

Rommney: Introduced State mandated Healthcare…in a Northeast as a Republican Governor. That will get him votes, but not as much as he thinks. I could understand that especially in a state like Massachusetts (at the time) was heavily liberal…But seriously, Gov. Rommney, did you HAVE to sign it with as much enthusiasm as you did, especially with Ted Kennedy and Sal DeMassy right behind you looking like the foxes with the keys to the hen house at night?

OTOH – Romney does have a history of actually WORKING for a living. Unlike George Soros (or as I like to refer to him ‘Count Chocula’) he didn’t make ALL his money on Slash n Burn of lame duck companies (but SOME did get it in the neck) and generated jobs & profit. At the very least, i don’t expect a Timothy Gietner Treasury Sec. under Romney.

Gingrich: Political wonk extreme; seems to be pedaling towards a more squishy style of Conservatism since his days as House Speaker. Some confusion on his role on the Fannie/Freddie deal, and while it wasn’t “illegal” like Gietner, Charlie Rangel, or the currently under reported insider trading scandal affecting Congress as a whole. Still it’s hard to press for smaller Gov when you are asking for your palms to be crossed with silver from the same dwindling supply. Plus the whole Pelosi/Global Warming commercial deal? Ugh.

OTOH – Gingrich does have connections inside the Beltway – how effective they are, we shall see. But to reverse some of the insanity we’ve had heaped upon us in the last 4 years alone. Especially these leviathan style programs that are like toadstools and are just as desirable. Shut down the Dept of Ed, dissolve and restructure the Dept of Energy and Homeland Security (WAY smaller and leaner if we MUST have it) and make sensible appointments to Dept of State, Defense, and the Agency and you might be able to redeem yourself…maybe.

Perry – Gaffes, yes…but to the level of THIS President? Hardly. Perry biggest problem is that Texas, with a better recovery than the nation as a whole, not to mention being a true definition of a “Maverick” state and home to Bush 43rd, he has a lot of negatives to overcome. Some obviously he has NO control over, but since we are in a cultural war as well as a political one, it WILL play as raw meat to the more radical base in both parties.

OTOH, Texans seem to be split with Perry as well…BUT Perry, could overcome that by NOT so much moving leftwards further than Romney (not meant as a dig, really) and not trying to be BFF with Pelosi, et al.

As for the rest of the field, Santorum (nice guy, but not for President, VP?), Bachmann (Same as Santorum), and Cain…they’ve been too dusted up by the process for them to make any real headway..But keep their name in long enough, build up on the National level (NOT by going on SNL, for starters) to be taken seriously, and in 2016 it WILL be a sure thing for the GOP.

Candidates like Ron Paul, or Trump…? No. We cannot make the leap that either of these gentlemen could do anything more for a Right of Center win than just repeat 1994 Ross Perot contribution…and THAT got us 8 years of the Bubba Mafia. I have no desire of repeating THAT decade…not without a damn Time Capsule….or Lithium.

In the end, this WILL come to not so much who we are voting FOR as AGAINST. Is it worth getting Obama out of office and to reverse the last 4 years, if it means putting up with any of the true top tier, but FLAWED candidates? Yes, yes it is and yes we sure as hell BETTER.

BlaxPac on December 15, 2011 at 2:14 PM

… conservatism should not choose a standard-bearer who would have to spend much of his time untying his own tongue.

Interestingly (at least to me), what finally sealed the deal for me against Perry is that he didn’t know the name of Hot Air.com. A conservative thinker would be intimately familiar with Hot Air. What does he read? TPM?

bremsstrahlung on December 15, 2011 at 2:36 PM

That’s a fine, persuasive argument against Gingrich. Not so persuasive is the idea that we should rule out Perry because he’d supposedly spend “much of his time” as president doing damage control over gaffes. No one seriously believes that, which means the real calculus here is whether his record as governor is sufficiently impressive to warrant bearing the risk of rhetorical error in having him as president.

Are you kidding me? Yes I do not believe this is how a Perry Nomination would go, I KNOW this is how it would go. You would have to be totally naive to think otherwise. Just think Bush. Now, consider that Perry has more gaffes as a nominee than Bush had as President. A rock could be governor of Texas and not mess it up. The foundational constitution and other legislative controls prevent an idiot from screwing with the existing governmental system of that state.

You lost me at this point, I couldn’t finish reading. Sorry, I do not want another Texas Duns as President. Thank-you very much.

uhangtight on December 15, 2011 at 5:34 PM

It is beyond belief how “in the tank” the so-called “Conservative” websites are for Romney.

Will I vote for Romney over Obama if Romney is nominated? Of course. But the myopic RINO’s are so joined at the hip with Mitt that they are personally participating in Ron Paul becoming a frontrunner–and that would be a disaster of epic proportions.

Will Romney (or Paul) send a shiver up the spine of our enemies at home and abroad like Gingrich would? No way in hell. And that is exactly the kind of leader we need now–a leader who will make our adversaries tread very carefully, because they know Gingrich would act decisively.

This whole phenomenon reminds me of near-hysterical fear going around in Republican circles when Reagan got nominated in ’80 over Bush–the “establishment’s” man. All of the talk that Reagan could not possibly win, unelectable, that his red-meat rhetoric was too terrifying to “independents”. Can anyone say “landslide”?

The same dynamics are in play here. I never thought it possible that Obama would be lower-rated than Carter at this point. But we are now perfectly situated to a genuine Conservative revolution, and the man with the best chance of making that happen is Newt. Gingrich; a man whose drive and electric appeal personally ended decades of Democrat rule in the House and balanced the budget with a Democrat in the White House. Romney’s legislative achievements PALE in comparison viewed through any rational conservative criteria.

Gingrich would destroy Obama in the general. Why do you think that all of the left media is excoriating the Speaker from every angle possible?

At least the phenomenon of the Leftist media going all out against Newt is understandable; but for the gutless RINO’s to be doing the same is nothing short of shameful; and the fact that this is what is happening is as obvious to those of us outside the beltway as is MSNBC’s worship of the ‘Man from Marx’. What is it that the Left fears so much about the Speaker? And why are holier-than-thou RINO’s like Will and Krauthammer lending them any creedence whatsoever at this point in time?

News flash: the “independents” this year are not your father’s indys–these are people who are SICK of the same old establishment double talk and “do as I say, not as I do” results. The best President of the United States for the challenges America faces is also the man most likely to articulate and rally the country behind monumental change: Speaker Newt Gingrich.

discerningtexan on December 15, 2011 at 5:48 PM

This choice goes beyond who sits in the Oval Office. It impacts directly who votes for the Senate and House races that are just as important.
JohnTant on December 15, 2011 at 10:34 AM

I agree. Which is another reason why Newt Gingrich would be a disaster for conservatives/Republicans in 2012.

Conservative Samizdat on December 15, 2011 at 6:50 PM

My family and I will NEVER cast a ballot for Frigging Newt, Perry, or that Big-Spending Enviro-nut Huntsiturd. We WILL stay home on election day for any of those creeps. No more statist-light RINOS. Never again.

NEVER.

Better to let King Barry Hussein destroy the nation utterly than let the RINOS do it. At least the commie-in-chief BELIEVES the idiot crap he spews as he takes us all off a cliff. These EVIL RINOS give us “lip-service” and then vote like democrats anyways.

We WILL punish the REPUBICS by voting for Obama if they give us “the Orange Juice Can” as the “lesser of two evils” with a smirk on their face.

NEVER AGAIN WILL THEY GET THE AUTOMATIC VOTE just because they are SLIGHTLY less UTTERLY EVIL than the Democrats.

NEVER.
AGAIN.

Push us REPubics. Watch us throw the lever for the man that will destroy us all, we WILL cut our noses off to SPIT YOU.

Got a problem with that?

Too damn bad.

Like I said before… the animal is just slowly dying, put a bullet in it and get the suffering over with, Romeny will kill America, as surely as King Barry the wonder turd – just slower and with more pain.

Enough.

Won’t listen to real conservatives RePubics? Fine, we will HURT YOU with our “ignored votes.”

Count on it.

SilverDeth on December 16, 2011 at 1:40 AM

PS: Subscriptions for Weekly Standard, wall Street journal, and National review Online cancelled and this RINO f3**@tio-fest. The remainder of the subscriptions they send will be mailed back rapped in one of our children’s dirty Diapers – which is, ironically enough, very similar to the treatment the last Donation Envelope the REPUBICS sent us recieved.

Support individual candidates directly. No more money for the RNC. They don’t represent US anymore – as should be obvious – they are as done as the wigs.

SilverDeth on December 16, 2011 at 1:46 AM

To conservative samzidat: A Republican win in the White House always brings momentum to Republican Congressional and Sentate races. A RINO in the NE is no less likely to be elected regardless of who is heading the ticket. A conservative in the South and West, on the other hand, is far more likely to vote conservative if they feel that the strongest conservative who can win is at the top of the ticket. Thus, I do not follow the logic that portends Gingrich to be a “disaster” for the other races. The Democrat party is imploding everywhere you look.

As for angry “cutting off our noses to spit you” voters, I have only prayers for people who allow their emotions to destroy rational thinking. It reminds me of the scene in Blazing Saddles where the Cleavon Little threatens to shoot himself if everyone else don’t drop their weapons. Reply: “hold it boys, I don’t think he’s bluffing…”

An election is always a choice of a human being. All humans are flawed and all have made mistakes. Romney’s mistakes have been legislative; Newt’s have been more personal and/or self promoting. Newt Gingrich is the father of the modern conservative movement and a staunch supporter of strong national defense and strong borders. He is a fiscal conservative who has engineered the only two balanced budgets the US has had since before the Great Depression. That is not conjecture, that is fact. So to those who would invite anarchy and nihilsm if “their guy” isn’t chosen, I say: if enough people think that irrationally to put Obama back in office, they will have cut their own throats. So sorry, the spite-filled angry rhetoric only serves to strengthen my resolve to elect the most conservative we possibly can. And in my book his initials are neither MR nor RP.

discerningtexan on December 16, 2011 at 2:50 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5