Noted historian claims failure to make VA ballot a lot like … Pearl Harbor

posted at 9:40 am on December 26, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

I’ve spent this morning trying to come up with a “Tora! Tora! Tora!” reference for this claim, and I just can’t quite make it:

Newt Gingrich’s campaign director said the candidate is viewing the setback in Virginia, in which he failed to collect enough signatures to qualify for the state’s primary, as an “unexpected setback” similar to the attack on Pearl Harbor.

“Newt and I agreed that the analogy is December 1941,” campaign director Michael Krull wrote on the Gingrich Facebook page. “We have experienced an unexpected set-back, but we will re-group and re-focus with increased determination, commitment and positive action. Throughout the next months there will be ups and downs; there will be successes and failures; there will be easy victories and difficult days – but in the end we will stand victorious.”

As any historian of any consequence could attest, “Pearl Harbor” isn’t synonymous with “unexpected set-back.”  It’s a deeply ingrained cultural reference for sneak attacks and shameful acts of aggression.  Dieppe was an “unexpected setback.”  Gallipoli was an “unexpected setback.”  And both Dieppe and Gallipoli were self-inflicted unexpected setbacks, which makes them a lot more analogous to Gingrich’s flop in Virginia.

I’m curious as to who the Japanese Empire is in Team Gingrich’s Pearl Harbor scenario.  It can’t be the Republican Party of Virginia, although there have been plenty of accusations that the VA GOP somehow gamed their process to shake out non-Establishment candidates.  Maybe Rick Perry can make that claim, but Gingrich is about as establishment as they come in this primary.  He’s certainly more establishment than Mitt Romney, who has not spent a great deal of time in Washington, at least not officially, while Gingrich has been a Beltway player for more than three decades.  Gingrich also hails from Virginia, which one might think the VA GOP might favor, at least over a Northeastern Republican and a Texas crank like Ron Paul, both of whom qualified for the ballot.  And when one looks at the VA GOP website, what have they been promoting for the last couple of weeks in the top spot on the page?  A December 22nd fundraising breakfast with …. Newt Gingrich.

Tommy Christopher notes that this isn’t the first time Gingrich has used Pearl Harbor for some self-promotion:

The campaign’s statement combines the bombast of his campaign’s tendency for overwrought statements, and the candidate’s own ham-fisted history of trivializing exactly this moment in history.

Last year, Gingrich used the occasion of Pearl Harbor Day to plug his books on Twitter, when he chirpily tweeted, “The 69th anniversary of the japanese attack is a good time to remind folks of our novels pearl harbor and days of infamy newt.”

Gingrich later deleted the tweet without explanation.

No explanation needed, really.  Gingrich missed the best analogy for this failure, which was the collapse of his own campaign earlier this year.  If he wanted an example of an “unexpected set-back” followed by a revival, Gingrich simply could have used that … but I doubt he wanted to remind anyone of that particular set-back.

Update: I originally wrote “Northeastern liberal” to describe Romney, but that’s unfair.  I think “moderate” would be a better descriptor, but I’ll just change it to Northeastern Republican, with which Virginia Republicans likely would have the same issues.


Related Posts:

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 2 3

VorDaj on December 26, 2011 at 1:51 PM

I don’t know, this statement is every bit as perplexing as Newt’s was, your advantage is that you aren’t running for office.

Cindy Munford on December 26, 2011 at 1:53 PM

@Philly on December 26, 2011 at 1:45 PM

I completely understand you point and well taken…
HOWEVER……when at the beginning of any game the you are GIVEN and 50-0 lead…it’s very hard to overcome a stacked game.
MONEY…again…MONEY should NOT be a virtue in determining our next nominee or President….and if it is….we are in big trouble going up against 1 BILLION. I hope you understand my point.

coach1228 on December 26, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Latest developments coming in fast. Newt Gingrich issues challenge to Virginia election board for a series of Lincoln/Douglas style debates on voter rights. Gingrich and Perry need to take this straight to Eric Holder. Eric Holder now best and last hope for Gingrich and Perry. Newt on phone right now trying to arrange for meeting with Eric Holder. Newt hopes they can both sit down on the same couch that he and Nancy used. Eric Holder agrees to help Newt Gingrich after Newt tells Eric that he too is 1/16th African American. Rick Perry now claims to be 1/32 African American and hopes that Eric Holder will order him on the ballot in at least half of Virginia’s precincts.

Breaking news! Eric Holder to sue Virginia on behalf of Gingrich and Perry! Keep hope alive! Obama to address nation (just as soon as he finishes another round of golf in Hawaii) on this travesty of justice and disfranchisement of voters. John McCain now claims to be 1/64 African American and wants Eric Holder to order a state by state recount of the 2008 Presidential election. McCain’s aides try not to encourage him.

VorDaj on December 26, 2011 at 1:56 PM

A politician engages in a minor bit of overheated rhetoric and that’s worthy of devoting a post to skewering him? Seems a bit ridiculous. If there is a story here – one of actual substance – it’s the one Moe Lane is pitching. Don’t let your Gingrich hatred override your judgment, Ed.

Wolf Howling on December 26, 2011 at 1:58 PM

If it’s true I agree. If it is true then the Newt campaign will lead with that.

A Mittens conspiracy to disenfranchise the voter seems like a stretch BUT if it turns out that there are shenanigans then I might not vote republican in the general. I can’t vote for an entity that doesn’t respect my vote.

This is a primer on republican GOTV.
http://flread45.hubpages.com/hub/How-To-Raise-And-Care-For-Sheep

BoxHead1 on December 26, 2011 at 1:18 PM

I’m very frustrated that the real conservatives don’t seem to have a chance in Bachmann and Santorum.

We need a real conservative to really fix things.

I think Newt would be a bad president but in no way would he ever be as bad as Obama!

Do you want Obamacare for life?? If not, then you owe it to yourself, your family, and America to vote against the Marxist!

LevinFan on December 26, 2011 at 1:58 PM

I don’t know, this statement is every bit as perplexing as Newt’s was, your advantage is that you aren’t running for office.

Cindy Munford on December 26, 2011 at 1:53 PM

My main advantage over Gingrich is that I do not suffer from delusions.

VorDaj on December 26, 2011 at 1:58 PM

I completely understand you point and well taken…
HOWEVER……when at the beginning of any game the you are GIVEN and 50-0 lead…it’s very hard to overcome a stacked game.
MONEY…again…MONEY should NOT be a virtue in determining our next nominee or President….and if it is….we are in big trouble going up against 1 BILLION. I hope you understand my point.

coach1228 on December 26, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Well said.

Seems pretty fishy that the 2 big money candidates are the only two that made it on the ballot!

LevinFan on December 26, 2011 at 2:00 PM

VorDaj on December 26, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Delusions, I don’t think so, hyperbole, I think you both have that down to a science.

Cindy Munford on December 26, 2011 at 2:06 PM

It was more like Newt’s “Bay Of Pigs”.

whatcat on December 26, 2011 at 9:45 AM

I don’t get it: What does the problems with Newt’s various wives have to do with him not getting on the VA ballot?
/

WhatNot on December 26, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Do you want Obamacare for life?? If not, then you owe it to yourself, your family, and America to vote against the Marxist!

LevinFan

If the primary process was tampered with to benefit 1 candidate , I’m not saying it was, then I wouldn’t vote for the primary’s nominee. I’ve had to lower my bar quite a bit already.

BoxHead1 on December 26, 2011 at 2:09 PM

Yeah, this is another one of those times where Newt has stuck his foot in his mouth. Pearl Harbor? Oh be serious. So much for the “historian” candidate. Its not that big of a deal, its just the cherry on top of the stupidity that is not qualifying for the VA ballot.

oryguncon on December 26, 2011 at 2:10 PM

If there is a story here – one of actual substance – it’s the one Moe Lane is pitching.
Wolf Howling on December 26, 2011 at 1:58 PM

Oy, after the 10th time someone pastes the same link, it gets a bit tiring. At any rate, a blog entry about something that did actually happen – Newt’s foot in mouth moment – does have substance. Someone’s blog entry full of if, might, maybe speculation and conspiracy theories has little to offer in the way of substance.

whatcat on December 26, 2011 at 2:10 PM

To Cindy Munford:
Thanks for your efforts to keep the focus on the merits, which is not an easy task.

GaltBlvnAtty on December 26, 2011 at 2:12 PM

If the primary process was tampered with to benefit 1 candidate , I’m not saying it was, then I wouldn’t vote for the primary’s nominee. I’ve had to lower my bar quite a bit already.

BoxHead1 on December 26, 2011 at 2:09 PM

Unfortunately politics has always been about settling for the lesser to 2 evils. THis is nothing new.

To pout and do nothing while allowing a Marxist to get reelected to permanently ruin American is reprhensible.

LevinFan on December 26, 2011 at 2:15 PM

Oy, after the 10th time someone pastes the same link, it gets a bit tiring. At any rate, a blog entry about something that did actually happen – Newt’s foot in mouth moment – does have substance. Someone’s blog entry full of if, might, maybe speculation and conspiracy theories has little to offer in the way of substance.

whatcat on December 26, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Who are you supporting?

LevinFan on December 26, 2011 at 2:16 PM

I was feeling some indigestion this morning. It was like the Battle of the Bulge.

pedestrian on December 26, 2011 at 2:21 PM

It is clear to anyone without an agenda that Newt’s words here were intended positively. He is merely saying that we will not become discouraged by this setback just as America was not discourage by Pearl Harbor. We will soldier on and redouble our efforts.

Good, but I disagree with that visual.

ProudPalinFan on December 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM

To pout and do nothing while allowing a Marxist to get reelected to permanently ruin American is reprhensible.

LevinFan

THis is the wrong forum to debate this since it implies that something indecent happened here. whatcat is right, the story is only a blog entry right now.

But hypothetically, if 3 of 5 nominees were kneecapped by the party apparatus, before the start of the first primary, then I’d sit it out or vote conservative party. My vote is my vote and I won’t hand it to someone who is playing me. It’s a matter of respect and dignity.

BoxHead1 on December 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Oy, after the 10th time someone pastes the same link, it gets a bit tiring. At any rate, a blog entry about something that did actually happen – Newt’s foot in mouth moment – does have substance. Someone’s blog entry full of if, might, maybe speculation and conspiracy theories has little to offer in the way of substance.
whatcat on December 26, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Who are you supporting?
LevinFan on December 26, 2011 at 2:16 PM

Like most folks, I’ll have no say in who is the candidate so I’ll go with whomever the party offers up. (Since Paul won’t make, I’m safe in saying that.)

whatcat on December 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Like most folks, I’ll have no say in who is the candidate so I’ll go with whomever the party offers up. (Since Paul won’t make, I’m safe in saying that.)

whatcat on December 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM

I was in the same boat as you in 2008 as it was already decided by the time it was Rhode Island’s primary.

There are still things you can do though: make phone calls, donate, etc.

It all helps to support a real conservative like Bachmann.

LevinFan on December 26, 2011 at 2:32 PM

GaltBlvnAtty on December 26, 2011 at 2:12 PM

For me, Newt has enacted conservative legislation and stood up against his party’s go along to get along. Gov. Romney has not. I don’t much care what either of them says during the stupid season, show me what they’ve done.

Cindy Munford on December 26, 2011 at 2:32 PM

whatcat on December 26, 2011 at 2:10 PM

To go for an 11th link to Moe Lane’s blog post (if only to blow it up, below), here is the money quote from Moe:

If it is true that the Republican party of Virginia decided in November of 2011 to increase the threshold for automatic certification from 10K to 15K, then it is reasonable to suggest that this was a change that unfairly rewarded candidates who had previously run for President in Virginia.

Unfortunately for Moe Lane, the thresholds were set at least by May 25, 2011 according to this list of the VA election rules.

This proves that “IF” is the biggest word in the English language. When the rule is unchanged from March 2011, a blog post claiming the rules changed in November 2011 is proven to be just BS.

WhatNot on December 26, 2011 at 2:34 PM

It is clear to anyone without an agenda that Newt’s words here were intended positively. He is merely saying that we will not become discouraged by this setback just as America was not discourage by Pearl Harbor. We will soldier on and redouble our efforts.

He’s going to South Carolina, and Oklahoma, and Arizona, and North Dakota, and New Mexico, he’s going to California, and Texas, and New York, and he’s going to South Dakota, and Oregon, and Washington, and Michigan, and then he’s going to Washington, D.C. to take back the White House, YEAAAAAAAARG!

pedestrian on December 26, 2011 at 2:34 PM

But hypothetically, if 3 of 5 nominees were kneecapped by the party apparatus, before the start of the first primary, then I’d sit it out or vote conservative party. My vote is my vote and I won’t hand it to someone who is playing me. It’s a matter of respect and dignity.

BoxHead1 on December 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM

I would’ve want to be screwed over either. I take it you’re from Virginia?

Even so it doessn’t do anyone any good to go on a principled stand against the GOP while allowing Obama to permanently ruin us.

Ever listen to Mark Levin? He lives in Va. He’ll be back on the air next week. He would vote for Bachmann or Santorum but would vote for an “orange juice can” over Obama.

LevinFan on December 26, 2011 at 2:34 PM

YEAAAAAAAARG!

pedestrian

LOL

BoxHead1 on December 26, 2011 at 2:35 PM

I’m loving seeing the sMITTens claim Gordon Gekko Mitt Romney is as good as president-elect, and the Newtonians claiming there’s nothing to see–move on. This is great fun. I hope this personal Pearl Harbor didn’t force him to cheat on Callista in service of his country. Newt is the Washington insider and Mitt is the establishment choice. Both are big government Republicans just like George Bush. But Bush-fatigue is why the guy who least compares with Bush, except they governed the same state and share similar accents, is unelectable.

cartooner on December 26, 2011 at 2:36 PM

If it is true that the Republican party of Virginia decided in November of 2011 to increase the threshold for automatic certification from 10K to 15K, then it is reasonable to suggest that this was a change that unfairly rewarded candidates who had previously run for President in Virginia.

Unfortunately for Moe Lane, the thresholds were set at least by May 25, 2011 according to this list of the VA election rules.
This proves that “IF” is the biggest word in the English language. When the rule is unchanged from March 2011, a blog post claiming the rules changed in November 2011 is proven to be just BS.
WhatNot on December 26, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Considering the fact that in 2008 Redstate itself reported “Romney, Fred, Rudy, McCain, Huckabee, and Paul all filed over 15,000 signatures each – well above the recommended minimums” it would seem that meeting the 15,000 vote mark was a concern even then.

whatcat on December 26, 2011 at 2:41 PM

Georgette Mosbacher is an ex Houston socialite. It is too bad that she didn’t have enough sense to let herself age gracefully. Too much botox has damaged her thinking if she had any to begin.

It is appalling that she and others believe they are our betters, telling us who will be the nominee. She, Ron Paul and 41 are more embarrassment for my state.

I hope GWB keeps his mouth shut until an appropriate time.

jazzuscounty on December 26, 2011 at 2:42 PM

… I take it you’re from Virginia? ..
LevinFan on December 26, 2011 at 2:34 PM

No. This has implications much bigger then Virginia. Wallets don’t open for campaigns that are 1/2 a$$*d.

These candidates spend most of their off camera time justifying their legitimacy/inevitability to big money donors. Not being on the Virginia ballot doesn’t mean anything to my family and friends. It means something to bundlers who grease a campaign.

BoxHead1 on December 26, 2011 at 2:47 PM

I hope GWB keeps his mouth shut until an appropriate time.

jazzuscounty on December 26, 2011 at 2:42 PM

I think W will continue to the class act he has been in his post presidency.

Cindy Munford on December 26, 2011 at 2:49 PM

I now pronounce you Newtie, King of Bombastic Rhetoric and Overblown Hysteria…

all bow down to the immense intellect of large King Newtie,

he who forgot to ask about the rules of his OWN STATE and is so clueless he could not even get on the ballot six months after entering the race.

then again, it takes a lot of class and respect to compare a dysfuntional political campaign to the brutal deaths of 2,789 American personnel on 7 December 1941.

I am sure those who were machine gunned, or drowned, or blown apart, or burned in oil also believe that their death is exactly similar to a politician missing a deadline to submit signatures.

I mean, after all, every American will be studying about King Newtie’s travails 70 years from now… it was a world historical event!

AirForceCane on December 26, 2011 at 2:55 PM

Is it too late for someone else to step in?

Christie?

Rubio?

Palin?

Huckabee?

Anyone???

Grace_is_sufficient on December 26, 2011 at 2:57 PM

Ever listen to Mark Levin? He lives in Va. He’ll be back on the air next week. He would vote for Bachmann or Santorum but would vote for an “orange juice can” over Obama.

LevinFan

I like Mark Levin. Liberty and Tyranny is one of 3 or 4 books that dramatically shaped the post 2008 conservative resurgence.

It’s the wrong thread to debate the merits of sitting out. Let’s see what comes of this Moe Lane business.

BoxHead1 on December 26, 2011 at 2:58 PM

Grace_is_sufficient on December 26, 2011 at 2:57 PM

I think it is set.

Cindy Munford on December 26, 2011 at 3:02 PM

The competition for winner of this thread is actually pretty stiff . . .

I only had a donut for breakfast this morning. Kind of like the WWII concentration camps.

Paul-Cincy on December 26, 2011 at 10:53 AM

and this:

. . .

my mother in law came to visit us for christmas. kind of like the germans ‘visited’ france in 1940.

t8stlikchkn on December 26, 2011 at 11:00 AM

and then this:

My dogs woke me up at 5 am this morning.

It was like the Tet Offensive.

CorporatePiggy on December 26, 2011 at 11:07 AM

and finally, this:

I felt a little full when I woke up this morning and figured I must have eaten too much yesterday. I felt a lot like Steve Jobs must have felt with his cancer.

VorDaj on December 26, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Has there ever been a four-way tie?

Trochilus on December 26, 2011 at 3:09 PM

Here in Connecticut I was out of power for a week following the snowstorm during Halloween week..

I spoke with my campaign manager and we agree it was a temporary setback

similar to the siege of Leningrad, Dien Bien Phu, Kasserine Pass, St. Mihiel offensive, Brooklyn Heights and Bull Run.

AirForceCane on December 26, 2011 at 3:27 PM

“Newt and I agreed that the analogy is December 1941,” campaign director Michael Krull wrote on the Gingrich Facebook page.”

Ahhhh, yes. Why not double down!

Well, perhaps Newt is just pining for a return of the WaPo Style Initiative, from way back in 1999, in which the paper had challenged its readers to come up with the worst possible analogies . . .

Two of my favorites:

Fourth Runner-Up: He was as lame as a duck. Not the metaphorical lame duck, either, but a real duck that was actually lame. Maybe from stepping on a land mine or something. (John Kammer, Herndon)

and, one of their “honorable mention” postings:

It hurt the way your tongue hurts after you accidentally staple it to the wall. (Brian Broadus, Charlottesville)

Trochilus on December 26, 2011 at 4:15 PM

My wife dragged me to the mall today. It was just like the Bataan Death March.

Voice on December 26, 2011 at 4:18 PM

My wife dragged me to the mall today.
. . .
Voice on December 26, 2011 at 4:18 PM

The horror!

Trochilus on December 26, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Voice, I think you should take the mall to court.

Philly on December 26, 2011 at 4:41 PM

I’m glad Newt is not discouraged by this “setback”. Unfortunately, GOP primary voters are discouraged by Newt’s inability to get his stuff together and run a competent campaign. Funny how he missed that.

Philly on December 26, 2011 at 4:45 PM

. . .
similar to the siege of Leningrad, Dien Bien Phu, Kasserine Pass, St. Mihiel offensive, Brooklyn Heights and Bull Run.

AirForceCane on December 26, 2011 at 3:27 PM

And, in keeping with the relation to the date, no doubt any self-respecting Hessian mercenary would add Trenton to the list.

Trochilus on December 26, 2011 at 5:13 PM

Gingrich wasn’t ready in Virginia like the Aztecs weren’t ready for Cortez.

pedestrian on December 26, 2011 at 5:13 PM

Obama job approval now at 47%.

None of this really matters at this point. Obama is most likely going to be re-elected. Sadly, Americans are just that stupid.

xblade on December 26, 2011 at 5:13 PM

My dogs woke me up at 5 am this morning.

It was like the Tet Offensive.

CorporatePiggy on December 26, 2011 at 11:07 AM

No, by God, it wasn’t Pig. Not if YOU were there.

Long haired country boy on December 26, 2011 at 5:15 PM

VAThead is the republican JohnF*n Kerry. The weak GOP field is a disgrace but turning to the one with the highest forehead is not going to save us. If his vaunted “organizational” skills mean Ocare and a VAT get the stamp of GOP approval that would imply the nay way to win is not to play. Get him out of here and the Irish setter that rode in with him. or rather, on his roof.

SarahW on December 26, 2011 at 5:24 PM

People should learn the difference between and analogy and a comparison. Only an idiot would think that Gingrich was comparing his Virginia problem with the Pearl Harbor attack.

It’s this kind of voter stupidity (falling for media headlines)that got Obama elected.

The conservative slogan this year should be…”eating our own”

cajunpatriot on December 26, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Gingrich is a Virginia resident, so he has no excuse for not knowing the law – including the rule revision, which was in place BEFORE the signing period opened.

Filing fee – $10,000.00. Paid signature collectors – $20,000.00. Watching him and his supporters whine and wail after missing the ballot – priceless!

Adjoran on December 26, 2011 at 6:33 PM

Poor Newt. He’s good for lobbing grenades, but this time he forgot to throw it after pulling the pin.

Philly on December 26, 2011 at 6:35 PM

Ah, thanks for playing CajunPatriot…

for all of us idiots here, please do deign to explain how an “ANALOGY” to Pearl Harbor makes for a brilliant tete a tete..

yet a “comparision” to Pearl Harbor only the inbred morons from Louisiana could possibly misconstrue.

because the last time I looked, at Pearl Harbor an enemy carrier fleet bombed our own battleship fleet.

so if you would like to make the case that this was an “analogy” rather than a comparison for us dummies, please let us know who is playing the attacking fleet and who is the defending fleet.

after all, it is an analogy and not a comparison right?!!

can’t wait to hear this reponse- please make sure that King Newtie mentions your brilliant defense in all his responses as well!

AirForceCane on December 26, 2011 at 6:42 PM

(re: TET)
Long haired country boy on December 26, 2011 at 5:15 PM

Well, Country Boy, you just made his point!

You see, the outrage was and is that Gingrich and his campaign manager actually had the nerve to double down with a comparison of their manifest ineptness, to the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor!

Please, Country Boy . . . just tell us how do you think any of the few remaining survivors, or any members of the families of those who were lost or injured during that unprovoked attack; or, of the friends of those lost or injured; or, for that matter, anyone with even the remotest sense of the utter outrage occasioned by that unprovoked attack, now feels about Newt Gingrich having somehow compared his campaign’s “unprovoked” failure to make the primary ballot in Virginia to the attack?

Pearl Harbor was for all Americans, one of the most emotionally wrenching historical episodes of the past century!

And, when you finish explaining that, maybe you can also give us a hint when Gingrich and his campaign manager are going to apologize for their attempt to minimize the focus on their inattention to detail via engagement in an utterly inapt trivialization of the Pearl Harbor attack?

That, my friend, is why we are now mocking him. And it is why some show like Saturday Night Live will likely rip him to shreds this weekend — that is, if he survives the late night TV jokes between now and then!

I guess it finally got through to you when someone mentioned an event that may be near and dear to your heart.

Yet . . . you still missed the point.

Denial is a strong elixir, eh?

Trochilus on December 26, 2011 at 6:46 PM

Krauthammer is clobbering Newt’s over-the-top grandiosity over the Pearl Harbor remark. The panel is concerned over Newt’s inability to get on state ballots, and that voters should be concerned that his campaign is inept. Ya think?

Philly on December 26, 2011 at 6:47 PM

They also think he should zip it, stop putting out accusatory press statements, and get his act together. No kidding.

Philly on December 26, 2011 at 6:48 PM

so, who’s up for voting for Newt?

Red State State of Mind on December 26, 2011 at 6:54 PM

Trochilus on December 26, 2011 at 6:46 PM

What the frail are you talking about? It’s not me, sir/madam who missed the point. I do believe it was YOU. It was using ANY reference to lost lives compared to not being on a ballot that I took offence to.

I guess it finally got through to you when someone mentioned an event that may be near and dear to your heart.

You sir/madam should also take offence to it….not me. Eh?

Long haired country boy on December 26, 2011 at 6:59 PM

America, I’m sorry about Carter. I hope some Obama voters feel the same about him.

TugboatPhil on December 26, 2011 at 12:01 PM

Similar situation with me, Phil. It was my first vote and I really liked the Southern Boy who had been a Governor. Had the awakening by the time that RWR ran in 80.

Red State State of Mind on December 26, 2011 at 7:00 PM

Krauthammer is clobbering Newt’s over-the-top grandiosity over the Pearl Harbor remark.

Well, Krauthammer getting after Newt is the last straw.

GaltBlvnAtty on December 26, 2011 at 7:02 PM

People should learn the difference between and analogy and a comparison.
. . .
cajunpatriot on December 26, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Here, just for starters . . .

a·nal·o·gy
   [uh-nal-uh-jee]
noun, plural -gies.
1. a similarity between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based: the analogy between the heart and a pump.
2. similarity or comparability: I see no analogy between your problem and mine.
. . .

Synonyms
1. comparison, likeness, resemblance, similitude, affinity. 2. correspondence.

Trochilus on December 26, 2011 at 7:08 PM

Unfortunately, CK pointed out that Newt is good at making himself a laughingstock because of his pomposity. Things are going badly for Newt and this sorry incident did not help.

Philly on December 26, 2011 at 7:15 PM

CK calling Newt pompous. Let’s see, that’s like . . . .

GaltBlvnAtty on December 26, 2011 at 7:17 PM

CK isn’t running for president. Big difference.

Philly on December 26, 2011 at 7:22 PM

My mom’s cousin died on the USS Arizona at Pearl Harbor. It was a devastating loss. I feel that Newt’s statement is inappropriate. However, I still support him because I believe he is the strongest candidate on the issues.

Rose on December 26, 2011 at 7:25 PM

CK isn’t running for president. Big difference.

Philly on December 26, 2011 at 7:22 PM

This is funny stuff. Which current candidate do you consider not to be pompous?

GaltBlvnAtty on December 26, 2011 at 7:40 PM

Newt, is that you? Slinging bitterness? Shame. Big turnoff. And you wonder why the money isn’t coming in.

Philly on December 26, 2011 at 8:03 PM

Rose, he is the leader in VA. Newt needs to move on from this mistake and strengthen his effort to remain viable. Having a wide field of candidates to choose from is great.

Philly on December 26, 2011 at 8:07 PM

Long haired country boy on December 26, 2011 at 6:59 PM

Country Boy, you are obviously having some difficulty understanding this, so let me see if I can explain a different way.

First, I didn’t make the analogy of Newt’s failure to secure a position on the VA ballot to Pearl Harbor. Newt Gingrich and his campaign manager made that inapt comparison.

And, when they were confronted with it, someone at the campaign issued a statement through their Facebook account doubling down on that risible analogy by expressly confirming that Newt himself agreed with it!

It was and is an outrage, and I do indeed take offense to it. In fact, it was so outrageous that many of us have been openly mocking him for making such an inapt analogy, by making similarly stupid analogies — I cited a few of the funnier ones, here. We were mocking Newt.

Newt Gingrich should come to his senses and apologize for making, and then actually reaffirming the outlandish analogy they made between his campaign’s huge and embarrassing mistake, and the horrific tragedy of Pearl Harbor!

Got that so far?

The point I was making to you, above, was that you only seemed to “discover” how offensive the Gingrich analogy truly was by way of your response to another commenter here (CorporatePiggy on December 26, 2011 at 11:07 AM), who likewise was mocking Newt’s campaign by posting a similarly false analogy . . . but this time to Tet.

He too was mocking Newt’s campaign, not belittling the tragic impact of Tet on the lives of many people! And that was why I said in response to you that he made your point.

Now do you get it?

Trochilus on December 26, 2011 at 8:15 PM

My mom’s cousin died on the USS Arizona at Pearl Harbor. It was a devastating loss. I feel that Newt’s statement is inappropriate. However, I still support him because I believe he is the strongest candidate on the issues.

Rose on December 26, 2011 at 7:25 PM

Fair enough, Rose.

Do you believe that Newt should retract his inappropriate statement and apologize, at the very least for any misunderstanding that it has caused?

Trochilus on December 26, 2011 at 8:21 PM

We’ve stopped caring what you think fair, Cap’n.

Pawlenty is a moderate.

icepick on December 26, 2011 at 9:02 PM

For everyone who got all bent out of shape because Newt made a statement about Pearl Harbor vs the situation in Virginia, would you please point out to me where Newt made this statement and not someone else? Please?

Vince on December 26, 2011 at 10:04 PM

This is with every candidate. Either reference has to be made to stuff that happened years and years ago or exaggeration of comments by their hired help are considered meaningful and are blown out of porportion.

This happens to all the candidates and most of the time has nothing to do with policy positions or how they’ll govern.

Vince on December 26, 2011 at 10:29 AM

If the candidate hasn’t done anything in years, shouldn’t the last public job he held be fair game?

cptacek on December 27, 2011 at 1:57 AM

Soooo… if/when VA GOP decide to allow Perry and Gingrich on to the VA ballot anyway, will it get the same play as this story?

Somehow I doubt it.

Snorkdoodle Whizbang on December 27, 2011 at 7:22 AM

“AirForceCane on December 26, 2011 at 6:42 PM”

The analogy was to the Pearl Harbor setback, re-group and winning of the war by the U.S.. It had nothing to do with attacking and defending fleets. In other words…Newt had a set back, he’s re-grouping and he’ll win the nomination. I assumed everyone knew that since Newt’s campaign manager explained it.

Some people should also process information honestly without their Ron Paul blinders on.

cajunpatriot on December 27, 2011 at 8:16 AM

Paul Goldman helps Newt Gingrich with Virginia ballot

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70866.html#ixzz1hkE74j7z

IndeCon on December 27, 2011 at 9:18 AM

What happened is that the VA GOP changed the ballot qualification rules in November. Under the old rules Newt would have gotten on the ballot.

Apparently the VA GOP neglected to inform the Gingrinch campaign about the change or there was miscommunication (the rumor is that an e-mail got dropped). The VA GOP posted a formal announcement of the rule change on their website on 12/21/2011.

The surprise rule change is the ‘Pearl Harbor’.

For details on the sorry situation see http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2825195/posts

Gideon7 on December 27, 2011 at 10:39 AM

What happened is that the VA GOP changed the ballot qualification rules in November. Under the old rules Newt would have gotten on the ballot.
Gideon7 on December 27, 2011 at 10:39 AM

Sorry, but that conspiracy theory has been debunked in quite a few threads already. Likely in this one, too, if you scroll back.

whatcat on December 27, 2011 at 11:46 AM

For everyone who got all bent out of shape because Newt made a statement about Pearl Harbor vs the situation in Virginia, would you please point out to me where Newt made this statement and not someone else? Please?

Vince on December 26, 2011 at 10:04 PM

I suppose I can understand your rather lame attempt at the above classic example of denial . . . it’s a common first refuge for the desperate.

Naturally, we want to defend our favored candidates from stupid comments and positions. But somehow concluding that because it was his campaign director who posted the exact words, clearly stating that he and Newt agreed that their failure somehow equaled Pearl Harbor, does not open the door to your risible claim, that the comments are, therefore, not directly attributable to Newt. Heh. Good luck with that one! You see, the way a campaign works . . . oh, never mind!

Maybe the reason you need to have others do your thinking for you on this, is that you’ve also made it obvious you expect others to do your reading for you as well!

So let’s review the key comments (my emphasis added):

“Newt and I agreed that the analogy is December 1941,” campaign director Michael Krull wrote on the Gingrich Facebook page.

And then, to make it abundantly clear that the strategy was indeed Newt’s “strategy,” i.e., one that he wholeheartedly and enthusiastically endorsed, Krull added:

“Newt and I have talked three or four times today and he stated that this is not catastrophic – we will continue to learn and grow,” he wrote.

Don’t you think that by the fourth time they talked, if Newt was getting at all squeamish about making the inapt Pearl Harbor comparison, he would have had Krull beat a quick retreat?

Perhaps something like this . . .

But he didn’t. They have doubled down, and left it to supporters like you to try to parse the difference on comment boards.

The very fact that you are now desperately trying to somehow yank those words out of Newt’s mouth, however, tells the rest of us all we need to know!

Seems even you believe it was stupid!

Trochilus on December 27, 2011 at 1:14 PM

icepick on December 26, 2011 at 9:02 PM

?? Pawlenty? Did I miss something?

My comment was responding to Rose, who had posted that she will continue to support Gingrich because she thinks he is the strongest on the issues, even though she conceded that his statement comparing his VA ballot difficulties to Pearl Harbor was “inappropriate.”

That was it.

What does Pawlenty have to do with this?

Trochilus on December 27, 2011 at 1:51 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3