Brutal Gingrich Super PAC ad: Meet the men who gave us ObamaCare

posted at 6:00 pm on January 24, 2012 by Allahpundit

Philip Klein calls it the best anti-RomneyCare ad of the cycle. I agree. And thanks to the largesse of Newt’s billionaire buddy Sheldon Adelson, this one’s going on the air in Florida with a $6 million ad buy — so huge that WaPo political blogger Aaron Blake calls it “game-changing.” In fact, despite Newt’s post-South Carolina windfall of campaign cash, it sounds like his Super PAC will be doing the heavy organizational lifting from now on:

They’re hiring field directors, setting up phone banks, building get-out-the-vote teams and crafting a message strategy worthy of a presidential candidate…

And they are doing what Gingrich’s topsy-turvy campaign hasn’t been able to: raise lots of money quickly and build a campaign infrastructure ready to go up against the massive operation of his leading rival, Mitt Romney. How well they succeed could shape what is now widely seen as a two-man contest — and determine how many weeks, or even months, it will take to decide the race…

Winning Our Future appears to be defining more broadly than anyone what super PACs do. The group is testing the Supreme Court decision by using unlimited donations for such on-the-ground activity as phone-banking that might be construed as going beyond protected speech. And, by setting up a shadow campaign complete with field directors, volunteers, poll workers and drivers, they are testing the law that prohibits any coordination between a super PAC and the campaign it supports…

“It would be virtually impossible for Gingrich to raise the funds he needs for an elaborate ground operation at this very late stage of the game,” said Robert Kelner, another election lawyer with the D.C.-based firm Covington & Burling. “The super PAC can do it easily and quickly. It’s sort of a positive thing; they’re taking us back to an earlier time where it was possible to come in from the blue as a viable candidate late in the game.”

Irony of ironies, after Newt’s endless screeching in December about Romney using his Super PAC to hit Gingrich hard while keeping his fingerprints off the attacks, his own chances in Florida and beyond depend more on his own Super PAC than on his campaign. As for the ad, one question: How come they didn’t play up O-Care’s funding coming at the expense of Medicare? That was a cynical yet highly effective line of attack for the GOP in the midterms, and needless to say, given Florida’s demographics, it’d be pure gold for Newt to toss it at Romney. Maybe, after Newt’s costly tangle with Paul Ryan last summer, the Super PAC wants to tread lightly when protecting the status quo on Medicare. Besides, seniors will probably draw the “more ObamaCare means less Medicare” conclusion on their own.

Update: Ah, right, I forgot: They don’t need to talk about Medicare because Newt’s already positioning himself as the Medicare candidate.


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

And rather than tamping down the scandal situation, they’ve only fanned with flames with another week’s worth of questions and denials to come.

Sweet. How sweet it is.

Finally, Obama’s chikkinzzz are coming home to roost.

petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:22 PM

“We’re not crooks – we’re incompetent” is their battlecry. The water is circling the drain, Barry.

Philly on May 19, 2013 at 3:46 PM

This.

When you have to plead incompetence to defend against charges of malfeasance, you know you might be in trouble.

petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:36 PM

ear relevant…

driguana on May 19, 2013 at 8:59 PM

Flush this lying tudd down the drain with the rest of the Obamacrap.

kemojr on May 19, 2013 at 9:34 PM

This was Dan Pfeiffer’s week in the barrel, like Susan Rice he was given the White House talking points and sent on a mission. He really needs to get copies of these tapes and watch them and see how foolish and unbelievable he looked and sounded. The White House is losing the little credibility it still had by sending these shills out every week trying to do damage control. Community organizers make poor leaders.

savage24 on May 19, 2013 at 9:42 PM

Pfeiffer’s statement that the law is irrelevant because the IRS conduct was “outrageous” and “inexcusable”, tells us all we need to know about this administration.

However, the follow-up should have been, “On what standard do you judge their conduct to be outrageous and inexcusable since the law is apparently not an appropriate standard?” (At least in Pfeiffer’s mind.)

What this comes down to is this: “if the Administrative deems something “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such. As we have seen in so many other areas, if the Administrative deems something to not be “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such.

In their mind, the law is – in fact – irrelevant. That’s what makes this situation so dangerous.

It’s not socialism. It’s worse.

EdmundBurke247 on May 19, 2013 at 10:36 PM

Irrelevant = “What Difference Does It Make?”

jaydee_007 on May 19, 2013 at 10:41 PM

In their mind, the law is – in fact – irrelevant. That’s what makes this situation so dangerous.

It’s not socialism. It’s worse.

EdmundBurke247 on May 19, 2013 at 10:36 PM

A fitting capstone to Ed’s story about loss-prevention (aka employee theft) and management’s “permission structure” in this post.

(Not to mention the jaw-dropping statements of Eleanor Clift in this one.)

AesopFan on May 19, 2013 at 11:40 PM

I enjoy popcorn and hope it is a long week.

Drill and Fill on May 20, 2013 at 12:41 AM

Hey give Barky a break. He had to get his sorry ass out to Vegas.

tbear44 on May 20, 2013 at 4:49 AM

Of course they sent Pfeiffer out to do the Sunday shows. He was the most senior expendable staff member they had . . .

BigAlSouth on May 20, 2013 at 5:39 AM

BigAlSouth on May 20, 2013 at 5:39 AM

Pfeiffer… The guy with the red shirt in the landing party…

Boudica on May 20, 2013 at 5:53 AM

Irrelevant = “What Difference Does It Make?”

jaydee_007 on May 19, 2013 at 10:41 PM

Perfect!

lea on May 20, 2013 at 7:11 AM

Does anybody else remember the campaign in 2008 when Obama defended his lack of administrative experience by saying he was just so smart and tuned in that his instincts were better than experience. Someone needs to dredge up these sound bites and play then with the current line about the government being too large to control and that the White House only knows what it reads in the newspaper.

bartbeast on May 20, 2013 at 8:43 AM

If where the president was during the Benghazi crisis is “irrelevant”, then he wasn’t where one would expect the Commander-in-Chief to be. So, where was he? Was he watching a movie in the residence? Was he bowling? Or was he having a bi-curious outing with his good buddy Reggie Love? If Obama was AWOL, as I suspect he was, it is he who is irrelevant. This entire stinkin’ criminal Obama Regime must go and now!

SpiderMike on May 20, 2013 at 9:31 AM

If this continues all week, it will be ‘O’ himself doing the rounds on the Sunday talk shows – except for Fox, of course. (‘O’ can do everything better than everyone else as he has been known to say.)

He then gets the extra benefit that no one will challenge him like they have begun to do with his minions.

Carnac on May 20, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Comment pages: 1 2