If he is elected, expect "surprises" like this on a weekly basis. Amnesty for illegals is only a start.
Posted on 12/19/2011 6:23:21 AM PST by Mozilla
I was wrong about Newt. Or, as Newt would say, I was fundamentally wrong. Fundamentally and profoundly wrong. I was as adverbially wrong about Newt as it’s possible to be. Back in the spring, during an analysis of the presidential field, I was asked by Sean Hannity what I thought of Gingrich. If memory serves, I guffawed. I suggested he was this season’s Alan Keyes — a guy running for president to boost his speaking fees but whose candidacy was otherwise irrelevant. I said I liked the cut of this Tim Pawlenty fellow, who promptly self-destructed. There would be a lot of that in the months ahead: Michele Bachmann ODing on Gardasil, Rick Perry floating the trial balloon of his candidacy all year long, only to puncture it with the jaunty swing of his spur ten minutes into the first debate. And when all the other Un-Romney of the Week candidates were gone, there was Newt, the last man standing, smirking, waddling to the debate podium. Unlike the niche candidates, he offers all the faults of his predecessors rolled into one: Like Michele Bachmann, his staffers quit; like Herman Cain, he spent the latter decades of the last century making anonymous women uncomfortable, mainly through being married to them; like Mitt Romney, he was a flip-flopper, being in favor of government mandates on health care before he was against them, and in favor of big-goverment climate-change “solutions” before he was against them.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
On the eve of Iowa it seems the Republican base’s dream candidate is a Clinton-era retread who proclaims himself a third Roosevelt, with Taft’s waistline and twice as many ex-wives as the first 44 presidents combined; a lead zeppelin with more baggage than the Hindenburg; a self-help guru crossed with a K Street lobbyist, which means he’s helped himself on a scale few of us could dream of. For this the Tea Party spent three years organizing and agitating?
Who does Mark Steyn support?
Romney...
If he is elected, expect "surprises" like this on a weekly basis. Amnesty for illegals is only a start.
Just saw him on Fox this am. Of the remaining field, he supports Bachman and Santorum.
Not totally sure but it seems he supports Rick Perry or Michele Bachmann out of this field. But he knows how bad things have become in choosing a candidate and he is against Gingrich. At least that was my take of his assessment on Fox and Friends. He acknowledges the faults of all the candidates.
Very disappointed in Steyn - who seems to drone on for what - 3 thousand words obsessing about things Newt has said and written and barely a whiff of a mention about what Newt has actually done.
He also seems oblivious not only to history, but to the reality of choices we have.
I like Mark Steyn but I’m sick of listening to his marathon Newt smear. I guess Mark didn’t catch Mitt on Chris Wallace yesterday.
>> I like Mark Steyn but I’m sick of listening to his marathon Newt smear. I guess Mark didn’t catch Mitt on Chris Wallace yesterday. >>
You know what is telling about this? It’s the abject ignoring of all the Newt has accomplished for conservatives. I don’t know where Steyn was in the early 90s, but Clinton’s win scared us almost as much as Obama’s win. And it was Newt who absolutely spearheaded the resistance and who led the charge for a take back of congress in 1994. Newt, more than any other single man took all of the heat from the media and the Democrats.
There is simply no intellectually honest assessment of Newt that can leave that part of history out. Yet Steyn does. He is being totally dishonest or demonstrating that he has a gaping hole in his knowledge of American history. The only thing he mentions about New’ts history in this piece is the 98 resignation. What a bunch of BS by Steyn.
He should be ashamed, and I’m getting angrier as I write about it.
Not true and he clarified that point this morning.
LLS
I read the first and last paragraph. The rest was I’m smarter than you filler
LLS
The tea party goal is to keep the house, take the senate and remove Obama. It would be a big bonus to have Santorum or Bachman as president, but Newt or even Romney would do IF we got #1 & #2 done.
I am simply pointing out that Steyn totally ignores that chapter. A case can be made against Newt that is intellectually honest and in historical perspective. Steyn manages to drone on about 3 thousand words with none of that.
Your short little post is more intellectually honest than Steyn’s work over the last ten days.
Newt is collapsing.
It will be Romney vs Paul.
Hell, we should have saved some money and just supported Romney.
That is what all of this is leading to....every conservative with a chance is knocked out....bachmann and opie...lol
Romney will kick their azzes so hard it wont be funny.
Not if you read the article he doesn't, he lays into Romney almost as hard as Newt. I think at this point he doesn't know who to support he only knows who not to support.
Supporting bachmann and santorum is a vote for Romney, Steyn is just too dense to see it.
Gingrich is the last chance to defeat Romney, just watch and see.
It’s all sarcasm, joke and smear. A hit piece. British school. Daffy-duckism but with an education. Substance-lite. Movie and music review mentality applied to the price of bread and the future of American children.
Except it’s not all a joke all the time, Mark Steyn!
His default attitude is that of liberals. Conservatives have a sense of humor, but they never lose sight of the serious and the sacred and the constructive.
Imagine yourself praying, asking God for what’s best, for wisdom and higher judgment. Then re-read all that venom! You will not see wisdom, but buffoonery.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.