Posted on 01/04/2012 12:36:51 PM PST by Kaslin
Now they turn on each other.
At least someone’s finally going to stick it to Romney.
Betting the outcome would not be the same.
Newt + open mic + GOP Primary voters watching + grudge against Romney = fun times at the debate Saturday night (unless you are a Romney fan)
Now, this may sink Newt, but at this point I think he would think wrecking Romney’s chances might be worth it.
An angry romney has already hurt most of the other candidates...
Whack-O-Willard!
I agree with Rush. I think the gloves are coming off Sat night at the next debate. Would not miss it for the world. Time to make Mitt sweat a little.
Maybe the wife can pick me an nice bauble for Tiffanys to make him feel better?
I think Newt’sa willing to take a chance that if he can destroy Romney he will have a shot out of who is left. But even if he ends up clearing the road for Santorum or Perry I think he would consider that worth it. I just think Romney really pissed him off and now he’s gonna pay.
Newt can buy whatever he wants to buy with his OWN money. It is noone’s business. I don’t care if it comes from Tiffany’s or Walmart...it is HIS money!!!
Well, Hell's Bells. You can sit there all you want and talk about a technical definition of amnesty, but the fact is that Newt did propose an immigration policy that allowed illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. Sorry, Newt, but, rightly or wrongly, that is very easy to characterize as "amnesty," and someone who was truly a savvy politician, as opposed to a motormouth, would know that. It doesn't matter whether it is technically amnesty or not. As presented, it is a policy that many do not agree with.
Moreover, when Newt announced this proposal, he prefaced it by saying something like "I know I'm going to get into trouble [with conservatives] on this." IOW, Newt knew VERY WELL that what he was about to propose could and would be characterized as amnesty, no matter what he said about.
On that basis alone, I think Gingrich -- and Hannity -- gave up any basis whatsoever for complaining about Gingrich's immigration position being characterized as amnesty. Gingrich knew that was going to be a problem and he went there, in the way he did, at the time he did, with the words he did, anyway.
Gingrich took the risk that he would be unable to persuade people that his policy did not amount to amnesty (and regardless of the technical definition thereof), and now he had to pay the piper.
That is all.
And that is typical Newt. Say something in such a way that it requires millions of hours of detailed analysis and explanation to get out the liberal stench that accompanied the original explanation.
That was the biggest mistake Reagan ever made. Why he would pick a VP who would dismantle his legacy is beyond me. Not to mention the fact Bush’s biggest donor’s son shot Reagan.
How about if it came from his aunt or uncle Freddie and Frannie, which was the point.
I disagree with this in degree.
You know who took Gingrich out? Michelle Bachmann did, at the final debate in Iowa, Dec. 16th. When she nailed him on his Freddie Mac ties and all he did was stammer around and sputter that "I did not . . . have lobbying relations with . . . that Liberal pet rock . . . Freddie Mac."
Freddie Mac was always going to bite Gingrich on the butt and Bachmann made sure it did.
THAT was the beginning of the possible end for Gingrich. Romney supporters did not start piling on until Gingrich's numbers had already started plummeting.
Based on what you wrote, you seem to know the reason. It’s like he was forced into it.
after watching how pissed Newt was last night, I posted on the live thread that Newt can be the perfect ‘bad cop’ to Santorum’s ‘good cop’. That’s what I think we’re now going to see...
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.