The GOP’s Death Wish [Is It?]

Washington Post ^ | December 10, 2011 | Kathleen Parker

[Steelfish]

The GOP’s Death Wish

By Kathleen Parker December 9

“Anybody but Mitt” has become a familiar mantra throughout the Republican primary campaign. It is also weird and self-defeating.

Republicans apparently want to nominate anyone except the one person who can defeat Barack Obama. And for all the strangest reasons:

One: He’s changed his mind. True. He changed his mind, thus becoming more conservative.

Two: He’s too perfect.

Three: You can’t drink beer with him. Whatever.

The result of these petty obsessions has been a pathological flirtation with a parade of lesser candidates who could replace Romney. This parade has persisted despite polls consistently showing Romney as the most likely to defeat Obama. It continues even though it’s perfectly clear the White House worries most about Romney.

First came Rick Perry, who, now desperate for attention, has turned his sights on gays in the military and Obama’s “war on religion.” Next was Herman Cain, who, though he has suspended his campaign, seems unable to leave the stage.

Now it’s Newt Gingrich’s turn.

You don’t get more un-Romney than Gingrich. Imperfect and untidy, he’s the serial husband with whom anyone could feel comfortable sharing a beer. Or a keg. A sinner like the rest of us, he’s as familiar and comfortable as an old sofa.

But no one other than Callista Gingrich thinks her husband can prevail in a general election. No. One. The consensus on Gingrich is so overwhelming that conventional wisdom has taken a holiday. That is, no one in Washington thinks he can win, and Washington is where Gingrich is known best. Instead of rallying to support him, former colleagues are going out of their way to politely say, “He can’t lead.”

[Servant of the Cross]

Is it?

A Conservative Truism: Whatever Kathleen Parker says, do the exact opposite.

Ergo ... Go Newt!

[Grunthor]

“Kathleen Parker”

Grain of salt alert.

[Bryanw92]

Romney can bring in the legendary “undecideds”: those people who are too stupid or self-absorbed to see that this election is about the soul of America. They sit on the fence, asking both sides “what will you do for ME?” and then voting for the one that made them feel good about themselves.

Gingrich can bring in the conservatives and people who understand that we will all have to do some sacrificing to fix this nation. Romney can bring in the beltway pundits and selfish elitists who think that someone else should sacrifice to fix their nation.

Since a majority of Americans appear to be either selfish, stupid, self-absorbed, or a combination of the three, it is no surprise that polls show Romney almost beating Obama while Newt lags a few points behind.

The challenge for Newt is to find a way to get Americans to grow up and realize that we’re all in trouble if we don’t get our house in order.

[Grunthor]

Yes Kathleen, I would rather lose with a candidate that most closely adheres to my beliefs than win with Romney.

Just because Romney SAYS he’s changed his mind does not mean that he HAS. He can SAY whatever he wants, he HAS A RECORD.

That record includes being liberal enough to be electable in Massachusetts.

[Servant of the Cross]

Kathleen Parker

[re_nortex]

Here's my analysis of the race with the two GOP frontrunners against the Kenyan Marxist. It assigns 1-10 points based on metrics established by Jim Robinson, the founder of Free Republic, a stalwart defender of Constitutional Conservatism.

Value           Gingrich     Romney     Obama
------          ---------    ------     -----
Pro-God                10         0       -10
Pro-life                9         0         0
Pro-gun                 8         2         0
Pro-family             10         7         0
Pro-constitution       10         0         0
Pro-Bill of Rights      9         0         0
Pro-limited gov't       7         0         0
Pro-limited taxes      10         2         0
Pro-defense            10         7         0
Anti-homo agenda        8         4         0

=============================================
TOTAL                  91        22       -10

By my calculations, Newt Gingrich wins all 57 [:-)] states but, admittedly, loses the District of Columbia and is utterly crushed in Berkeley. But in the real America, it's a clean sweep. As for Romney? Well, the figures show that he's a lot closer to Obama than he is to the man who most assuredly will be our next President.

January 2013 isn't that far away. That's when the restoration of American Exceptionlism begins. I can hardly wait!

[MrEdd]

1. He's a socialist who signed into law the prototype for Obamacare.
2. He helped raise money for Planned Parenthood.
3. He indicated willingness to sign legislation for the Lavender Mafia that would have forced the Boy Scouts in Massachusetts to accept homosexual parents into the program.

The long litany of Romneycare disqualifyers starts with these three highest priority malfeasances.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

If the GOP really was doing something to destroy itself, the Washington comPost would step aside and keep its mouth shut.

[indianrightwinger]

Yes. That is why I loathe Newt and support Perry. Newt will destroy the party.

[alstewartfan]

Kathleen Parker is the “conservative” who makes liberals comfortable in their own prejudices. Bob

[white17x]

“”no one in Washington thinks he can win””

You guys must have missed where she said the above. Don’t you know that the votes in the 57 states don’t count ? Only those in Washington count.

[CaspersGh0sts]

“has turned his sights on gays in the military and Obama’s “war on religion.””

The Compost writers actually think these two things are worth defending.

[hattend]

BTTT

[Reaganite Republican]

What rubbish