Replies

And Newt is using socialist rhetoric to attack Romeny

Not at all. I think you misunderstand what's going there, it's entirely different from the class warfare rhetoric of Romney and Santorum campaigns. Let me explain.

When Newt Gingrich shot up in the polls, Romney knew that Newt presents the only real challenge to him. He wanted to deliver a knockout punch immediately before Newt got any traction.

Romney [PAC] started saturating airtime and mailings with the lies about Newt and his record (particularly falsely misstating Congressional "ethics" charges and "fine"). He was also hoping to take Newt off his game and positive message and get him flustered and make him lose temperament (to show a "nasty Newt").

That knocked down Newt's numbers especially after endorsement of Santorum by Iowa's "family values leader" Vander Plaats.

However, the plan didn't worked quite as expected, in other respects. Newt immediately warned Romney and his PAC to stop the lying attack ads, and warned the stations in SC and FL not to run false Romney PAC ads. He gave Romney [PAC] about three days warning to stop that or modify the ads.

Attacks also brought significant amount of money to Newt and his PAC. Romney [PAC] wanted to show everyone how the left will "massacre" Gingrich in general election attacking his "baggage" and that would knock Newt out. It doesn't because everybody knows about Newt's "baggage" (most of it, as we already know, has been either false or less than meets the eye, or pretty much contained).

However, few people know about Romney's "baggage" and how the left will attack him. So when Romney [PAC] didn't stop the ads, Newt [PAC] will hit Romney to show everybody where and how vulnerable he is to the attacks from the left (and making sure that it's without lying about Romney's record).

What's more and very important, Newt took it directly to Romney during the NH debate, and when Romney started stumbling but insisted on Newt's "record" and that he doesn't have anything to do "directly" with what Romney PAC does (which is legally correct) Newt not only didn't lose his nerve, but basically said (not verbatim) "That's OK, this is politics, we have big shoulders, this is the game for the big dawgs, and we'll let it play out."

What Newt meant was that, barring Romney [PAC] retreat, Newt - who doesn't legally "directly" control his PAC, either - can't call off his [PAC] dogs, so now they can go ahead and demonstrate just how vulnerable the "electable and inevitable" Romney is to the attacks he will certainly face from the left, with the "baggage" that Republican powers-that-be chose to ignore or downplay.

Now, that... was... cold! And you could see Romney was shaken and just about losing it (the idea, of course, was for Newt to "lose it"). You could plainly see that it hit Romney and his cool, when yesterday Romney had an accident using an "unfortunate" choice of words "I like to fire people!" He is off his game, the blitzkrieg against Newt backfired, and now Mitt himself is under attack which he didn't expect to happen (due to positive "coverage" by friendly media).

Another way you know it backfired, is that Newt [and his PAC] received a massive infusion of money from people who understand that it's between Mitt and Newt as far as viable candidates for nomination go (Santorum is playing for Romney's VP spot by being a "spoiler", just like Bachman did before... and still thinks she is in the running).

I am pretty sure this will not be an anti-capitalist film, it has nothing to do with PE business, it will be about Romney, and from "reliable sources". In any case, Romney will have to spend time an money to defend himself - something he didn't have to do until now - and he's already made mistakes because of it. QED!

These decisions of attacks and counterattacks are not made off-hand or lightly. There are smart people in the PACs who can "read" what their beneficiaries are saying and doing and react accordingly without being legally "directed" to do it.