Newt is suffering from a typical problem exemplified by the way fouls get called in sports. The original and inciting file is seldom called. But the reaction to the original file almost always gets the whistle.
Romney can pretend innocence as much as he likes by faux-lamenting as he did in the Bloody Thursday debate, “Wouldn’t it be nice if people wouldn’t make attacks that have to be answered in the debates? (paraphrase).
But the reality is, Mitt started it. Newt desperately needs to learn not to react. Until the general, the press will be more than happy to blow the whistle on him and ignore Romney’s fouls. Of course that will change drastically with Mitt’s acceptance speech. At that point his own earth will be scorched—and by pros who will make him look like the amateur that he is.
Great analogy.
I think one valid point York makes is that Newt has demonstrate both ‘how-to’ and ‘how-NOT-to’, and the results speak for themselves. If he can rise above the fray and stay focused on the big picture, I think he’s got a fighting chance.
As much as I liked Palin, she’s never been able to let even the smallest slap or punch go unrecognized. With his sense of history, I think if anyone can find a way to elevate and re-invent himself, Newt can.