Good Morning CEW-
I'm not following your condemnation of Newt on this. I read the article at the link and the only things in quotes attributed to Newt is one word and one phrase: “silly” and “trying desperately to protect (Obama)” ...that's it! Everything else is the author's opinion/paraphrasing of what Newt “said.”
It is not clear; however, perhaps you actually heard Newt on the program (I didn’t). That said, from what is offered at the link, there isn't much substance for any condemnation of Newt that I can discern. How do you get from the those two quotes to “Newt screwed the pooch”??? (It goes without saying that I NEVER trust anything attributed to any Conservative by the media unless I see that it is in quotes and I can verify that the quote is correct.)
I know we're both Newt supporters and I know you are sincere and thoughtful; however, in this case I am not following your criticism and am asking you to elaborate if you would.Thx!
Regards,
-Geoff
Post #135-
“only things in quotes attributed to Newt is one word and one phrase” = only things in quotes attributed to Newt ARE one word and one phrase
(That’s what I get for not “proofing” my own comments!)
Fair question: so I say look at the headline - which is a fair headline in light of one comment Newt made. It was that comment, and that comment only, that I wish he had not made. It allows for a headline that immediately seemed to put Newt very close to the Santorum “absurd” camp.
Now, in totality, Newt was nowhere near Santorum, but the headline is the headline. That is 90% of my comment.
The other 10% is the “silly” comment, where Newt said it is “silly to say that Rush speaks for the Republican Party.” This has the smell and the feel of Rick’s “just an entertainer” comment.
I think both of these invite a wrong impression - and to back me up - please go look at how the Santorum folks jumped on this in the early posts in this thread. That’s what headlines do. They form impressions that most people are left with.