Laura Ingraham says Mitt Romney should send two dozen long-stemmed roses to Newt Gingrich for making him a better candidate. “Many saw Romney as a likable Ward Cleaver-sort,” she explains. “They now see a cunning, relentless, and aggressive side to him that they’ve been waiting for.”
She’s reacting to Romney’s performance in last night’s debate, where the ex-governor directly confronted Gingrich on numerous issues — and yet didn’t crash and burn. Ingraham credits Romney’s more-muscular performance to his crisis-management skills. “The entire Romney operation is run like Salt Lake 2002,” she writes:
His team was prepared for the rise of Bachman, Cain, Perry and finally Newt. The response to Newt’s second coming in South Carolina was flawlessly orchestrated. Mitt hit hard at Monday’s debate, and did a mop-up operation on Thursday night. He marshaled the help of boosters and aggressive defenders in media and politics. When Tom DeLay emerged from forced retirement and Bob Dole from convalescence to lay waste to Gingrich, you know it was a coordinated hit Godfather fans should recognize. Gingrich was caught in a revolving door, bullets flying, with nowhere to go.
Read her post here. And here’s a clip of the new and improved Mitt.
I don't know about "cunning, relentless, aggressive". What I'm seeing more and more is Mitt being a weasel-like. It's not a flattering picture I'm seeing of him in the debate attacks on Newt.
"They now see a cunning, relentless, and aggressive side to him that they’ve been waiting for."
Yep, and right after the convention, we'll see that aggressive side turned against conservatives. We'll see the Romney who put Planned Parenthood permanently on the board overseeing RomneyCare. We'll see the Romney who signed a permanent assault weapons ban. We'll see the Romney who nearly bankrupted the state of Massachusetts with the predecessor to ObamaCare. He's never done anything conservative in his political life. Who in their right mind thinks he's going to start when he gets to a town that is even more liberal than Massachusetts?
I know the writers here in NR all went to schools like Princeton, Harvard, Columbia, and Yale, so that's why they support Mitt: He's a northeastern elitist like them who will finally kick all those inconvenient fly-over rubes out of the party. You know, the ones Reagan brought in during the 1980s. Yep, that's the winning ticket right there, National Review. Kick out the base who go to the polls and vote for conservatives.
But on November 7, when we're looking at four more years of Obama, I'm sure there will still be NR articles explaining why its all the fault of the backwoods bumpkin right who refuse to compromise, reach across the aisle, and hand over our wallets to Planned Parenthood. Brilliant!
Romney's new cunning, relentless and aggressive side used against Obama in a debate will be seen as disrespectful and nasty. Romney can only use this style against fellow Republicans, so his supporters shouldn't become too fond of it.
Attack of of the killer weinies. Dragging that buffoon Bob Dole out of mothballs was truly pathetic. I still see the idiot ogling trashy teen Britney Spears in those Pepsi commercials. That he is now supposed to represent class after that is sad. Oh, for an elder statesman that may actually represent conservatism with dignity and intelligence.
The problem the establishment needs to understand is that Tea Party types might not know if the establishment is attacking Newt because he is Newt or because they fear he would actually try to fight Democrats/MSM more aggressively than they historically are comfortable with. And any assurances Mighty Mitt may offer that this is nothing to worry about are always going to be viewed sceptically (appropriately so) until he has a track record.
The "nothing to get angry about" comment only serves to reinforce the possibility that feelings will start to surface that a betrayal and "growth in office" by Romney are only as far away as Inauguration Day.
Forget not the Beltway types hated the low-brow tea party at the outset. Told everyone to shut up because they were damaging the brand(Republican). Krauthammer was particularly put out by the uproar of the malcontents.
The beltway/northeastern types are always wrong because the people they spend time with are almost all liberals. They talk to these liberals in their cocktail parties and at their kids' soccer games and at the country club while sipping 12 year old scotch. They then make the assumption that their friends are representative of everyone else, having no idea that the rest of Americans go to football games instead of cocktail parties, have kids who play peewee football instead of soccer, and drink one month-old Coors instead of 12 year old scotch, at the local sports bar instead of the country club.
So they told the base sit down and shut up. The base refused, and now the Tea Party has a majority of the US House of Representatives
Even George W. Bush betrayed the grassroots when he got to Washington, with prescription drugs and the TARP bailouts. Of course we don't trust a northeastern liberal like Mitt Romney.
As far as the attacks on Newt are concerned, the two from members of Congress who served with him--Tom Coburn and Bob Dole--had to do with the fact that Newt wanted to take the fight directly to Bill Clinton's doorstep, and the rest of the party didn't want to support him. Taking the fight to the left sounds great to us in the base. Of course, if you want to obsequiously impress your rich liberal friends at cocktail party's on the Vineyard, then admittedly a Newt victory would be a major personal embarrassment.
"Even George W. Bush betrayed the grassroots when he got to Washington, with prescription drugs "
Are we talking about the same Medicare Part D prescription drug give-away that was actively promoted by "real conservatives" Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich? That prescription drug program?
Yes, you're making my point for me. We know that even conservative politicians will depart from the faith at times. Even Reagan did. But how much more will a guy like Romney go against conservatism, when he's never governed as a conservtive in his entire life, and his alleged conversion to conservatism seems suspiciously timed to occur after being in office, but right before the 2008 Republican primaries?
While Santorum railed against Romneycare - a program that actually forces people to take personal financial responsibility for their own health care costs - Santorum was the guy who voted for the unfunded $7T prescription drug give-away - which is FAR CLOSER to socialized medicine than Romneycare is. In fact, it is socialized medicine.
This wasn't an isolated incident for Santorum. He was front and center for every big-government program that came before the Senate between January 2001 and his departure from the Senate. At least Romney balanced the budget and restrained spending so that MA had a modest rainy-day fund. Santorum didn't restrain squat, and yet you're alleging that Santorum is the "real conservative" who occasionally erred. Ridiculous. Santorum is a big-spending Republican.
He's gonna need a much, much bigger and far more deft hit squad for what Axelrod has in store for him. But it was a sign that he's got some organizational chops. I think we knew that or at least should have known that. He was a strong executive in the business world and good at the Olympics. I don't think his competency is what has the base worried.
"(Romney's) team was prepared for the rise of Bachman, Cain, Perry and finally Newt.... Mitt hit hard at Monday’s debate, and did a mop-up operation on Thursday night."
Wow. That say's it all, doesn't it? A mop-up operation. "The peasants got all uppity toward their betters, and we slapped 'em down good. Now they can shut up and go back to toil in our fields. Have some more wine."
Fat chance.
If only the GOP Establishment were as effective at fighting big government as they are in their vicious personal attacks against fellow conservatives. (Sigh).
I don't know about "cunning, relentless, aggressive". What I'm seeing more and more is Mitt being a weasel-like. It's not a flattering picture I'm seeing of him in the debate attacks on Newt.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"They now see a cunning, relentless, and aggressive side to him that they’ve been waiting for."
Yep, and right after the convention, we'll see that aggressive side turned against conservatives. We'll see the Romney who put Planned Parenthood permanently on the board overseeing RomneyCare. We'll see the Romney who signed a permanent assault weapons ban. We'll see the Romney who nearly bankrupted the state of Massachusetts with the predecessor to ObamaCare. He's never done anything conservative in his political life. Who in their right mind thinks he's going to start when he gets to a town that is even more liberal than Massachusetts?
I know the writers here in NR all went to schools like Princeton, Harvard, Columbia, and Yale, so that's why they support Mitt: He's a northeastern elitist like them who will finally kick all those inconvenient fly-over rubes out of the party. You know, the ones Reagan brought in during the 1980s. Yep, that's the winning ticket right there, National Review. Kick out the base who go to the polls and vote for conservatives.
But on November 7, when we're looking at four more years of Obama, I'm sure there will still be NR articles explaining why its all the fault of the backwoods bumpkin right who refuse to compromise, reach across the aisle, and hand over our wallets to Planned Parenthood. Brilliant!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRomney's new cunning, relentless and aggressive side used against Obama in a debate will be seen as disrespectful and nasty. Romney can only use this style against fellow Republicans, so his supporters shouldn't become too fond of it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAttack of of the killer weinies. Dragging that buffoon Bob Dole out of mothballs was truly pathetic. I still see the idiot ogling trashy teen Britney Spears in those Pepsi commercials. That he is now supposed to represent class after that is sad. Oh, for an elder statesman that may actually represent conservatism with dignity and intelligence.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe problem the establishment needs to understand is that Tea Party types might not know if the establishment is attacking Newt because he is Newt or because they fear he would actually try to fight Democrats/MSM more aggressively than they historically are comfortable with. And any assurances Mighty Mitt may offer that this is nothing to worry about are always going to be viewed sceptically (appropriately so) until he has a track record.
The "nothing to get angry about" comment only serves to reinforce the possibility that feelings will start to surface that a betrayal and "growth in office" by Romney are only as far away as Inauguration Day.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseForget not the Beltway types hated the low-brow tea party at the outset. Told everyone to shut up because they were damaging the brand(Republican). Krauthammer was particularly put out by the uproar of the malcontents.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe beltway/northeastern types are always wrong because the people they spend time with are almost all liberals. They talk to these liberals in their cocktail parties and at their kids' soccer games and at the country club while sipping 12 year old scotch. They then make the assumption that their friends are representative of everyone else, having no idea that the rest of Americans go to football games instead of cocktail parties, have kids who play peewee football instead of soccer, and drink one month-old Coors instead of 12 year old scotch, at the local sports bar instead of the country club.
So they told the base sit down and shut up. The base refused, and now the Tea Party has a majority of the US House of Representatives
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEven George W. Bush betrayed the grassroots when he got to Washington, with prescription drugs and the TARP bailouts. Of course we don't trust a northeastern liberal like Mitt Romney.
As far as the attacks on Newt are concerned, the two from members of Congress who served with him--Tom Coburn and Bob Dole--had to do with the fact that Newt wanted to take the fight directly to Bill Clinton's doorstep, and the rest of the party didn't want to support him. Taking the fight to the left sounds great to us in the base. Of course, if you want to obsequiously impress your rich liberal friends at cocktail party's on the Vineyard, then admittedly a Newt victory would be a major personal embarrassment.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Even George W. Bush betrayed the grassroots when he got to Washington, with prescription drugs "
Are we talking about the same Medicare Part D prescription drug give-away that was actively promoted by "real conservatives" Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich? That prescription drug program?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYes, you're making my point for me. We know that even conservative politicians will depart from the faith at times. Even Reagan did. But how much more will a guy like Romney go against conservatism, when he's never governed as a conservtive in his entire life, and his alleged conversion to conservatism seems suspiciously timed to occur after being in office, but right before the 2008 Republican primaries?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseActually, it's you who's making the point for me.
While Santorum railed against Romneycare - a program that actually forces people to take personal financial responsibility for their own health care costs - Santorum was the guy who voted for the unfunded $7T prescription drug give-away - which is FAR CLOSER to socialized medicine than Romneycare is. In fact, it is socialized medicine.
This wasn't an isolated incident for Santorum. He was front and center for every big-government program that came before the Senate between January 2001 and his departure from the Senate. At least Romney balanced the budget and restrained spending so that MA had a modest rainy-day fund. Santorum didn't restrain squat, and yet you're alleging that Santorum is the "real conservative" who occasionally erred. Ridiculous. Santorum is a big-spending Republican.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDid Laura just sound proud that Mitt's team was so good at attacking Republicans?
Wow.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHe's gonna need a much, much bigger and far more deft hit squad for what Axelrod has in store for him. But it was a sign that he's got some organizational chops. I think we knew that or at least should have known that. He was a strong executive in the business world and good at the Olympics. I don't think his competency is what has the base worried.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"(Romney's) team was prepared for the rise of Bachman, Cain, Perry and finally Newt.... Mitt hit hard at Monday’s debate, and did a mop-up operation on Thursday night."
Wow. That say's it all, doesn't it? A mop-up operation. "The peasants got all uppity toward their betters, and we slapped 'em down good. Now they can shut up and go back to toil in our fields. Have some more wine."
Fat chance.
If only the GOP Establishment were as effective at fighting big government as they are in their vicious personal attacks against fellow conservatives. (Sigh).
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse