The Ever Modest Newt

The Ever Modest Newt December 26, 2011

compares failure to make ballot in Virginia to Pearl Harbor.

The dead of Pearl Harbor were not available for comment on this chickenhawk’s exploitation of their death agonies.

The Thing that Used to Be Conservatism sees in *this* man the best the party has to offer?

Newt, of course, does not take responsibility for failing to make the ballot. He naturally blames other people.

The thing about representative government is that we get the candidates we deserve.

Memo to the Thing that Used to Be Conservatism: Deserve better than this egotistical clown.

"The indigenous that my kid hangs out with in the sweat lodge don't have a ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
"What you don't know is that my weakness is reading about this stuff (too much). ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
"It seems Mark made clear the type of dissenting Catholics he was discussing (that type ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."
"Huh? You "heard" priests got spat on so that means asserting Junipero Serra abused Native ..."

Where Peter Is has a nice ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Jack

    In the grand old tradition of what used to be conservatism Newt if confronted by a person down on their luck would tell that person that thier lack of employment was due to a poor work ethic and tell them to take responsibility for it. Well Newt it appears that YOU need to take responsibility for the fact that your campaign in virginia wasn’t great, perhaps the fact that you took a holiday whilst Rommy and Paul were campaigning flat out.

  • Brent

    Why does everyone get all hippidy-hop over comparisons? He’s simply expressing his frustration of the setback with a hyperbolic comparison. I don’t think he’s equating the gravity of one with the other.

  • Greta

    Far better than Romeny or Ron Paul or others in others in the race and miles ahead of Obama. If its Newt versys Obama, it is a clear choice for Newt. Look for Ron Paul or Trump to try to mount a third party to give us Obama again. Hope the fools do not fall for that one like they did for Perot which gave us Clinton. Of course Clinton was better than Obama. Who isn’t?

    • William

      Greta, if you really want the opposite of Obama then you want Ron Paul.

      • Greta

        No, Ron Paul has zero chance of being elected. A vote for Ron Paul now or if he runs third party is a vote for Obama and that is fact.

    • Mark S (not for Shea)

      A choice between to Sauron and Saruman is no “clear choice” at all.

  • Gregory

    I am not voting for saints. I am voting for the next president of the United States. In so doing, track record is the most important. None of the candidates are perfect. The most decent one though is Ron Paul. Hence, I support Ron Paul. The track record of the others makes me very scared.

    • Greta

      When ron paul loses the nomination which he will, will you support the republican candidate over Obama? That is the real question for the Ron Paul folks or deep down are you pro Obama. You certainly cannot consider that anyone now running for the nomincation is worse than a second Obama term with him free of worry about ever running again.

      • Dave

        Some Paul supporters, like me, will probably vote for the GOP candidate, even if it is not Paul. I am under no illusions, though. If the candidate is not Paul, the choice is basically between a Democrat and a Democrat-lite. There will be very little practical difference. The only improvement I’d expect to see would be the hopeful repeal of Obamacare, and mediocre judges appointed instead of horrible ones.

        Ron Paul is actually the only true conservative in the race, in the classic definition of conservative. Problem is, hardly anyone knows what a real conservative looks like any more.

        Paul is the only candidate that closely follows the just war and subsidiarity teachings of the Church, as well as wanting to actually follow the Constitution in the sense the founders intended. He also actually takes our debt problem seriously and will try to do something about it before it’s too late.

        • Greta

          My concerns with Paul are his age and the articles under his name in his newsletter which he has danced around. I also am concerned that he will never be able to beat Obama. Lets face it, he is not managed to win over the more conservative Americans who are part of the Republican Party and that is not a good sign.

          However, I agree on much of what Ron Paul stands for and if there is a possiblity he has a chance at the Republican nomination by the time he hits Ohio and I can actually vote, I would seriously look at him at that point. Anyone who can beat Obama is essential at this point. And I disagree that the differences are minor between Obama and any Republican running at this point. If the president was Clinton, I think it might be closer to the case, but Obama unleased is a certain disaster for this country and never having to worry about hiding his true self for the next election will be a disaster.

        • Thomas R

          Ron Paul is the closest thing to the American “Old Right”, but that’s not the same as the “classic definition of conservative.”

          The classic definition of conservative involves a good deal more prudence than I think his positions have. And although he’s going by a tradition, it’s the liberal-tradition of a Constitution created largely by Deists and Freemasons.

          I’m not sure if any American politician can be “the classical definition of a conservative.” They can just be more and more “paleo” in their liberalism.

  • William

    And you should see Newt’s latest ad! He portrays himself as a modern day George Washington! What an abomination! Keep it coming Newt, here in SC you’re causing people to take a good look at Ron Paul!

  • Matt B

    Michael Krull wrote on the Gingrich Facebook page. “We have experienced an unexpected set-back, but we will re-group and re-focus with increased determination, commitment and positive action. Throughout the next months there will be ups and downs; there will be successes and failures; there will be easy victories and difficult days – but in the end we will stand victorious…”

    “We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France,
    we shall fight on the seas and oceans,
    we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be,
    we shall fight on the beaches,
    we shall fight on the landing grounds,
    we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,
    we shall fight in the hills;
    we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old.”

  • Mark S (not for Shea)

    I’ve noticed that in history, nation’s best rulers tended to be those who didn’t want the job. When the previous emperor was murdered by his own guard, Claudius was found hiding in the curtains and had to be dragged to the throne. He turned out to be one of the best emperors Rome ever had.

    We need to add a new slot to our primaries: The “DO OVER” slot, or the “NONE OF THE ABOVE.” Anyone who wants the job this bad doesn’t deserve it.

    • Dale Price

      In a democracy, someone has to want the job. The question then becomes do the candidate’s other virtues correct, inform or balance his ambition?

      • Mark S (not for Shea)

        “In a democracy, someone has to want the job.”

        I don’t think so. The best candidate ought to be chosen by representatives, and for once I’d like to see that candidate dragged into office, kicking and screaming.

        Anyone who actually wants to be President makes me very suspicious.

        • Dale Price

          My point is, it currently doesn’t happen that way. In fact, it hasn’t happened a lot, even in smoke-filled rooms and brokered conventions. Each one has involved someone with political ambition, and not a monastic dragged away from the abbey or father dragged from the assemby line. Come to think of it, I can’t recall anyone pulled kicking and screaming into it, Sherman’s famous growl notwithstanding.

          Like it or not, we’re stuck with people with ambition for the job. The trick is to see through the pre-packaged facade to see if anything worthwhile is in the candidate–apart from raw ambition.

        • Greta

          You want the representatives to chose the next president? Are you serious. You want the congress to choose? Keep in mind they have selected Pelosi and Reid…

        • Greta

          Are you serious? Have congress select the next president? Keep in mind they selected folks like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.

  • Sean O

    Excellent. The Price is Right!

    “The trick is to see thru the pre-packaged facade to see if anything worthwhile is in the candidate beyond raw ambition.”

  • Gregory