So it’s okay. (h/t Terri in Tip Line)
The point is not that there’s anything wrong with it, but the hypocrisy (which applies even more to Romney) is dripping, considering how Newt was raked over the coals for a video with Nancy Pelosi which did not endorse any specific legislation or result in anything whatsoever.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Dripping indeed. Just more evidence of the sadly deficient understanding of the Left shot through our political class. Romney is worse. At least Santorum is capable of calling Obama an “elitist snob,” an oblique and insipid insult but SOMETHING anyway. Romney is far worse — a walking void of comprehension.
Only Gingrich gets it.
Here comes my really bad joke of the day:
Well at least Newt and Rick got in bed with female representatives!
Romney doesn’t work with liberals, he is a liberal.
If I was running Obama’s campaign, I would make sure that Santorum’s campaign is well funded, active and very visible.
Off topic-
One thing I love about Ian Anderson, besides his great artistic talent, is how with each and every song he looks overjoyed to perform.
Must be hard to do playing a song for the umpteenth time … so many performers make it look like it’s the umpteenth time.
Neither Santorum nor Romney is at all inspiring. I am, for the first time in this primary race, personally hoping for a brokered convention. I don’t think conservatives will do particularly well in a brokered convention, but at least we’ll do better than Romney.
As for the Santorum ad, who exactly was the target audience? Gotta think this stuff through, people.
Both of those ads might appeal to the majority of voters out there today, considering this latest Rasmussen poll:
<a href=http://c5.zedo.com//ads2/f/1044151/3840/172/0/305007392/305007392/0/305/1721/zz-V1-425x600New.html?a=s%3D1721%3Bg%3D172%3Bm%3D574%3Bw%3D6%3Bu%3DTvrrr38AAAEAAGoalaoAAABB~123111%3Bi%3D0%3B;l=;p=;t=132939801452% say it’s better to work with Obama than to stand on principle
I think the public, in general, is suffering from fatigue over the two parties constantly fighting and getting relatively nothing done in Congress. Augmenting this distaste are the chronically low approval numbers that regularly come out on Congress.
52% say it’s better to work with obama than to stand on principle
That’s why back in the day the Smart Set thought Reagan would be a sure loser. Too conservative; stood on principle way too much, unlike Howard Baker, and George H. W. Bush.
The lesson here is not that Santorum is a hypocrite but that he was right in that 2006 ad: you have to work with others to get ANYTHING done in Washington, short of overwhelming control of both houses and the Presidency, which aint gonna happen.
Newt’s record — in the 80s as a backbencher, in the 90s as a key leader, and since he left office — is another tale of practicing the art of the possible in politics. So for that matter was Ronald Reagan’s eight years as Governor and eight years as President. Mitt Romney is no different, notwithstanding the tortuous efforts to make him supposedly different. He just had to fight a different kind of battle in a strongly Democratic state dominated by liberals.
Although this should be blazingly obvious to everyone, a sizable slice of conservative activists and voters refuse to recognize it, forcing every would be Republican candidate to do contortions to adhere to a strict party line that bears no relationship to what any of them might be able to do in Washington in the next four to eight years. One result is the intra-party fratricide that is rapidly alienating masses of voters. Another — worse in my estimation — is the daily distractions into conflicts over just about any and all issues except those on which Obama is vulnerable. Day by day, Obama is crawling back from his extremely tenous hope of reelection as of three months ago. Republican squabbles burn up the media oxygen when each day should bring steady, effective attacks on Obama.
And you know what? After all this has boosted Obama and muddied the reputations of all the GOP contenders, whichever one emerges as the nominee will instantly turn to the center and work feverishly to change the narrative in order to win over swing voters. If it’s Newt or Santorum, you will see them take up the message of how important it is to work together, unlike Obama. In fact, Santorum could run that same ad from 2006 to good effect.
You do have a point in that there has to be some compromise to get anything done in Washington. The problem for some of us is that Romney has not been able to convince us that he is a conservative. He’s a boring person, and I just don’t get why he has to gel up his hair the way he does! Newt Gingrich, for all his faults, is a conservative who has passion, and ideas, and he definitely is not boring.
Hey, when you’re promoting Newt, I wouldn’t use hair styles as an argument.
I have a problem trusting older men with slick hair – just a personal thing. But seriously, if I HAVE to, I will vote for Romney in the general election rather than see Obama re-elected, but I really don’t believe he’s a conservative. However, I do believe he’s as mean as a snake. Sorry!
“The point is not that there’s anything wrong with it, but the hypocrisy is dripping…”
I disagree. The hypocrisy is pouring… all over this blog.
A vote for Newt is a vote for Mitt. Some people don’t want to hear it, but it is what it is.
So, in SC, Florida and NV was a vote Santorum or Paul a for Mitt?
Don’t blame me, I’m just using the arguments made on this blog against this blog. I can’t help it if y’all don’t like the taste of your own medicine.
Sure, give me a thumbs down, but when you do, you are just giving Mr. Jacobson a thumbs down – I’m just following his direction.
Oh my.
Debbie Wasserman Schultz says all women should get free contraception… Can’t all Republicans say that is wrong? I would like free whiskey and ice cream myself. But I know it is better that I pay for it.
I have a feeling we may see that wrestling video again. Is Dick Morris scheduled to be on Hannity tonight?