The American Spectator

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 1.26.12 @ 6:26AM

A good commentary but the egos won't listen.

Let's hope the era of Big Newt is over.

Bob K.| 1.26.12 @ 6:44AM

Obama is the issue.

IT'S OBAMA, STUPID!

Patrick| 1.26.12 @ 7:11AM

Newt is too narcissistic to let it be that. It must always be about Newt, always!

Jack in Wi.| 1.26.12 @ 7:38AM

This is a nonsense campaign. The only guy discussing the grave problems this country has and solutions is Ron Paul. He hasn't gotten into any personalities, but sticks to the questions asked and the issues. He also has great moral charecter, has been married to the same women for 54 years, and has 5 children who have given him 25 grandchildren. He is the most knowledgeable pro-life spokesman around. Nutt Mutt are proving once again it is Ron Paul or ruin.

Alan Brooks| 1.26.12 @ 4:21PM

Jack, I have to reluctantly (I do not enjoy empty politricks) agree Paul is the only honest one.
But he is tad paranoid concerning the UN-- if the UN were as potent as he thinks, it could actually do something other than pad expense accounts.

beebop2| 1.26.12 @ 7:02PM

Your endorsement is enough for me. Well, that and my own realization that Dr. Paul is just not in the best interests of America. Thanks so much for your support of him.

Jack in Wi.| 1.26.12 @ 7:17AM

It is all true. I remember it all. This guy would be the final death knell of the Republican Party. He has never been a conservative. He has always been for number 1, himself.

Steve in Wi.| 1.27.12 @ 3:04PM

That's just not true. Newt may not be perfect--who is--but he has always been conservative. Go read or listen to his inaugural speech as Speaker if you can find it.

Jon B| 1.27.12 @ 7:36PM

Newt spent $30 billion more than what Clinton asked for, and increased spending in all of the 95 programs he promised to cut in the Contract for America. Don't believe me, believe Edward Crane, former President of the CATO Institute: http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4463

Popsicle Mania!| 1.26.12 @ 9:34AM

Ever need to calm down? Raspberry flavored popsicle works every time. Guaranteed.

FDA Approved

Hobbes| 1.26.12 @ 12:21PM

Obama is the issue. He will win in a landslide against Moon Unit Gingrich. Has that for an issue, Bob K?

David in MA| 1.26.12 @ 1:08PM

if obozo is elected to another term, America will be the newest islamic socialist country on the planet, and anyone with an ounce of brains knows that's a formula for failure....as obozo has already given a preview to.

Hobbes| 1.26.12 @ 1:57PM

If you are right, what are we doing in Iraq, and Afghanistan trying to turn them into islamic socialist countries too? Maybe our commander in chief can turn other countries into democratic republics, but not our own?

beebop2| 1.26.12 @ 7:00PM

If Newt vanquishes Mitt only to be exposed as a phony how well are we served then? 0bama dances in for a second madministration .... Really? I feel that he is just one minute a way from a meltdown at any moment.

Paula Hopper| 1.28.12 @ 10:29PM

Remember Clinton's motto last time?- (" It's the ECONOMY stupid!") It was true then and it's more true now. PS. He won! - And so will Newt, if you
guys stop mimicking the " lame-stream media".
( Some things never change!)

Jack in Wi.| 1.26.12 @ 7:25AM

Newt is a big mouth who likes, big wars, big government solutions, and big tits. He reminds me of the late Huey Long. But Huey had a terrific sense of humor to go along with his, huge ego. That's what I get when I have read about him, anyhow. Newt loves FDR and Woodrow Wilson as his great historical hero's. What conservative likes those guys?

Vern Crisler| 1.26.12 @ 9:13AM

Jack, do you ever get tired of listening to your own Paulista propoganda?

Drunken Sailor| 1.26.12 @ 10:21AM

HAHAHAHA, Come on now Vern, even Jack doesn't listen to Jack.

SUBVET| 1.26.12 @ 10:24AM

And Jack how do you know about the big tits.......just like all of the crap you spew nothing to back-up anything you say.

I don't know who you are I am not an insider here to know your backround, but you and your views are whats wrong with this country......and to think I risked my life to give a POS like you the platform to perpetrate your lies.

You need to live in some 3rd world country and see what it is like to not have the liberties and freedom I have provided for you.........I am taking donations for a oneway plane ticket.

Occam's Tool| 1.26.12 @ 11:03AM

My wife has big tits, exemplary moral character, and graduated summa cum laude in accounting from The Capstone. She's smarter, prettier, and nicer than your wife, Jack. Another ex-girlfriend of mine had big tits and made Michigan Law Review, and was a Truman scholar. Another girlfriend I had had big tits, and is now a Family Practictioner in Alaska. Another close female friend of mine had big tits, and is now a child psychiatrist.

What does big tits have to do with anything except having big tits?

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 12:07PM

Great, Occam. Now you've got that Joe Walsh song "Tits" stuck in my head.

Ken (Old Texican)| 1.26.12 @ 12:52PM

Acttuuually...my pet name for my wife is P T (pretty tits).
She is why I use a screen name and a pen name. She is world famous giving children a new future.

PTs are fun (grin)

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 12:59PM

"I like tits for dinner, for a noontime snack!"...Joe Walsh, "Big Tits"

^raised eyebrows"| 1.26.12 @ 9:46PM

Pretty tits for old shits, like Con Chef and Ken and the rest of the shits on here.

Shitty, shitty, shitty!

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 10:08PM

Stop smelling your own ass & it won't be so shitty.

PaulC| 1.26.12 @ 12:09PM

I detect a pattern here.

^raised eyebrows"| 1.26.12 @ 9:47PM

A shitty pattern?

W| 1.26.12 @ 1:28PM

Chef and OT
It is obvious what Jack means. It is another plot by the Israelis to elect Newt. They knew Newt likes big tits so Mossad arranged for Newt to meet women with big tits. Mossad now owns Newt.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 1:44PM

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

I just spewed Sprite all over my monitor!!!

^raised eyebrows"| 1.26.12 @ 9:48PM

You mean you spewed Sprite all over your big, bloated belly.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 10:07PM

I'm 33, 5'5, 150. Wanna try again, putz?

KennesawJack| 1.26.12 @ 1:54PM

Well, Occam, in the case of your wife and ex girlfriends and my wife and ex girlfriends also, it just goes to prove the old adage, "All things being equal, pick the one with big tits."

skip| 1.26.12 @ 2:16PM

Thanks alot.

Now I've got a Joe Walsh tune from his 1995 'Look What I Did!' album stuck in my head. Disc II track 11, if memory serves.

This song will probably be going through my head for quite some time - whether breakfast, lunch, dinner, or even a noontime snack - it'll give me shivers.

I'm probably going to have to dig up Joe's first album in 1969, The James Gang 'Yer Album', to come up with another song to replace it. Last track, 11, if memory serves.

Thanks again, mind doctor - I think you're trying to take advantage of poor old me.

Jeamar| 1.26.12 @ 3:17PM

You should know since you are the one making such a big deal of them.

Jeamar| 1.26.12 @ 3:22PM

This comment was to appear as reply to Ocam, i.e. why so many boasts about his female friends (?) breasts. This sounds like a site for 8-16 yr.-old boys, not that older boys don't have the same thoughts, but they usually learn how to restrain their public utterances.

SUBVET| 1.26.12 @ 3:57PM

See Jack what you started...........were just a bunch of 8 yr. olds trying to remember what it was like to brest feed.

JACK probably didn't brest feed ...mum just didn't have the time....this could be why you have such distain for this country.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 4:04PM

Oh, for G*d's sake, lighten up...

Humorless people are so lame.

KennesawJack| 1.26.12 @ 4:17PM

Oh no we don't.

^raised eyebrows"| 1.26.12 @ 9:41PM

Big tits and bigger shits.

Dick Nome| 1.26.12 @ 11:03AM

Jack prefers big butts.

Vern Crisler| 1.26.12 @ 9:12AM

Too bad our formerly conservative AmSpec editor has sold his political soul for a mess of political respectability. I think it's time for the old guard to step aside now and let the younger, hungrier conservatives move in.

Vern Crisler| 1.26.12 @ 9:41AM

BTW, looks like we know who Drudge is supporting.

Todd S| 1.26.12 @ 11:02AM

Virtually every conservative that knows Newt personally have not endorsed him because they know what he is really like. Disliking Romney doesn't change the fact of who Newt is and his terrible character. He knows him and you don't have a clue.

Vern Crisler| 1.26.12 @ 11:25AM

RET knows Newt? How do you know? How well does he know him? What about all the conservatives who know Newt and SUPPORT him? They don't count, right? Perry doesn't count, Sarah doesn't count.

Newt is a lot like Churchill; sometimes you love him, sometimes not so much. Yes, he has a lot of baggage, and also has a Progressive streak, and I won't let him off the hook if he falls into political temptation. I opposed him originally, but after watching a number of debates, he's won me to his side.

But to think that Romney is the answer, or that Paul or Santorum could do better, is dreaming. I believe RET is losing his conservative nerve. He's going for the safe (and losing) candidate this time around rather than take a risk with Newt.

Vern Crisler| 1.26.12 @ 11:29AM

In answer to RET's "moral character" argument. The problem with Clinton's moral character is that he had none. He lied about his behavior and continue on with it. Newt has flamed out on a moral level as well, but he has the character to know he has done wrong, and to seek forgiveness. The analogy with Clinton betrays a complete lack of understanding on RET's part about the concepts of ethics and redemption.

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 11:36AM

Or maybe Newt has cynically realized that feigning contrition is the only way to attract voters: "people don't care what I do--only what I say."

Vern Crisler| 1.26.12 @ 11:47AM

On what grounds do you mock his confession? We heard reports about Clinton's behavior after he left office. Do we hear that of Newt? I haven't heard anything more than Pelosi's insinuations that she knows something, and try as I might, I cannot imagine Newt fooling around with Pelosi.

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 12:11PM

Neither you nor know what is in Newt's heart. But his own statement that people only care what he says and not what he does makes his words about seeking forgiveness seem more a cynical attempt to manipulate voters than good faith contrition.

Hobbes| 1.26.12 @ 12:32PM

You evangelicals would vote for the whore of Babylon before you vote for a Mormon. That is the only reason you like Moon Unit Gingrich.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 12:41PM

So now Hobbes knows the mind of all Evangelicals. I forgot. Paulistinians, like Obamunists, know everything.

KennesawJack| 1.26.12 @ 1:57PM

No, no, no, Hobbes. It itsn't the Mormon, it's the Muslim. You are totally mistaken. We WILL vote for the Mormon to replace the Muslim. We'd just rather vote for a Conservative first.

Manny| 1.28.12 @ 10:52AM

Yeah, because evangelicals just LOVE Roman Catholics.

paul3165| 1.27.12 @ 5:06AM

Amen. Don't RET, Drudge, Coulter, etc believe in forgiveness and redemption? Why are they trying to play God? Are they so cynical they belive a man can't change? There's a good chance they're hurting themselves by these attacks. Also Coulter was critical of Sharron Angle, Christine O'Donnell, and she didn't want Sarah Palin to run for Prez. She's not really a Tea Party conservative. And she sucks as a strategist. I was one of her biggest fans, but not now.

Todd S| 1.26.12 @ 1:45PM

Sarah Palin did not know him back when he was the Speaker and RET says right in the article that he knew Newt back then. Name me one conservative that actually worked with Newt back then that supports him now? Spare me the Churchill comparison, Newt thinks it is a good comparison but he is a egomaniac who thinks himself a great historical figure.

thoughtcriminal2| 1.26.12 @ 2:47PM

Tony Blankley was the conservative commentator that I most admired. He was right in the middle of the Republican takeover of the House after 1994. Just before his death from cancer, he wrote this endorsement of Newt Gingrich:
http://www.realclearpolitics.c.....12396.html

W| 1.26.12 @ 4:08PM

I believe Blankely was the press secretary for Newt or for the RNC in the 90's. He was an articulate intelligent man. RIP

paul3165| 1.27.12 @ 5:12AM

J. C. Watts said this when he endorsed Gingrich: "I am long past looking for my president or my presidential nominee to be my savior or to be my pastor. I'm looking for someone that is prepared to do the heavy lifting to get us where we all want to be and I think where we need to be."

Manny| 1.28.12 @ 10:57AM

Actually, Newt is a great historical figure numb nuts. Unless you don't think that engineering the largest takeover of the House in 40 years is small potatoes, or having the only balanced budget four four years in out lifetimes is no big deal. Name one other member of Congress within the 20th century who can make those claims.

RCV| 1.26.12 @ 11:36AM

He and Glenn Beck recognize a truth: Newt Gingrich is not a conservative; he's an opportunist. Take a look this morning at Drudge and see what Newt had to say about Reagan and Reagnism. Listen to Glenn Beck about Newt's favorite Presidents: Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, Wilson and FDR. The man is selling you snake oil and you appear to be dumb enough to buy it.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 12:09PM

Hell, I'm certainly no fan of the man. The only real conservative in this race is Santorum. Newt's a self absorbed guy. And you're right. His lauding of "great" regressives in history is what troubles me greatly. I'm sick of ALL regressives. PERIOD.

cdm| 1.26.12 @ 11:18PM

Does that mean you might begin to think PROgressively?

Hobbes| 1.26.12 @ 12:24PM

The younger conservatives are supporting Ron Paul 10 to 1. You must be an old fart.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 12:39PM

I'm 33. And Paul's an idiot on foreign policy. Does that make ME an "old fart" too?

You Paulistinians sure do know how to attract people to your candidate.

Jim | 1.26.12 @ 1:03PM

Young folks always think they know best, until they become a little older, and then realize how dumb they were.
I don't know if you are short, but you are certainly nasty & brutish. Don't worry, though, if you live long enough, experience, if nothing else, will make you smarter.

Winghunter| 1.26.12 @ 2:28PM

Here's hoping their epiphany hurts as much and as many as they have.

aware| 1.26.12 @ 2:58PM

I know plenty of stupid young people who became stupid old people. Being old doesn't make one wise.

paul3165| 1.27.12 @ 5:15AM

They're supporting him because he wants to legalize pot.

Patrick| 1.27.12 @ 4:47AM

Newt is a whore. End of story. He is no different than Trump, a pretender that can bark at the media a little for the adulation of the masses.

I don't like any of the candidates running, however, I do loathe one - Newt Gingrich.

Art laVois| 1.28.12 @ 3:49AM

I loathe Rick Sanitorium, too. But then I don't think you should have a kid every time you have sex.

W| 1.26.12 @ 9:41AM

Tyrell and Newt must have had some arguments in the past because I remember reading almost the same criticism of Newt by Tyrell about 10 years ago.
He has always likened Newt to Bubba.

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 11:48AM

What was true then remains true today.

Patrick| 1.27.12 @ 4:47AM

Amen.

paul3165| 1.27.12 @ 5:20AM

Do you know Newt personally?

paul3165| 1.27.12 @ 5:19AM

Yeah and I don't understand RET. He's had it in for Newt for years.

On another topic: always wondered why they call him Bob Tyrell and his name is given as R. Emmett. Shouldn't it be Robert E. if he goes by Bob?

rhortus| 1.26.12 @ 12:47PM

Is Newt on a diet?

Nick099| 1.26.12 @ 1:11PM

Gingrich:
No Fines.
IRS concluded no wrong-doing.
Even Mark Levin supports this as he was involved in parts o the case with his foundation.
Ethics violations were made by Lefties.
Strong Conservative record as concluded by Club for Growth White Paper.
Personal failings...nothing new in 16 years. Forgive. Get over it.
Has great ideas for revising every aspect of government including the Judiciary.

Romney Record as Governor of Massachusetts:
Record in Massachusetts: raised taxes by closing "loopholes," raising fees, and raising Capital Gains by acquiescing to Supreme Court ( same as he did with gay marriage, although he was under no obligation to do so). He did cut 1.5 Billion of a 3 Billion deficit, but he raised 1.5 Billion...just did not call them taxes.
Left the new Governor coming in with a 1 Billion dollar deficit.
Gave us Romneycare: those same advisors are working in Obama's cabinet ( John Holdren-science czar).
Banned assault weapons permanently in Massachusetts. after the federal law was expiring. Claimed same as "fees are not taxes"…… that he strengthen gun rights. Got a few soft gun groups to praise him.

Has no ideas of sweeping revision of government....just tweaks.
So dear enlightened so-called Conservative, the facts are the facts. Romney's record is public and for all to examine. Why are you not doing so??? Ignorance, stupidity or corruption hmmm?????

ENOUGH ROPE| 1.26.12 @ 2:43PM

Nicko99, thank you for your comments in defense of Newt. I am astonished by the assaults on Newt's character and record. For the left and the RINO establishment, redemption does not apply to Newt.

No matter how the left and the RINO establishment spin the facts, the record proves that Romney is a liberal in Republican disguise, and Gingrich actually did Conservative transformations.

Patrick| 1.27.12 @ 4:48AM

How has he been redeemed from Fannie Mae?

Patrick| 1.27.12 @ 4:48AM

Or ethanol?

Winghunter| 1.26.12 @ 2:22PM

Reagan's Young Lieutenant http://spectator.org/archives/.....nant/print

The Case for Newt Gingrich http://bit.ly/w2Wvsz

Alan Brooks| 1.26.12 @ 2:24PM

The following, by John O. McGinnis (NR, 12/22/'97) touches on Gingrich's #1 error:

"Because our discoveries and inventions change the human environment faster than that of any other animal, there is always a temptation -- to which today's techno-conservatives, like Newt Gingrich, often fall prey -- to think that such changes may usher in an age of harmony and plenty that will solve the dilemmas of politics. Evolutionary biology shows that this is simply a pipe dream. Our nature assures that we will simultaneously be obsessed with our relative status in society and possess unequal abilities for acquiring higher status. Thus individuals will always seek to use the government as a means to rearrange their relative positions. No matter how much wealth free trade produces, no matter how much information the Internet transmits, the central problem of politics will remain: how to empower the government for safeguarding life and property, and yet simultaneously constrain it from eviscerating civil society and expropriating property."

Alan Brooks| 1.26.12 @ 2:26PM

... so though Newt is v. disingenuous politically, it's not all dissembling; it's also flaws in his thinking- errata.

Alan Brooks| 1.26.12 @ 5:23PM

Newt was a good Speaker from '95- '99, but he'd make a horrendous POTUS from '13- '17. He has got to be destroyed politically-- he will say anything to get power.
Plus he is an insult to Toffler; at least Toffler isn't a compulsive liar.

aware| 1.26.12 @ 6:43AM

Just what I been saying. Newt the snake still selling snake oil to the neocon dumbasses.

RET you are right and will be vilified for it. The attention span of many who post here only extends back to his latest attack on the propaganda arm of the State at the SC debate. They are being played like pawn shop fiddles.

Bob K.| 1.26.12 @ 6:46AM

Once again. Back on point!

IT'S OBAMA, STUPID!!!

aware| 1.26.12 @ 7:05AM

No, STUPID is the issue, Bob. Obama Derangement Syndrome isn't enough for me to rush into the arms of political whores like Newt.

I'd start reconciling myself to a 2nd term if I were you, Bill. The Stupid party is proving there is no real opposition party. Their corruption or our corruption. Some "choice". These guys are worthy of festooning lamp posts on piano wire, not your worship.

Jack in Wi.| 1.26.12 @ 7:30AM

Nutt and Mutt are going to be running the usual nonsense campaign against Oblabla. He is a Communist, a Muslim, and his wife has a big, fat rear end. Neither one of them do anything but pander to the lowest instincts of the voters, just like the incommbant.

LipSinka| 1.26.12 @ 9:37AM

Shut the F up!

All of you! Just shut your F'ing mouths!

Dmac| 1.26.12 @ 9:53AM

So AWARE,
where then will you run? If your choice comes down to Newt or Obama what's your choice?
LEt me ask you, when was the last time you had a choice for president that wasn't the lesser of two evils?

KennesawJack| 1.26.12 @ 10:16AM

1980

Dmac| 1.26.12 @ 10:29AM

My point exactly KennesawJack

W| 1.26.12 @ 2:15PM

KJack
Before the sainted Reagan in 1980, it was 1789 and 1992 when GW ran unopposed.

W| 1.26.12 @ 4:09PM

meant 1792, the first GW

KennesawJack| 1.26.12 @ 4:19PM

I was sort of wondering about that.

aware| 1.26.12 @ 2:33PM

Dmac, if you want to believe one of these bastards is better than the other bastard, it is your privilege. I can see no stopping an inevitable brick wall moment for this nation.

We will be lucky if we even get to Nov. for your "lesser of 2 evils" option. Illusion dies hard and many who hold illusions die before the illusion does.

KennesawJack| 1.26.12 @ 4:22PM

You know, Aware, a lot of folks are going to read the first sentence in your last paragraph and think you're giving it a bit of a stretch. I don't. There is this thought, deep in the recesses of my mind, that keeps telling me the threat to the country is greater than maybe we realize. I hope we are, indeed, lucky.

aware| 1.26.12 @ 7:10PM

There are only 2 ways to sleep at night, understanding or ignorance. The nation is awash in a sea of lies.

Some of the liars claim to be on our side. Some of us like to believe lies cause they're easy and neat and make us feel "better" than the truth. The "villains" are always conveniently on the other side.

A bill is about to come due and we don't have the money to pay it. Elections won't change that. Now it is just a question of how default will happen, repudiation or (hyper)inflation.

Either way you will be on your own.

David in MA| 1.26.12 @ 1:31PM

Finally, an intellegent thought from a_______,(fill in the blank)

Nancy in NC| 1.26.12 @ 1:38PM

Which is why it's absolutely ridiculous that the best the GOP can come up with is this bunch of losers. All we needed is someone WITHOUT a ton of baggage...a 1/2 ton would be OK, but not the 5 tons these guys have between them.

Obama is the worst president of my lifetime, and he's probably going to be reelected because of these losers.

I'm sick.

Warrior| 1.26.12 @ 3:25PM

The establishment marginalized Michele Bachmann almost immediately. IMO, she was the only candidate, with a conservative record that could run on her character and her record. Now we have three candidates on the stage that basically stand for the same big government Republican style we've had since Bush 41. We also have a Libertarian (who I'd prefer over the other three because he is the only candidate that offers anything different than more of the same) who get ridiculed over his foreign policy.

David Kilfoile| 1.26.12 @ 6:49AM

Mr. Tyrrell,
What exactly does "if I have heard of some, you can be sure he Democrats have heard of more" mean? If you know something that your fellow Americans don't know about Newt Gingrich, please let us know! As a "inside the beltway pundit" did you know something about John
McCain before I voted for him? Maybe you wrote an article to warn us? If so, I would like to read it, if not, shut up and let us make our own decision! I stay tuned to MSNBC for all the dirt regarding Speaker Gingrich!!

David Kilfoile
Coral Springs, FL

Patrick| 1.26.12 @ 7:16AM

It isn't about what isn't known about the slime known as Gingrich so much as what is forgotten.

As a long time reader of AmSpec, there has long been a disgust for McCain before the 2008 primaries even started. Did Republicans listen? No. So, he was the one to face off against the Demokratik God-King, Obama.

Now you are sprinting towards the other most-vilified Republican in modern history why? Because he barks on television? Get a grip!

richard ryan| 1.26.12 @ 8:07AM

Please. Romney is McCain II. A vacillating, empty shell whose primary motivations are pleasing the masses and obtaining political power. The fact that Mr. Gingrich is vilified by half of Washington DC is a result of his positive attributes. These include my personal favorite, not being afraid of pissing of the establishment, "lets's not rock the boat" insiders. If anyone has a beef with the plans laid forth on NEWT.ORG lets hear it. Otherwise, we've all heard the baggage BS many, many, many times over.

Patrick| 1.26.12 @ 2:09PM

So McCain II is worse than Nixon II?

richard ryan| 1.30.12 @ 2:33PM

yes. no doubt about it.

cdm| 1.26.12 @ 11:27PM

As Herman Cain must have said, "You're throwing me out for allegations of adultery and going with ...Newt Gingrich???"

paul3165| 1.27.12 @ 5:25AM

Patrick why do you hate Newt so much? Are you NevadaMom who posts on Human Events? You're a lot alike.

Chalkdust| 1.26.12 @ 8:35AM

Mr. Tyrrell:
Most of us know the recent history of the Republican Party. In 2008 Mitt Romney was asked by the RINO wing of the party to step aside for John McCain, the #1 RINO. The deal was Romney would be the candidate the RINO wing would support in 2012.
So here we are in 2012 and 68-year-old Newt is screwing up the plan and will not step aside, so the RINO's have fired up their slime machine, willing to cripple Newt, giving the White House to Obama's commie gang, rather than back the people's choice and winner of the primary race.

Newt may be an unguided missile, but we know he was; instrumental in winning back the "house" after 40 years, the "Contract with America" was finished in less than 100 days as promised, he worked with Bill Clinton to bring welfare to a management level.

Newt is an unrepentant asshole, but he is his own asshole and not controlled by the RINOs. Which may be all we need to back us out of this Wall Street (read RINO) created mess, which George Bush (another RINO) could have prevented.

Pete| 1.26.12 @ 8:54AM

George Washington was right. Political parties are the death of the country. A few insiders with connections to the media are bent on controlling results. They create the appearance of a polarity, but the reality is that they just have their own lust for power. I think at the least it is time to shed these parties before the do more damage.

scotchieguy| 1.26.12 @ 10:03AM

You may be right about Newt being his own asshole, but remember this--Americans don't vote for assholes. Ask yourself this: how many independents will vote for him? How many women will vote for a guy who cheated on two of his wives, then married his mistress. I like the hell he is raising, but let's not kid outselves--he is a timebomb waiting to explode.

Chalkdust| 1.26.12 @ 10:45AM

Barrack "Barry" Obama is not a asshole???

Chalkdust| 1.26.12 @ 10:48AM

Bill "snap the tong" Clinton is not a asshole???

Chalkdust| 1.26.12 @ 10:50AM

Jimmy(peanut head) Carter is not a asshole???

cdm| 1.26.12 @ 11:30PM

There's not enough storage in the universe to list all the assholes. Your point?

Occam's Tool| 1.26.12 @ 11:04AM

Lots of women voted for Clinton---twice.

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 11:23AM

Like it or not, moral failings are acceptable in Democrats but not in Republicans.

rhortus| 1.26.12 @ 12:49PM

Being a Leftist means "Never Having to Say You're Sorry."

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 12:59PM

Very funny

Delta Zelda| 1.26.12 @ 12:06PM

Have all of you pro-Romney suckers forgotten RomneyCare which was pushed down our throats as ObamaCare? That alone is reason enough to disqualify him for me. Add to that his comparison of himself to Obama in laying off folks at the auto makers, and you have a man with no self-respect at all. Like McCain, Romney offers us Democrat-lite. Yep, Newt has lots of baggage, but I do not think he will bow to foreign rulers or break our laws like O has done with Czars and deciding when Congress is or is not in session. His behavior is that of a despot. If Romney is the nominee, Obama gets another term, during which he will finish destroying my country.

The problem, of course, is the Republican party. It’s “leaders” have no contact with the grass roots electorate. The party movers and shakers do not get into the states and really look at governors as potential candidates.

Repub candidates need to remember they are going after the nominees of the Dem party—not each other. Neither Romney or Newt have told us what their plans for solving this mess that both parties got us into. We voters NEED to know their plans for repealing ObamaCare and for getting the ban lifted on the incandescent bulb. What will they do to get Keystone project moving? That is expected to generate at least 29K jobs. Medicare has to be means-tested. Rework Social Security; Perry was absolutely right about it being a Ponzi scheme. The money collected from the employed was never invested, so the SS fund has never had money in it.

We’ve had unicorns and utopia for the last 3 years and seen how that has worked. Give us some doable solutions. Rainbow pie won’t do it.

Old Soldier| 1.26.12 @ 2:37PM

I have not forgotten about Romneycare - nor have I forgotten about the Medicare Drug entitlement that Gingrich supported strongly and Santorum voted for. Only Ron Paul seems to be opposed to government healthcare. Too bad his foreign policy is so illogical.

aware| 1.26.12 @ 3:46PM

But is it?

SUBVET| 1.26.12 @ 4:04PM

Dust......funny I just heard Rush utter the same reason.....the only part you forgot was when Newt is at the helm you will see some jumping ship and the rest on their knees trying to save their worthless jobs.

Vern Crisler| 1.26.12 @ 9:15AM

David, RET doesn't know anything more about Newt than Pelosi does. He's just a Romney supporter, and now he's going the way of Peggy Noonan, selling out.

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 11:39AM

Examine both Newt's and Mitt's admittedly flawed records and explain to me why a vote for Romney is any more a sellout than a vote for Newt.

Drunken Sailor| 1.26.12 @ 10:24AM

I noticed that too David, If our conservative editors know more should they not spill the beans? At least I will give R.E.T. some credit for posting this blog here today, even though it is the exact same article he posted yesterday elsewhere. Makes you wonder why he did not start here?

thoughtcriminal2| 1.26.12 @ 2:59PM

David, I couldn't agree more. If there is anything substantive that we need to know about Newt, let it come out now, so that each of us can factor it into our decision. Innuendo doesn't cut it. Facts only please, not innuendo.

Clint| 1.26.12 @ 6:54AM

The Stupid Party Vs. Stupid.

Bob K.| 1.26.12 @ 6:56AM

No.

IT'S OBAMA, STUPID!

Clint| 1.26.12 @ 7:01AM

No Stupid, It's The Economy, Stupid.

Americans Will Vote Their Wallets.

Bob K.| 1.26.12 @ 7:37AM

That was Clinton's slogan. Stupid! And it worked too. So get off the Ron Paul bandwagon and use it!

Clint| 1.26.12 @ 7:44AM

Duuuuuuhhhhh, Stupid !

And How Do Ya Think Clinton Got Elected.

Read Dr.Ron Paul's " Plan To Restore America "

"SPENDING:

Cuts $1 trillion in spending during the first year of Ron Paul’s presidency, eliminating five cabinet departments (Energy, HUD, Commerce, Interior, and Education), abolishing the Transportation Security Administration and returning responsibility for security to private property owners, abolishing corporate subsidies, stopping foreign aid, ending foreign wars, and returning most other spending to 2006 levels."

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the.....e-america/

Bob K.| 1.26.12 @ 8:06AM

Sorry, but reality is sometimes tough to confront.

The Republican Leadership determined long ago that Paul was unacceptable. The Republican base agrees. After Florida he will be an afterthought.

But hang in there! If by some miracle he does get the nomination the 2 most surprised men in America will be himself and yourself! Neither of you really believes he has a chance.

Dmac| 1.26.12 @ 10:01AM

Clint,
Should Ron Paul not get a Republican nomination and decides to go rogue and become a third party candidate, and Obama wins by 4% then what will you think of him?
Or, if he does somehow miraculously win the nomination and a year from now we all watch the pictures of Tel-Aviv go up in a mushroom cloud what will you think then? You won't have but a few minutes to reach a conclusion, because we'll all be dead within 40 minutes of that event.
I think we can all agree that Ron Paul has some damn fine points about where this country, our government, has stryed from the Constitution. It's the fear he puts in people about an immediate loss of the social safety net and the loss of our extended national security lines (we fight our wars in other peoples backyards not our own)that scares the hell out of everybody. This is why your guy will not get elected.

Pete| 1.26.12 @ 11:42AM

Why worry about the ones who would vote for Paul. Over 40 percent of the voters will not vote at all. That number would far out-weigh the number of votes to Ron Paul.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 12:12PM

Clint & Jack would be like the Palestinians dancing in the streets on 9-11 in the West Bank if Tel Aviv is nuked. They'd piss themselves with glee.

Clint| 1.26.12 @ 6:11PM

You're A Serial Israel Firster Smear Bund Liar, Con Job.

The Tea Party Rebellion Steps On The Israel Firster Neo-Chickenhawk, Con Job.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 7:21PM

You couldn't step on a cockroach, coward.

Hobbes| 1.26.12 @ 12:28PM

The only candidate traditional (read non-NeoCons) will vote for is Ron Paul. If he runs Third Party, do you think we would vote for a Let's Invade the World NeoCon like Gingrich? Never. Doesn't matter, Obama will destroy Moon Unit Gingrich.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 12:43PM

Aw, how cute. The peacenik idiots who voted for Obama realize that socialism sucks, so now they vote for the "conservative" who lauds traitor Bradley Manning as a "hero."

Color me shocked.

KennesawJack| 1.26.12 @ 2:01PM

Only because people like you will stay at home. Like I told you a few days ago, you should have spent a little more time with Locke.

Drunken Sailor| 1.26.12 @ 10:57AM

Scary Clint, but your making sense.

Drunken Sailor| 1.26.12 @ 10:58AM

Guess I better clarify that. Your making sense when you say "Americans Will Vote Their Wallets."

Dmac| 1.26.12 @ 11:03AM

If Paul were elected spending would not go to 2006 levels, to the contrary, they would go to 1956 spending levels as Paul (rightly so I have to say) beleives government has a very very small role to play in our everyday lives. The problem is our society will not return to the day of self reliance and self control. Some form of big government will always be with us now.

Drunken Sailor| 1.26.12 @ 11:32AM

Don't get me wrong Dmac, I'm not agreeing with Clint's choice of canidate, but he is right America will vote their wallet. All of the people on this site that keep saying Obama is going to win seem to forget that. The same crap was said about Jimmy and look how it worked out for him.

Thom| 1.26.12 @ 6:25PM

Actually Clint, half of those that call themselves Americans will vote for what's in your wallet....assuming you pay income taxes.

Bob K.| 1.26.12 @ 6:55AM

Right on, David!

Stop the fighting!

IT'S OBAMA, STUPID!

Hobbes| 1.26.12 @ 12:30PM

You are a broken record. And a stupid one, at that.

Brian Mc| 1.26.12 @ 6:56AM

I am still in shock that we were unable to come up with a better field of candidates than this. Stopping the alien and the mindset that put him in a position to cause so much desecration to our Founder's intentions is a labor of love. It's as if we are trying to get the mosh pit to listen to the Linz Symphony on our transistor radio. It does not help that our version is performed by a local grade school band...and the batteries are running low.

Bob K.| 1.26.12 @ 6:58AM

It's not too late! Get back on point!

IT'S OBAMA, STUPID!

Patrick| 1.26.12 @ 7:23AM

The point is, Newt is no improvement over Obama. When all the hype falls away, they are one and the same.

Kade| 1.26.12 @ 7:40AM

The entire GOP RINO field are also libertarian (not conservative) economic globalists, who will continue to sellout America to China and the Third World. This sadly includes Newt just used left wing jargon and called Romney anti-immigrant for his self-deport stance on immigration.

I was very much leaning towards Newt by default but this reinforcement of his amnesty views and his cheap-labor guest worker program to undermine the American worker leaves me no choice but Flip Romney -- that is if I vote at all, very depressing.

cdm| 1.26.12 @ 11:42PM

Agreed about undermining the American worker.
So what's your opinion of Obama's proposal to use the tax system to reward companies who keep jobs here and penalize those who ship them overseas? Will that help solve the unemployment problem?

scotchieguy| 1.26.12 @ 10:07AM

A "better field of candidates?" Who in their right mind would voluntarily put themselves through 18 months of an asinine reality show that has become the American weeding out process to select a nominee? This is getting as never-ending as the playoffs in the NHL.

John - TMF| 1.26.12 @ 6:58AM

How suicidal are the Establishment types that they will now readily destroy the political party rather than nominate an outside of the Establishment nominee for the Presidency?

It's like the old comedy routine of the thief sticking up the liquor store while holding a gun to his own head, screaming "HANDOVER THE CASH OR I'LL PULL THE TRIGGER!!!!"

Fred Thompson, Dr. Thomas Sowell, Gov. Rick Perry (who I used to support), and even Chuck Norris think that Newt is their man. Todd Palin is on the Newt bus, too.

The GOP Establishment continues its political party suicide run at full throttle. That's what you get for backing a Wall Street Limousine Liberal Democrat for the Republican Nomination...

Cao. TMF

Patrick| 1.26.12 @ 7:19AM

Newt IS the Establishment. Just because he picked up some names doesn't make it any less so. That the Establishment was impressed with how well Romney wears a Brooks Bros. suit doesn't change that they are both creatures of the Establishment.

Even so, Newt is a dirty, dirty whore.

Pete| 1.26.12 @ 8:50AM

The establishment hate Newt which is quite obviously and nonsensical name calling like dirty whore is so over the top that it makes you look small minded and deceitful.

Dmac| 1.26.12 @ 10:04AM

The establishment doesn't care about party, they care about money, end of story. The establishment as you put it is not party affiliated anymore, the establishment owns bot parties, thats why you can hardly tell them apart. That's why Congress vagina for a Speaker of the House.

Old Soldier| 1.26.12 @ 2:39PM

They hate Newt despite the fact that he has been an insider since the 70's - maybe because he's a caustic ass.

Drunken Sailor| 1.26.12 @ 10:27AM

Show me a politician that has never been a whore and I'll vote for them. Until then, they are all whores, some just pull it off better.

paul3165| 1.28.12 @ 3:36AM

All the establishment types like Dole, McCain, Sununu are supporting Romney. Outsiders like Sarah Palin are against Romney.

Winghunter| 1.26.12 @ 6:59AM

Another insult thrown by yet another pundit who is suffering from the reality that their bias is being refused as the internet is providing the capable for their own governance.

A quick reminder; WE didn't choose these RINO losers and fools! They were handed to us by the GOP and RNC. We'll be taking them back.

AND Billy was a lot of things (including a serial rapist) but, he was never 'brainey' nor 'drop-dead beautiful'. A manipulator isn't intelligent, it's a prefailed character flaw. And why are you stuck on the Enemedia lie that he was just a philanderer? And we know the reasons Hillary didn't leave him and one of them is that she has better looking girlfriends (read: victims) than he does.

Ryan was wrong to attempt to rework state run healthcare. It must be market based. Period.

We know from several trusted sources exactly what Newt's record is and what you're offering to smear him ain't it.

Santorum, Paul nor Mittens are NOT Conservative - We've done our homework and know this!

We also know we're not in for an easy ride with Newt but, you better get used to the idea as that's exactly what's going to happen!

Patrick| 1.26.12 @ 7:22AM

What kind of crazy are you from? Does "conservative" sit next to Nancy Pelosi or gibber on about the horrors of Global Warming?

No, Newt is a filthy whore.

Simon Templar| 1.26.12 @ 9:11AM

Does a conservative help frame and pass a state health care bill that is used as a model for the national one? Does a conservative distance himself from the Tea party and have a political record that is indistinguishable from a liberal democrat?

I will take the guy of the couch if that is my only choice? Please spare us the conservative crap.You do not want a conservative you want a moderate progressive Republican from the east coast. If you were a Ron Paul supporter than at least you would make some sense.

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 10:08AM

Come on, Simon. Does an alleged conservative support the individual mandate or Medicare Part D, both of which Newt supported? Newt and Mitt are equally flawed when it comes to conservative bona fides. Given that, I prefer the fundamentally decent guy who I think has a better shot at beating Obama than the personally flawed candidate.

Pete| 1.26.12 @ 11:44AM

Does a conservative support the FDA, the Department of Education, the EPA etc? Yet which ones have they been trying to eliminate?

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 11:55AM

I think you may have missed my point. Both frontrunners are equally wanting in the conservatism department. Given that I will never sit this election out and that neither candidate is a true conservative, my decision comes down to character. I find Mitt's character preferable to Newt's and think Mitt will attract more voters if he is our nominee.

paul3165| 1.28.12 @ 3:38AM

Does a conservative pass univeral healthcare which is the biggest attack on freedom we've ever had?

Renaissance Nerd| 1.26.12 @ 9:06AM

There is no conspiracy to put McCain or Romney or anybody else in the nomination. You'll notice that none of the pundits writing against Newt did the same thing to Bachman or Perry or Cain. Each of them managed to alienate VOTERS all by themselves, even Cain--if he had stuck to his guns I would stuck with him. All of the candidates put themselves forward, and have to convince voters to vote for them, no matter what any 'establishment' says or does. You know why Romney has 72 congressional endorsements? He campaigned for a bunch of congress critters for the last election cycle. He's established his own coattails, got down in the mud and fought for quite a few, and they're grateful. He went out and demonstrated his utility to the party, which is why so many in his camp.

If you don't like him don't vote for him in your primary. But enough with all the conspiracy theory crap.

Vern Crisler| 1.26.12 @ 9:16AM

Dittos Winghunter....

Mimi| 1.26.12 @ 7:13AM

Pardon me, Mr Tyrrell but WHY did you wait until NOW to come out with this? Newt has been running for a long time. To wait until we are down to 3 viable candidates and one Libertarian to choose from is incredible!!

Patrick| 1.26.12 @ 7:26AM

Because before this point, Newt was too busy on vacation to run seriously. That we've been stuck with a bunch of third rate candidates from day 1 is the crux of the problem.

Even so, I will never vote for Newt.

Bob K.| 1.26.12 @ 7:51AM

Actually RETJr. is acting as the point man here; a John the Baptist, you might say, for a savior who will come in and rescue the Republican party. Newt is a mess. Paul is unacceptible. Santorum and Romney are, like McCain, unable to enthuse the party's base.

KennesawJack| 1.26.12 @ 10:20AM

Obamarx sends you his heartfelt thanks.

Pete| 1.26.12 @ 8:48AM

Because now they are getting desperate. Heaven forbid the people actually choose the candidate.

Ken (Old Texican)| 1.26.12 @ 7:15AM

Emmett,
I am astonished at this column. I totally disagree, not only with the tone, but the specious arguments.

Newt got tangled up with two gold-digger wives.
End of story.

Patrick| 1.26.12 @ 7:20AM

While digging for my gold himself. Whores go for whores.

Drunken Sailor| 1.26.12 @ 10:29AM

You have a thing for whore's apparently. Go find you one and get over your obsession.

paul3165| 1.28.12 @ 3:40AM

Aren't you pimping for Romney?

Pam| 1.26.12 @ 3:22PM

And, if true, this means that he doesn't have good judgment. Besides, his first wife married him when he was 19 and not exactly gold digger material. As for the other two, you're probably right. Again, though, it doesn't make me think "poor Newt." It makes me think "sucker!"

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 5:47PM

"Newt got tangled up with two gold-digger wives.
End of story."

Of course Ken knows this for a FACT. Heh.
AND apparently, Ken Married a successful business woman.. does this mean Ken is a gold digger himself? And about whom he likes to share his pet name for here.. I wonder how she'd appreciate that?

Say Ken the Reprobate: Where's those e mails you said you had to "prove" your false accusations against me?

Oops, changed your story how many times now??

"He who speaks the truth gives honest evidence, but a false witness utters deceit." Prov. 12:17.

You're a fraud.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 7:25PM

G*d has spoken, Ken. Margie said you're a "fraud" & a "reprobate."

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 8:10PM

God has spoken here concerning what He does with liars and false accusers: Rev. 21:8.
He throws them into the Lake of Fire.
But you have no fear of Him, and became a Jew because, as you said, they reject Jesus, and you don't want Jesus.
God? He says you're a liar:

"Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son." 1 Jn.2:22.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 8:46PM

So all us Jews are "liars."

You're an f-ing fraud, Margie. Go cash your unemployment check, haint.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 9:29PM

VILE.
And since I do not get unemployment checks, I cannot cash them.
I'm almost 60 years old. I collected unemployment once in my life, when a company I worked for in NYC relocated to another state. And I didn't like doing it, but I did it, for 6 mos. It was 20 years ago.
I am a home owner, and I work for myself from home, which gives me lots of time to go online.
I see that you do as well.
Do YOU work??
And I have never taken welfare, either, and never will.
God always makes a way.
You're the FRAUD, you vile piece of work.
I hope you repent.
But, as long as you keep lying, you WILL go to Hell.
God says so.
Rev. 21:8.

W| 1.26.12 @ 10:33PM

MullahMargie
Is it your husband receiving the $549 per week since August 2009 in unemployment as your post indicates?

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 9:33PM

"So all us Jews are "liars."

Go talk to Jesus, Who is the Truth, Whom YOU deny, and Whom you and ALL of us will have to stand before.

You read His Words, above.

YOU are calling Him a fraud, not me, for they are HIS Own Words.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 9:58PM

"You're an f-ing fraud, Margie."

Really? Well, kiddo. My husband did a little research on you, since you posted your name here, and looked up some of your posts elsewhere.

In FACT, you are the fraud here. You were a Catholic who was christened or baptized in the Catholic church, but left it because you wanted to become a Jew in order to be able to reject Christ.

And yet, you have the gall to call me a fraud?

Not only are you a liar and a fraud, but a blatant hypocrite, pretending to be something you're not.

Neither a real Jew, nor a Christian.
Little man.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 10:16PM

Hey, Charlatan, I wan't raised in the Catholic church & never spent ONE Sunday there. THE CHOICE WAS LEFT TO ME BECAUSE I CAME FROM A MIXED MARRIAGE, for the umpteenth time. Who the F**K are YOU OR VIC to question that? My parents also taught me to despise bigots, which you most certainly are. You didn't look shit up. I sent you an email telling you that.

You & Vic can blow it out your asses. Unless you guys morphed into Richard & Annette Frankel, your opinion of the choice left to me by them doesn't mean ANYTHING. Neither of you 2 bumpkins are fit to shine their shoes anyways.

Apostate.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 10:56PM

You sent us no e mail. I never got an e mail from you, punk.
Filthy, vile little man. What a haughty little twerp you are~ YOU who reject Christ~ and openly, and accuse me and lie repeatedly about me here~ and yet YOU have the gall to say to me, "Who are You to judge?"

Your morals are in the toilet, punk.

You're a total fraud.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 11:05PM

Your opinion of me means as much as the turds I flush every morning.

W| 1.26.12 @ 10:30PM

MullahMargie
So now you are the authority on who is a "real Jew" and who is a Christian?
You do not believe in the Trinity and you do not believe that Jesus is God, which are the basic tenets of Christianity, so how can you judge who is a Christian when you are not a Chistian?

So you now believe people convert to the Jewish faith to reject Jesus Christ?

If your husband is the one receiving the $549 per week since August 2009 in Unemployment comp, as your post last week indicates, then I can see why you and he have so much free time to research the religous background of others. Maybe looking for a job would be more productive?

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 10:46PM

Nah, W. They're too busy weaving blankets outta belly button lint & perfecting their Kool Aid recipe for their cult of 2. They've been saving those unemployment checks to buy a nice abandoned compound in Guyana.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 10:57PM

"W" scum:

No, it is the twerp Con Artist Chef who said he was a Jew, but isn't. He's the one who said it, yet he is not a real Jew by birth.

He's a liar, like you, who rejects the Scriptures and gets off on denigrating Christians.

Rev. 21:8~ read it and weep.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 11:04PM

Oh, so now a shikse is the arbiter of who's a "Jew" or not when they come from a mixed marriage. This gets better & better.

Stupid shikse.

W| 1.26.12 @ 11:07PM

MullahMargie
So a "real Jew" is only one by birth?
How about answering the unemployment question, is it your husband? What does the bible say about the 30 months of comp paid by us taxpayers?

cdm| 1.26.12 @ 11:51PM

This is the biggest fucking waste of electrons I've ever seen. Get a life, all of you!

W| 1.27.12 @ 8:37AM

cdm
responding to a bigot like margie is not a waste of electrons or anything else.

Margie| 1.27.12 @ 2:25PM

SCUM W:

You're a lying little punk. It's all you do.
Burn in Hell, along with your false accuser pals.
Rev. 21:8.

And, the Jews say unless your Mom is Jewish, you're not a Jew.
I'm not "judging" him, you scumbag.

But then, you already knew that, didn't you, freak Troll?

AND: God's definition of a Jew, according to Scripture, is the following, which you SHOULD also know, but are a liar and a hypocrite who is too busy trying to trash me because I'm a Christian and not a Pope worshipper like yourself to know or care about the TRUTH:

"He is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God." Rom. 9:29.

I could care less what he is or what you are, as you wish to be amongst the liars and slanderers that God promises to throw into Hell~ that's your "choice". Rev. 21:8.

And He PROMISES to throw liars and slanderers there.
So, lotsa luck.

My point about the Troll Con Artist Chef is that he's a blatant liar and hypocrite, here to try and trash Christians because they aren't Catholic, along with yourself and the few other nasty Idolators who reject the Scriptures.

He says he's a Jew, but he isn't a Jew. He says I'm an Apostate and yet he openly states he DENIES the Divinity of Christ.

What utter fools you both are.

You really believe you are going to get away with your blatant lying and hypocrisy??
LOL!!

W| 1.27.12 @ 8:28PM

MullahMargie,
Hey parasite, you still evading the question of who received the unemployment comp of $549 per week since august 2009 that you posted under your name last week. You say it is not you but you do not deny it is your husband, victor? Come clean Parasite.
What does your bible say about having the taxpayers paying someone $549 per week since aug 2009?

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 7:28PM

Like that unemployment info you never posted? The stuff with your SSN on it?

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 8:11PM

Again, you're lying here. I answered your question, but you don't care because you simply hate me.
So, suit yourself.
Liars burn in Hell.
Get ready.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 8:48PM

Know who else goes to Hell? Pompous bitches who claim to speak for G*d. Also known as a charlatan.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 9:23PM

Christians speak in Scriptures, kiddo. That's what makes us Christian.

Con Artist Chef.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 9:33PM

So why is YOUR interpretation ANY better than those of others? WHO writes the Bible, Margie? Men do. You are no more an authority on what G*d wants than anyone else.

Charlatan.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 9:38PM

I don't interpret anything, I just post what God says, and what Jesus says as written in the Bible.

For example:

"For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.

For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.

He who believes in Him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the Name of the only Son of God.

And this is the Judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

For every one who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light, lest his deeds should be exposed.

But he who does what is true comes to the Light, that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been wrought in God." Jn. 3:16-21.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 10:20PM

Man wrote the Bible. Inspired by G*d, yes. But men nontheless.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 10:51PM

And God is perfect, is He not? And His Spirit is perfect.
And He appointed men to write His Own Words.
Each of us only has one real "choice" we are able to make in our lives.
And that is whether or not we choose Him. And He sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Rom. 3:25.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 11:01PM

Men are not perfect. That's why He's G*d & we're not.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 11:16PM

God uses the most imperfect of men (and women) to preach His Word. And He used the worst of the worst to be His Apostles.
Like Paul, who used to persecute Christians before God called Him and opened His spiritual eyes.

And He calls Christians to preach His Word, and STRONGLY stand on Scriptures in the face of contempt, which you dish out here to me on a regular basis.

And I'm not trying to convert you. God does it if He so chooses. It isn't up to me.
I'm just answering you back.. to your filthy mouth, false accusations and utter hypocrisy.

You began your tirade against me here weeks ago. And for no good reason, except that you jumped on the bandwagon of the Reprobate liar, Ken, after he falsely accused me here.
But it really seems to me, that your beef is with God, ad His Son, and not with me.
So, if you insist on attacking my person every day, I'll keep pointing out what a little twerp you are.

W| 1.26.12 @ 11:09PM

MullahMargie
But you do not believe that Jesus is God and you do not believe in the Trinity. Skip the cut and paste bible, and speak in English.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 11:26PM

Skip the lying and go straight to Hell.
Rev. 21:8.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 11:49PM

Where's he lying?

W| 1.27.12 @ 8:40AM

MullahMargie,
Since you are an unrepentant bigot I will ask you each time you post here the same questions that you refuse to answer and point out what a fraud and bigot you are.
Got that Mullah, now go play with your snakes.

Margie| 1.27.12 @ 2:27PM

I'm no bigot, but I love the God of the Bible, and in Jesus Christ His Son, according to all that is written in the Scriptures.

You sir, are an unrepentant, filthy, lying hypocrite and anti-Christ.

W| 1.27.12 @ 8:32PM

MullahMargie
You are an unrepentant bigot. You are now the self appointed Mullah of who is a Jew and who is a Christian.
You are also a stupid bigot. You posted under your name confirmation of unemployment comp for $549 per week since aug 2009. Now you evade the questions.
Go play with your snakes, bigot.

Konnie| 1.27.12 @ 10:09PM

Margie, when you start spewing all this, I skip everything you have to say. Not that I don't believe in the Bible, but please read the part in the Bible that says, "Be as wise as serpents and harmless as doves." Chill, lady.

W| 1.26.12 @ 10:24PM

MullahMargie
You still have not answered who is receiving the $549 per week since Aug 2009 in unemployment comp.
Is it your husband,Victor, or you?

Come clean, Mullah, if you intend to preach to us about conservatism and working.

What does your bible say about someone who receives unemployment comp for 30 months paid by the taxpayers?

Afraid to answer, Mullah?

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 7:17AM

I pray we send Newt back to private life where he can cheat on his wife, think grandiose thoughts, betray conservative principles, lobby Fannie/Freddie, conjure up faux outrage and be petty and vindictive to his heart's content. Nominating Newt assures Obama's reelection.

Au Contraire| 1.26.12 @ 8:13AM

Hear, hear!

Just looking at Gingrich nauseates me.

Dmac| 1.26.12 @ 10:06AM

Then looking at Obama must make you go into convulsions?

scotchieguy| 1.26.12 @ 10:39AM

Nominating Newt or Mitt assures Obama's reelection. We all know that, the problem is it is McCain/Dole/Ford/Bush 41 with Mitt, and a Hail Mary with Newt. Newt will at least go down swinging. The one thing Rush keeps saying is Newt is merely a "vessel" we are using to express our anger with the dem hacks in the MSM who have refused to vett their boy-president. Maybe he will get the base so fired up we will find a better, more conservative, ELECTABLE candidate.

martin j smith| 1.26.12 @ 7:47AM

I support Newt over Romney and the more smearing of Newt the more I support him. Its not that I think Newt is a paragon of virtue its that I think the smearing factor stinks and I am tired of this. Prove that any one else has better policies, is better at going after Obama, can make a good case for a Free Market Economy and for a Pro-American attitude. I think that this piece is another example of evading the real issues namely what does Romney have to offer in the matters I state. Nothing !!!!!!!!!

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 7:59AM

Romney might not excite the base but most will vote for him to oust Obama. I know of no independent or Reagan Democrat who voted for Obama last time who would ever be enticed to vote for Gingrich. That's the problem when you are, as Mark Steyn described Gingrich, a lily-livered ninny who has masqueraded as a hard-line, right- winger.

Pete| 1.26.12 @ 8:44AM

No they won't. Most will sit home. Romney is the loser who lost to the loser to Obama. He lack passion and conviction. Romney will not be able to debate ObamaCare or Cap and Trade or abortion. He will do as Mc Cain did and just let Obama look credible.

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 8:51AM

I have to be pragmatic here. My focus is entirely on defeating Obama and see no way that will be accomplished with Newt as the nominee. Any conservative who sits it out with Romney will be more than made up for with disaffected Reagan Democrats. Romney is woefully imperfect but the best we have this go-round.

Renaissance Nerd| 1.26.12 @ 9:10AM

And besides, anyone who sits out this election because they don't like Romney will never be able to call anybody else a RINO or CINO--because they will have proved themselves just that. I don't need anybody to enthuse me. I voted for McCain, and he would've been 10x better than Obama. I'll vote for Romney if he's the nominee, and I'll vote for Gingrich if he wins. I'd even vote for Paul if I had to. Staying home is only an option for poseurs.

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 9:41AM

Absolutely. Obviously, I prefer Mitt to Newt but if Newt's the nominee, he gets my vote.

Pete| 1.26.12 @ 11:46AM

And the same thing will happen as 2008. Obama gets elected. Romney means another failed election.

Mike| 1.26.12 @ 9:37AM

The more smearing of Newt,the more you support him. That is certainly a rational argument for this illegal alien loving, Puerto Rico statehood loving, global warming loving toad. I am convinced. I, too will vote for Newt.

martin j smith| 1.26.12 @ 7:49AM

John-TMF--You are o right on. Sometimes I think this element of the Republican Leadershit really is in collusion with Obama and Socialists have no intention of defeating Obama. Look at the WSJ op ed --Republicans Deserve to lose. Look at FOX NEWS--its right out there. I vote no confidence for the current Leadershit of the RP

Pete| 1.26.12 @ 8:47AM

Republicans lust for the power that Obama collected. They just think they can manage it better. Romney is the one they annointed and they will try to rip anyone who stands up to him.

POST American| 1.26.12 @ 7:50AM

Two PRIME players from the very
heyday of the CFR-Rockefeller
RED China handover,
sellout and TREASON OP.

SO, feast your eyes on the authorized.
yet at large EYE--CONS and keep on
buying into the CON kiddies----

------------------JUST KEEP ON GOIN!

Tim the Enchanter| 1.26.12 @ 2:37PM

Huh?

POST American| 1.26.12 @ 7:54AM

"And remember, PSYCHOPATHS
always worship power ----and those
above. . ."

And feast your eyes ---on those eyes!

Merge that with his legacy of sellout,
Globalism and his 'warm' work promoting
the capstone EUGENICS agendas of the
Toffler's et al ------and you have the man!

Tim the Enchanter| 1.26.12 @ 2:38PM

and... Huh? again!

NVA Patriot| 1.26.12 @ 8:06AM

Patrick - commenting Whore repeatedly doesn't make it so and by your standard of whore - DC is full of them.

Clinton gave us a balanced budget and welfare reform. Romney gave us Romney care and Bain Capital. Bain capital is best characterized as crony vulture capitalism. Bain donates democrat and sends jobs overseas - GREAT.\sarc

Newt may not be perfect but his policy solutions implemented, trump Romney policy implemented. In realityville, results matter.

RustyG| 1.26.12 @ 8:09AM

Newt is starting to get slapped around from a lot of folks who know him well. Check out the interview Tom Delay did on the Michael Berry radio show yesterday.

http://www.ktrh.com/pages/mich.....le=9666278

John - TMF| 1.26.12 @ 8:19AM

You mean Tom "Earmark - K-Street Juice" Delay?

Right... Delay was in on the Establishment Coup attempt back in the '90's. His House Majority Leadership during the Bush administration was marked by a complete abandonment of what Gingrich had tried to put into place; spending discipline and pork denial.

Before referencing Delay check out why he was driven out of office. The prosecution was over the top, but the shades have to be pulled down pretty tight to attract that sort of attention.

Gingrich's persecutors back then, come back to throw more of their manure knowing that most folks won't remember what they actually did. The Mainstream/DNC Propaganda mill media certainly isn't going to correct the memory lapse.

-TMF

RustyG| 1.26.12 @ 8:40AM

Damn John..... You DO realize that most of what you just said about Delay is also true of Newt.... RIGHT. Listen to it and judge for yourself. Don't be scared to hear someones thoughts.

JimH| 1.26.12 @ 8:18AM

Newt, like many intelligent, talented people is deeply flawed. Some might say he is in fact a bad (though not evil) man. Supposing he can be elected, and as long as he applies his talents for the country does this mean he can’t be a good president? As was said of a former dictator we backed: he’s a SOB but he is our SOB. BTW, when speaking of endorsements, I heard Chuck Norris is backing Newt. If true, who else does he need?

Pete| 1.26.12 @ 8:40AM

Notice that as soon as any candidate challenges Romney, the GOP insiders start the slur campaign. The more desperate they get the more hyperbole they use.
What people like Tyrell fail to realize is that they not only insult Newt, but in the process they insult the rest of us. It is though we are so stupid we can't make up our own mind.
We have Drudge dumping on Newt for comments on Reagan. Lets see what party did Romney belong to when Reagan was President? What Democrats was Romney contributing to?
From where I sit there is no difference between Tyrell and any left wing hack.

Pam| 1.26.12 @ 3:14PM

The reason Drudge is posting those items is because Newt has been comparing himself to Reagan. I don't care for Mitt, either. However, Newt has done his share of cozying up to liberal Democrats.

Simon Templar| 1.26.12 @ 8:44AM

Mr. Tyrell,

Just how do you sleep at night? Comfy in your swank townhouse in Washington DC? Have you ever been visited by the ghost of the founding fathers?
You know... sometimes I really just do not know whether you or the utopian big goverment democrats are my worse enemy. The founding fathers certainly warned us about them but I am not sure they had any idea about the likes of you and your pals in the beltway..perhaps Benedict Arnold comes close. You like most fake modern conservatives can sit there with a straight face and tell your readers that Romney is a truer conservative than Newt, tout conservative rhetoric, and compare Clinton to Newt as one in the same. Castro as detestable as he is, is right, it is a contest and show of idiots.

Newt may not be the best pick one might want as president and he may indeed have flaws as a person and a politician but these lame arguments, smears, hypocricy, and distortion of the truth is really incomprehensible. Every time you people open your mouths on these web sites, you put another nail in the coffin of a free republic and constitutionally limited government. This is a game with you and truth is the last thing that you want entering this arena. You are adding nothing to the cause of conservativism, an informed public, or the workings of a free press.

Really what is the difference between you and liberal press boy King and all the other talking heads that "guide us?" At least liberal press boy knows what side of history and political movement he is a part of and knows how to protect his own rather than eat them alive. He knows enough to not give an inch to his opposition and knows how to promote his objectives without destroying himself and his comrades.

Please spare us the tired old response that you are just trying to vet these candidates and get to the bottom of the truth about each of them. It is not about the truth of anything, it is about you, your carreer, your townhouse, your agenda, and the agenda of your fellow elites.

steve| 1.26.12 @ 9:46AM

What are the "distortions of the truth?"

Drunken Sailor| 1.26.12 @ 10:36AM

Right on Simon. I read R.E.T.'s article and then I re-read a Thomas Sowell article endorsing Newt and it's like I'm reading about two seperate canidates. Someone has a agenda and seeing how Newt getting elected would not benifit Mr. Sowell, I can't help but wonder what is going on.

Old Soldier| 1.26.12 @ 2:52PM

A calm assessment of Gingrich's career does not reveal a conservative. He talks the talk, but his mind wanders into grandiose fantasies.

Conservatives didn't vote to create the Department of Education, didn't support the big expansion of Medicare, don't work for Fannie Mae, and don't want to expand the power of the federal government.

He just isn't conservative. Between Newt, Romney, and Santorum, we can debate who has slightly more conservative tendencies. It's hardly worth getting worked up about.

W| 1.26.12 @ 4:16PM

Newt's voting record in Congress is conservative. His problems are caused by his speeches where he says a lot of different stuff and you can always find something to criticize. He likes to toss out ideas to discuss, it does not mean he would try to enact them into laws.
Also he seemed to antagonize his fellow Republican and conservative members in the House and they would not vote again for him as Speaker.

Mimi| 1.26.12 @ 5:13PM

What is going on..? Looks like they are ganging up on Newt ! This whole thing wwill be decided by the REPUBLICAN Primary voters....Not pundits ! Newt put himself out there to run...a lot of work and hassle, with cruel UPS and DOWNS.
In S.C. last Saturday he won over Romney with 12% and carrying all counties but 3.
Here is a man who has SERVED this nation well and for Years...You would think they would be grateful!

Pat Hickey| 1.26.12 @ 8:55AM

Solid, Bob, solid!

Let’s see in November. Personally, I will vote for Vernon Supreme, Jesse L. Jackson, Bob the Extenz Guy, or Joy Behar over President Obama. I am voting against the Horse in order to dump the DNC ( Planned Parenthood, LGBTQ, ACLU, SEIU) cart.
.

Dave| 1.26.12 @ 9:05AM

Another "conservative" magazine from the DC establishment attacking Newt. Go figure! If it's Romney I will go 3rd party, screw the GOP!

Renaissance Nerd| 1.26.12 @ 9:12AM

Why not just vote for Obama, since that's obviously what you long to do?

David| 1.26.12 @ 10:36AM

That is a non argument. Voting for Romney is the same as voting for Obama so I will vote 3rd party for someone I believe in. Didn't you read the article by Romney's advisors who basically said he will propose $2 per gallon gas tax, VAT tax and will NOT repeal Obamacare or did you just ignore it like you Romneybots have been doing with Romney's record as Governor?

Konnie| 1.27.12 @ 10:15PM

David, please don't go 3rd party, just go ahead and pull the lever for Obama. That's what a 3rd party vote does...elect the bad guy. Read up on the Bush/Perot/Clinton election. Clinton would never have happened when he did without 3rd party Perot.

OLDRAY| 1.26.12 @ 9:08AM

Mr Tyrrell...Thank you for your article. You have cleared up a puzzle. Now I understand. You prefer Ron Paul to Newt ("I like them all"). I could never figure out Hillyer's articles and the great reception center AS has become for the foulest collection of pro Ron Paul kooks I have yet run across. I didn't know that you and Nancy Pelosi were on the same team. Well, live and learn.

Otis the Hand| 1.26.12 @ 9:11AM

I can't beleive that RET can comfortably draw this parallel knowing almost first-hand the extent of Clinton's depravity, having had sex with dozens of women at a minimum, possibly in the hundreds. Clinton's sexual proclivities aside, his other conduct was far worse, and Monica Lewinsky almost provides welcome cover for Bill's real crimes.

RET ignores Gingrich's conservative wins, and the fact that he has a 90 pervent ACU rating.

RET ignores Mitt's conservative infidelities on AGW, abortion, and gun rights. Romney's gun rights problem is most notable, being largely ignored by all the candidates for some reason.

RET also leaves out Gingrich's conversion experience (http://www.newt.org/news/pastor-jim-garlow-explains-why-he-supports-newt). I'm a different man than I was twenty years ago, and I believe that Gingrich is as well. Gingrich has already shown a willingness to correct his course immediately when confronted by conservative critics on issues (Rubio incident.) Gingrich has an entriely different attitude than Clinton. Gingrich actually admits and repents of his wrongdoing, rather than defend it.

Could Gingrich be taking us all for a ride? It is possible. But Romney is a sure bet for failure. His effete, polite approach to governence is already percieved as weakness by Democrats. Romney is another moderate republican appeaser, who thinks that he can further his agenda through cooperation and "crossing the aisle." He has explcicity said so. Romnney, in one of the debates, declared "I had the disadvantage of some respects of becoming governor and a state with a legislature 85 percent Democrat. It turned out to be a blessing in disguise. To get anything done, I had to learn how to get respect of the speaker of the house and the senate president and Democratic leaders. I found a way to do that, to find common ground from time to time. And when crisis arose, we were able to work together. That is what has to happen.

There are Democrats who love America as Republicans do, but we need to have a leader in the White House, that knows how to lead."

Got that? "Leadership" according to Romney is finding common ground with the side that wants to destroy us. At least, Gingrich shows a willingness to fight.

Todd S| 1.26.12 @ 1:54PM

Newt will stab a good Republican like Paul Ryan in the back if it is not his idea because he is an egomaniac. Find me one conservative Republican that worked with Newt back when he was Speaker that supports him? None that I have heard as of yet, that says it all to me.

paul3165| 1.28.12 @ 3:50AM

I answered your other post about this. J.C. Watts, who's an ordained minister, and had a 94 % ACU rating. When he endorsed Newt, he said he wasn't looking for a president to be his savior or pastor. That's good enough for me.

Mimi| 1.26.12 @ 5:28PM

Good Post...Newt has matured, grown in spirit, has tons of ways to open the many doors in Washington to help this country....how can you trust the judgement of TAS big boys.... they do not allow the PEOPLE to choose ... and do not realize we will VOTE our freedom....of choice as informed citizens. If their objections were more honest and fair we could maybe accept and take their view serious. The brutal way is not valid....as Hillyer's LIZARDRY !

Leah| 1.26.12 @ 10:03PM

Excellent comment and analysis Otis. RET's article stunned me in its nastiness. When he commented on BJC he at least used humor. There was no humor at all in his vicious diatribe on Newt. I never would have guessed he harbored such hatred for Newt as was evident in the article. Thanks for your comments.

al222| 1.26.12 @ 9:15AM

Emmett:
Maybe it's me, but if you're trying to prevent Newt from being nominated by comparing him to another baby boomer with a lack of character, why would you pick the guy who was elected president in spite of those same character flaws?

Drunken Sailor| 1.26.12 @ 10:37AM

Twice no less.

Occam's Tool| 1.26.12 @ 11:09AM

Hmmm....seems to me that budget bills start in the House, that balanced budgets occurred during Clinton, that he signed budgets created by the House, and theat we had incredible prosperity during those Clinton years thanks, in great part, to the balanced budgets being created in the House of Representatives during that time---and the Speaker during that time was who?

Occam's Tool| 1.26.12 @ 11:11AM

sorry--not "theat," but "that."

I want to bash Iranian scum and balance my country's budget and get rid of ObamaCare and get a business boom started---"who ya gonna call?"

"Newt Gingrich!"

Pam| 1.26.12 @ 2:55PM

You might as well call Ghostbusters. They'd probably be more reliable. Do you think "bashing Iranian scum" (AKA getting involved in yet another expensive war) might be in direct conflict with your desire to balance the budget. We're bankrupt. Keep that in mind.

ER| 1.26.12 @ 9:17AM

Yikes! A hit piece worthy of Politico; The Republican who authored the Contract with America, the same as a Democrat who pushed for HillaryCare?!!? Seems the Conservative blogs are moving away from reporting and revealing, to , 'gulp', campaigning. Level heads might want to regard this Tyrell tabloid piece as freeway noise. Newt is speaking up; he is megaphoning the things I would like to shout daily; we on the RIGHT do not need to stoop to , "I know something you don't know" journalism. Obama is toast, so let us listen as the GOP dukes it out, and may the most Conservative candidate win; and may Conservatism triumph and save the GOP.

David T| 1.26.12 @ 9:23AM

Mr. Tyrrell--The difference between Gingrich and Clinton is that Newt has repented of his sins and is now working out his salvation through Mother Church. That might not be reason enough to vote for him, but it's certainly a good reason to stop crucifying him.

Todd S| 1.26.12 @ 2:11PM

How do you know Gingrich repented of his sins? Because he joined the Catholic Church? Did he say enough Hail Mary's and now everything is cool with him and God? Maybe he did repent but only God knows for sure but his character is forever stained to trust as President.

David T| 1.26.12 @ 3:03PM

Confession and repentance are necessary before one is baptized a Catholic, but you're right, of course, that only God knows for sure if one has truly repented. As for Gingrich's fitness for the presidency, the voters will decide.

Todd S| 1.26.12 @ 3:30PM

I could overlook his mistakes of the past and that he has learned from them and been somewhat humbled but I don't see it. This is a guy that was getting paid off by Freddie Mac before the crash to prevent having their "business model" questioned, sat on the couch with Pelosi to warn us about global warming and said Paul Ryan's carefully considered plan to get entitlements under control was "social engineering". I don't know if he stopped his cheating ways or not but I see he is basically still a selfish egomaniac who shows very little respect for real conservatives. So I don't think he is any more conservative than Romney really when it comes down to it however he talks.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 5:37PM

Let us hope that Newt is actually working out his sin between him and God through Jesus Christ, not a Religion, which cannot save.

Jesus, the ONLY Mediator between God and Man. 1 Tim. 2:5.

Pam| 1.26.12 @ 2:52PM

His salvation is between Newt and God. The issue here isn't just his serial infidelity; it is, more importantly, his pursuit of what is best for Newt instead of what is best for America. He has no abiding principles, other than to promote himself.

David T| 1.26.12 @ 3:08PM

So, then, you support Mitt "Which Way is the Wind Blowing" Romney?

ncatty| 1.26.12 @ 9:35AM

The glory days of AmSpec, and there were indeed glorious days, appear to be over.

Peppermint Tea| 1.26.12 @ 9:37AM

Newt is like Clinton?
Nothing new here, folks.
By the way, CHARACTER DOES MATTER. Presidents don't change who they are when they take the oath. Mr. Obama is still a secretive, affirmative action child, who hides his addictions well (tobacco, etc.) behind his pompous speeches, "It's not class warfare, it's common sense," and blames "the man" for all the problems in the world, and blames The Man for his problems.
Newt is about riding the wave of whatever is politically popular at the time. Yes health care, no Hillarycare, no Obamacare, yes global warming, yes balanced budget, no balanced budget, no global warming, etc.

VonMisesJr| 1.26.12 @ 9:37AM

The problem, Mr. Tyrrell; is that everyone is telling us how conservative Romney is but Romney.
Mitt will not admit RomneyCare was a mistake, and if you listen closely, he is telling us he will modify ObamaCare, not end it. Will we get a bipartisan RoBamaCare where the state enforces the mandates?
Santorum and Paul, both good men, have not convinced a majority of the people to support them. Romney can't secure the enthusiasm of 75% of the base. Newt is moving towards the halfway point in polls despite his warts and blemishes.
We have let the GOP pick the candidate since we elected Reagan over their objections. It appears that the Establishment has decided on Mitt, but we get to choose, not the insiders.

Dmac| 1.26.12 @ 9:49AM

"Today Mitt Romney has 72 Congressional endorsements. Newt has 11. Possibly the 11 have yet to meet him."
That is where I stopped reading the artice. With the approval rating of congress at what, 10% and knowing that most long term republican congressmen are RINO's why would I or any other real conservative care about Romney's congressional approval ratings? We don't. Yes Newt has his issues but he's a fighter. He will be less lkely to comrpomise anymore of our beleifs and rights away, whereas Romney has no fight in him, he's just another pleaser. That is pleaser of politicians, the elite and corporate Amrica.

POST American| 1.26.12 @ 9:52AM

------------------------TREASON ------------------------

---from Old French word
'Tradere' ---meaning to trade
-------------------------------handover
---------------------------------------surrender

In other words unaccountable, capstone
----------------FREE Traders----------------.

'FREE' traders who HANDED OVER,
SURRENDERED the entire US economy
at US taxpayer expense ---for
PRIVATE gain----and far more,
the establishment of ABSOLUTE,
unaccountable world 'govern-ANTS'
----and the agendas of FINAL EUGENICS.

"In the 20th century there were soveriegn
nations and armies to stand against Hitler's
FINAL solution. Once world government
is in place ---NO ONE will be able to STOP
the New World Order's plans for population
'reduction'."
-ENDGAME documentary
(10 MILLION views online)

WHY are the Clintons/ Bushes
and the likes of Gingrich, Gore and McCain
-----------------------------STILL AT LARGE?

AND ----WHY are we refusing to talk about it?

---------------------------WHY?---------------------------

Kade| 1.26.12 @ 10:02AM

One of the main reasons I was warming to Newt was the establishment media, and this includes Rush, was pushing for Romney and that Newt was a master of framing conservatism.

I thought we could push Newt to the right when he veers left, but his recent left wing hit on Romney being anti-immigrant reminded me that Newt is bi-polar and of his previous endorsement of super lefty Dede Scozzy.

Alas, neither Newt on Romney can be trusted. We The People are so screwed.

Otis the Hand| 1.26.12 @ 10:31AM

If you think Rush is pushing for Romney, you just have not been listening closely enough. Rush has decided to take a hands-off approach and let the people decide for themselves. He also seeks to avoid weakening Romney by refraining from harsh criticism in case he becomes the nominee. That is a wise course, and is no way the same as "pushing" for Romney. Rush has stated on numerous occasions that Romney is the establishment choice -- and Rush is no fan of establishment Republicans.

Kade| 1.26.12 @ 10:59AM

Rush is part of the big-money establishment though he cleverly says he is not.

Rush recently had his buddy Carl Rove as a substitute host. Rush always backs socialist Wall Street, which pushes for bailouts whenever the market goes south and is composed mainly Rockefeller Republicans and limousine liberals. Rush still backs the Bush big-money Dubai sellout of America.

Finally, Rush and Rove during a critical primary week led the bogus non-stop GOP establishment charge of deliberately distorting Newt’s legitimate criticism of Romney’s Bain Capitol tactics. Rush vehemently undercut Newt by falsely claiming that he was attacking capitalism -- a shallow, incoherent and ridiculous claim.

If Romney beats Newt we can partly thank El-Rushbo.

Kade| 1.26.12 @ 12:43PM

Rush is now quoting Drudge, NRO and this piece about how bad Newt is – piling on Newt. Newt is dead meat – alas, we are stuck with flip Romney. Pray for America.

Otis the Hand| 1.26.12 @ 2:57PM

You hear what you want to hear. Rush also said, "Newt is fighting for an ideal, Romney is fighting to get elected."

and

"They are clearing the field for Romney" in preparation for tonight's debate.

And pointed out that Nancy Reagan identified Newt as the obvious ideological heir of the Reagan legacy, and that Rush remembers Newt appointed himself the primary defender of Reagan during Special Orders on CNN.

Kade| 1.26.12 @ 4:22PM

I am not the only poster saying this. It is clear that Rush is in the tank for Romney. Rush though cleverly couches his views to make it appear he is not backing anyone in Republican primaries. Now if the Newt surge continues Rush will of course then back him otherwise he will lose his audience.

The one good thing about this brutal primary is that it has revealed the RINO pundits like Coulter masquerading as a conservative. Big money from We The People is what ties all these talkers together.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 5:33PM

I heard Rush's show today. He isn't "in the tank for Romney".
What IS clear about Rush, is he tells the TRUTH and reasonably speaks about ALL the candidates.
He doesn't care about keeping cool with people, he cares about the TRUTH, and I admire him for it.

Today, I heard him talk about both Newt AND Romney's foibles and gaffes, seeming and otherwise.

Rush lets the chips fall where they may. But he has also said that He'll be voting for whoever becomes the Republican nominee.. as we all should. That is, if we don't want another four more years of an unrepentant Marxist in the people's House.

Todd S| 1.26.12 @ 8:40PM

When you don't talk about religion you can actually make some good points, Rush can always be trusted to say it how it is and give the best political analysis anywhere. Kade is talking nonsense and is personally invested in Newt so cannot take a fair view on the matter.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 9:21PM

"When you don't talk about religion you can actually make some good points.."

Well I'm glad your highness thinks so. LOL.

I'm into the TRUTH. You just don't like it when I stand on the Scriptures because it disagrees with your Mormonism.

But I am in agreement with you about what you said about Rush.

As to Romney, he's not who I prefer but better than Obama.

I actually am liking Santorum's confidence these days and it's coming from faithfulness and steadfastness in his personal life.

I'm kind of rooting (and praying) for him to pull ahead.

With me, it isn't about Religion, (except if a Muslim tried to run for President).

For me, it's any Republican who's strong on Defense, for a free market, low taxes, and getting rid of all of the punishments put upon us by the Democrats over the years.

Newt, Santorum or Romney~ since these are our choices right now (I don't count Ron Paul), are far better than Obama, the untrepentant Marxist.

Did you listen to his Obama's speech?? It made me sick. This so called man has even more communist plans for us.

If we thought things couldn't get any worse~~ get ready.
More punishments to our freedoms that are left, more government take overs of whatever's left.

And after all, that's what Communism is all about, isn't it? The utter hatred and destruction of the individual and his freedom.

We need to VOTE for WHOEVER becomes the Republican nominee.

Anthony| 1.26.12 @ 9:59AM

Sorry to say Emmett, but you have engaged in dishonest and deceptive comparisons, which I once thought was beneath you.
Your sweeping and superficial analysis of Newt in comparsion to Clinton is sophomoric at best. It's easy to make sweeping generalizations about professional pols, hence creating a false similarity. One could easily do the same with journalists, eh?
For example, you claim both Cinton and Newt are narcissists, ok, fair enough, can you cite a pol of their generation that isn't? Are not Ron Paul and Romney not narcissists?
Did you not create TAS so that you would have a forum for your writings, as you once told us, is that not narcissistic?
Then you engage in the broadbrush smear, so popular with the left wing media, about women problems creating a moral equivilance between Clinton and Newt.
Tell us Emmett, does a sociopathic rapist really compare to a man thrice divorced? Is that how Washington insiders see things? Is this the facile thinking that justifies a moral equivilance in "waywardness and deviancy" between the two?
And how dare you insult our intelligence by citing the dispicable and disgusting Nancy Pelosi as a source of legitimate information about Newt. This I would expect from Chris Matthews, not you.
Pelosi has already "talked backed", as you folks say in Washington, her public threats about Newt, yet you have given this reprobate credence. Shame on you!!!
Newt ain't perfect, for sure, he's said and done things clearly not to my liking, but what pol in over 30 years doesn't have a similar record to pick over? I could do a credible hatchet job on Reagan if I was so inclined towards this type of dishonesty.
Then you have the gall to tell us that even Ron Paul has more character than Newt. Are you serious? A dangerous demigog, not unlike Obozo; is this the guy you want as our nominee before Newt???
You, Ann Coulter, and other Washington folks may indeed have the inside track on gossip about Newt, and may have had your encounters with Newt over drinks, not to your liking, but spare us your tawdry ad hominin attacks.
You and the rest of the Washington establishment may indeed get your wish for Romney as our nominee. We rubes however have seen this movie before, in 08, and know how it ends. Four more years of Obozo and America will end ,but you will have made your point about Newt. Congrats!!
And since you're so hung up on character, tell us Emmett, whose character does Romney have?
Well, this may be the last post of mine allowed, although I believe Emmett has more class than David Axelrod, but if I'm correct, it was fun my brothers and sisters. Keep the faith.

KennesawJack| 1.26.12 @ 10:26AM

And that, my friends, is called "being taken to the woodshed". Well done, Anthony!

Dmac| 1.26.12 @ 10:37AM

That last question Anthony, that IS a vert telling question. Whose character does Romney have? He has no ones character "my friend". He doesn't have a character of his own. He reminds me so much of "my friend" John McCain and he has no character either......"my friend".

Occam's Tool| 1.26.12 @ 11:12AM

You know, Churchill was a right bastard with all the charm of barbed wire, sometimes, as well.

Dmac| 1.26.12 @ 12:20PM

Exactly Occam, if I needed a morally spotless leader I'd trun to my pastor, and even he may have a skeleton or two in his closet.

Trish| 1.26.12 @ 9:34PM

Absolutely.

SUBVET| 1.26.12 @ 4:14PM

EMPTY SUIT.....Romney

Tommy Frisco| 1.26.12 @ 11:11AM

Awesome post, Anthony.

Jerry A. Kane| 1.26.12 @ 11:26AM

Amen brother!

AC| 1.26.12 @ 10:04AM

I'd rather have a bulldog than a golden retriever.

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 11:10AM

Not if more people hate bulldogs than golden retrievers.

Trish| 1.26.12 @ 9:35PM

I would rather have a bulldog than a lapdog.

Anommynous| 1.26.12 @ 10:20AM

Before Newt's Bain attacks, I would have supported him over Romney. Now it's a coin-flip. They both supported the individual mandate. He sat on the couch with Nancy. He derided Paul Ryan's plan right-wing social engineering. I feel trepidation about his character, and I do think he has traits of a narcissist in the mold of Bill Clinton. You Newt supporters tell me why I should support Newt over Mitt, because the decision isn't so obvious to me.

What Newt definitely has over the other candidates is his gift of gab, his command of the issues, his ability to think on his feet. But who expects Obama and the media to agree to Newt's rules? Obama's not going to agree to seven Lincoln-Douglas debates, and meanwhile Obama is going to use his massive war chest to continuously run ads that hammer Newt on all his baggage. If it worked for Mitt in Iowa, it will certainly work for Obama.

Rick Santorum is the most consistent conservative still in the race. Why has the conservative press decided to ignore him?

shoebox57| 1.26.12 @ 10:25AM

Santorum is a social conservative. Big spender on the fiscal side!

Anommynous| 1.26.12 @ 10:56AM

Santorum is the most vocal supporter of Paul Ryan's plans to reform entitlements. We know he will kill Obamacare, too. On the fiscal side, those are the things I'm looking for in the candidate, and Rick Santorum fits the bill. On foreign policy I'll side with him over Ron Paul any day of the week, and of course I agree with him on social issues. Even in his support for Medicate Part D, which overall is not a good bill, he can point to the good, market-based ideas like Health Savings Accounts (which I contribute to, love, and appreciate) and the choices offered under Medicare Advantage. Rick Santorum is not a perfect candidate, but his sins don't approach those of Newt and Romney.

Here's the bottom line. Because the "conservatives" chose style over substance and decided to rally to Newt over Santorum, Romney is now doing to Newt in Florida what he did in Iowa, pounding him and pounding him with negative ads, and the latest polls already show Romney has recaptured his lead and is winning by 8 points. Mitt is going to win Florida.

Old Soldier| 1.26.12 @ 2:59PM

Funny how he changed his tune AFTER losing his Senate seat. While in the Senate, he loved the spending.

Otis the Hand| 1.26.12 @ 10:42AM

Before throwing Newt overboard on his criticism of Bain, you should visit this blog (http://newtoniancapitalists.wordpress.com/) and carefully consider the context of that criticism, and evaluate whether private equity tactics are the same as actual free-market capitalism.

Old Soldier| 1.26.12 @ 3:01PM

Your last sentence made no sense. Free-market capitalism is a setting. Private equity is a method of adding value / making profit within that setting.

Otis the Hand| 1.26.12 @ 3:19PM

There's one in every crowd. In that case, Newt could not possibly have been attacking capitalism in his criticism of Bain. How about; are Romney's business tactics ethical within the framework of capitalism? And; how is capitalism properly defined? Read the blog.

shoebox57| 1.26.12 @ 10:24AM

So...... a little help here! Romney is unelectable, Newt is a Cad of the highest order, Santorum is also a big government Republican as in Medicare. Mr. Paul is true Constitutionalist whom like Romney is unelectable. Do I move to Canada where some sense of order and logic still prevails.

Dmac| 1.26.12 @ 10:41AM

No sir, not at all, thats what illegal aliens from Mexico do. Rather, you should have the courage to stay and if the politicians can not get their act together you do what your forefathers did. You hang them or send them home and keep them home for the rest of their lives. Thats what will keep us from becoming another third world country, our desire to stand up to the "establishment". We must be willing to fight for what we beleive in or we are no different than your average illegal alien.

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 10:42AM

Given that both Mitt and Newt have wandered off the conservative reservation on numerous occasions and to an equal extent, I'm going with the guy whose personality will repel fewer voters in the general election...and that's Romney.

Dmac| 1.26.12 @ 11:09AM

If Newt is repelling voters please explain how he won in S.C.? Or how he rose in the polls. The only people Newt is repelling are liberals, lazy people, and his own ex-wives.
Romney is liberal, more so than Newt. They're all too damn liberal for me, but at least New knows our history. He also knows who our internal enemies are and he's not afraid of them. His ego will not let him cowar down to them. Romney will melt like butter everytime the opposition cries foul.

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 11:14AM

Newt temporarily tapped into understandable anger at the mainstream media. In the general election, neither his public nor private life will withstand the scrutiny.

Drunken Sailor| 1.26.12 @ 10:44AM

Kind of sounds that way doesn't it? I'm thinking of moving to socialist Italy. America will be pretty much the same with 4 more years of Obama, but at least there the pasta and seafood are awesome, the wine is plentiful and some of the politicians run on the fact they are whores. More honest than many of ours.

Deerknocker| 1.26.12 @ 10:52AM

I'm 70, and I've never been more depressed by a Republican presidential campaign than I have by this current one. To begin, the best qualified Republicans chose not to run. The nation is in great crisis and the first string Republicans stay home. Thanks guys for stepping up when your country needs you. Those second stringers who do show up promptly abandon Reagan's 11th commandment and commence to hack each other to pieces; managing in the process to perhaps fatally divide the Party and at the same time provide abundant grist for Obama's mill. How bad is it? Just consider that Republican voters are so down on Romney that they are willing to embrace Newt, one of the most reviled candidates in a generation. The members of the Republican establishment, the supposed brains of the Republican outfit, cling to Romney despite substantial evidence that the base sees him as a RINO loser. Is there no one home in the Republican party? For God's sake, let's all write-in "Abraham Lincoln" on our primary ballots and go to a brokered convention. What a mess!

Nelson H.| 1.26.12 @ 4:20PM

Incisive remarks that perfectly reflect my own feelings. I don't like Romney or Gingrich at all. Santorum seems the best choice on pragmatic grounds but he fails to inspire. Picking Paul on the basis of federalism and constitutionalism is sensible, but then there's the reality that he would suffer the biggest walloping since Goldwater. Let his ideas percolate another few years and let's see if more can be won over to a serious platform of limited government. The timing will be better in 2016, after the big crack-up.

It is so patently obvious that a Daniels/Ryan ticket would win handily and represent the very best that the GOP could offer. These gentlemen simply must be roused from their safe-houses. And appoint Ron Paul Secretary of the Treasury, for goodness sake!

David| 1.26.12 @ 10:54AM

Newt has an ego at least the size of Bam Bam's.

His wife said that he told her: "People don't care what I do. They only care what I say. And I can things better than anyone else can say them".

Then, in his scribbling, which Glenn Beck has seen or has, he wrote things like: "I am the definer of a civilized society." "I am the one who makes the rules for a civilized society."

Scary huh? Sounds a lot like our current planet healer and ocean receder, doesn't it???!!!

Wake up people.........support Santorum.

He does not have the political baggage of Romney, or the political and PERSONAL baggage of Gingrich.

shoebox57| 1.26.12 @ 10:58AM

I like Rick, I really do not see him a conservative towards the end I am most concerned with, that is reducing both the scope and the money spent by the Federal Government. The only candidate that atleast says the things I believe in,is Paul. I consider the income tax an abomination. BTW I am not a Paulista, so.... thus the quandry.

Anommynous| 1.26.12 @ 10:59AM

Bingo!

shoebox57| 1.26.12 @ 10:55AM

I have no real intention of leaving, my family has been here since 1600's. Hell it was dutch territory then, i.e. New Amsterdam. It sure is disgusting we cannot get better people to run.

David| 1.26.12 @ 10:57AM

Deerknocker, if you have been paying attention, you have NOT HEARD Santorum personally attacking his opponents. He has been the adult in the race. When he does criticize them, it is on their records...........AND..........he does engage in misrepresenting their records or telling outright lies and half-truths about them as every one of the other 3 still in the race have done. Let me lump Perry in with those three, too.

David| 1.26.12 @ 11:01AM

Anommynous, are you trying to spell Anonymous?

Anyway, it seems that we are about the only two are really looking at the candidates. Santorum clearly does not have the political baggage that Romney has, or the political and PERSONAL baggage that Newt has.

It's sad to see poster here ignore what is staring them in the face.

Anommynous| 1.26.12 @ 11:08AM

The spelling is just a joke, and it sets me apart from any real anonymous people.

KML| 1.26.12 @ 11:05AM

Newt knows the real problems in this country, and the biggest problem resides in the White House. He knows this, and has not been afraid to say it. All we get out of Romney is how ready and willing he is to "work with Democrats". Even when Romney was asked his thoughts when Dingy Harry Reid said he will not work with a Republican president, all Romney could say was he is the one who will work with the other side? We all saw what happened to the last Republican presidential nominee who was just so eager to work with Democrats.
I think many conservatives and Republicans don't want to work with the other side, and we are sick to death of those who are. Newt has said repeatedly he will repeal Obamacare and Dodd/Frank. Not water them down, but repeal them. These two bills are the single greatest obstacles to robust economic growth in this country, and these bills represent the greatest threat to individual liberty. Newt says he will repeal them. The man has my vote.
Obama is a Marxist and a destroyer, and we need someone who can articulate exactly how his policies are destroying the middle class and the foundations of this country. We need someone who can explain to the American people how every policy Obama has implemented is intentional and designed to empower the government at the expense of the individual. Romney says Obama is simply in over his head and does not know what he is doing; Obama is well-intentioned but misguided.
Romney seems to have no idea why Obama needs to be defeated, and that is Romney's biggest problem. Newt knows. Newt is calling out Obama, and in some cases, Liberalism in general, and explaining why they are so dangerous for this country. This is why, I favor Newt over the others.

David| 1.26.12 @ 11:09AM

Sorry, that one sentence should have read, "he [Santorum] does NOT engage in mispresenting their records, or telling lies ..."

Tommy Frisco| 1.26.12 @ 11:10AM

"How long have I been saying it? At least for 15 years, but in private I have been aware of it longer. Newt Gingrich is conservatism's Bill Clinton, but without the charm. He has acquired wit but he has all the charm of barbed wire."

Emmett, 15 years takes us back to 1196. So, just when Newt was doing many of the things we want done now, you were saying he's just like Bill Clinton. It's easy to see that you don't want the same things we do. It's easy to see that you are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Bob Louie| 1.26.12 @ 11:20AM

Game, set, match- Have a nice day

Jerry A. Kane| 1.26.12 @ 11:22AM

Now that you've removed all doubt about whether or not you're an establishment shill, I'm curious to know if the castration procedure was painful and if you paid out-of-pocket, or did a good-ole-boy fund earmarked for sellouts cover the cost of the procedure?

Tommy Frisco| 1.26.12 @ 11:27AM

"Today Mitt Romney has 72 Congressional endorsements. Newt has 11."

Emmett, you obviously want to protect the status quo which is why Boehner, et al are pi**ing in their pants at the thought of Newt becoming their leader again. Boehner led the secret coup to remove Gingrich from his Speakership. I assume you think Boehner has done a better job as Speaker than Gingrich did while Speaker. That makes me angry. Your entire article makes me angry and makes me even more of a Gingrich supporter.

The Palins, Michael Reagan, Art Laffer, and Fred Thompson have endorsed Newt. I respect their opinions much more than I do yours or those of our GOP establishment.

Drunken Sailor| 1.26.12 @ 11:38AM

Thomas Sowell does too.

paul3165| 1.28.12 @ 3:54AM

And J.C. Watts, who was in the leadership with Newt. Most of the Romney endorsements are RINOs or sellouts.

Pete| 1.26.12 @ 11:48AM

Pelosi wants Romney also. I wonder why?

rhortus| 1.26.12 @ 12:53PM

Tommy why are endorsements important to you? What do you value? What do you think?

David| 1.26.12 @ 11:42AM

Mr. Tyrell, it is clear to me that your analysis of Newt is CORRECT?

What is not clear to me is why you are singing the praises of Romney ONLY, and you chose not to include Santorum? I believe Santorum is the candidate who will provide the greatest contrast with Bam Bam. He has been the truest, most principled, most consistent conservative of the big 3 candidates.

Newt, Mitt, and Barack all supported the Wall Street bailout, have supported individual mandates for health insurance, have bought into global warming, have criticized Paul Ryan's plan, have supported amnesty for illegal at different times, have supported liberal repub candidates over conservatives in primary races, etc.

Other then the Specter endorsement, Santorum has been on the opposite side of the above issues.

To be fair, in the LAST election cycle, while prepping for his prez run, Romney did support conservatives in the primaries.
Again, Mr. Tyrell, why do you sing Romney's praises to the exclusion of Santorum?

emilio lizardo, phD| 1.26.12 @ 11:59AM

Romney is going down, the tax info incredibly damaging. The only question remains is whether or not people will heed the above post IT'S OBAMA, STUPID and vote for Newt, warts, baggage and all or stay at home, hunker down and try to survive another 4 years of Obama. Smug salon lizards like Emmett are doing their best to enable the latter. No particular fan of Newt, but jeezis h christ the problem here is not philandering, or any of gingrichs other peccadilloes, IT'S OBAMA, STUPID

David Pipkin| 1.26.12 @ 2:35PM

The mere fact you had to ask the question provides the answer. While Mr. Tyrell and Ms. Coulter are Conservatives, they are for some reason in the tank for Romney, most likely based on the shaky evaluation of "electability." I am with you - the person who is most electable is the person who is unwavering in his/her Conservative core. That is most decidedly not Romney.

You are absolutely correct that of the remaining candidates, the best choices as true Conservatives are Santorum and Newt. I believe Santorum was just about to break through when he had that strange exchange with Romney about supporting voting rights for felons who had completed their sentences as a gesture designed to win support from the Black community. Why do Republicans do this - appeal to the lowest of the group to win the group? It is like supporting amnesty for illegal aliens to win the Hispanic vote. Wouldn't that tend to anger Hispanics who came to this country and obeyed the law in the process? Why we would not want to appeal to law-abiding Blacks and instead choose to pander to their criminal element is beyond me, but that is where I turned from Santorum to Gingrich.

However, as to your question, you are absolutely correct. Even with Santorum's slip up on voting rights for felons, he still gets my nod over Romney. It is about the Conservative core, and Romney has proven he does not possess that. As soon as Romney got the Republican nomination, the Tea Party conservative core of the Republican Party would become irrelevant to him, as he makes his break to what he sees as "the middle."

Santorum would hold steady, and Candidate Santorum in the general would look a lot like the candidate we see today. Why people like Mr. Tyrell are trying to steer us from Newt to Romney at the exclusion of Santorum only reveals them to be the establishment mouthpieces they are.

Who Knows?| 1.26.12 @ 12:16PM

One of your best pieces, if not THE best!

And, how timely---I was going to castigate you by writing, "It's about time!".

Gingrich and Jerry Brown---both moon us with their weirdness. And, it's NOW over, because once exposed, the DAMNED SPOT won't be ignored.

Newt is about to become as much of a joke for the right as algore is for the left.

emilio lizardo, phD| 1.26.12 @ 12:22PM

algore, you may recall, damn near became our president despite being a joke and an embarrassment. Newt may just be that same kind of joke- Weird shit happens, especially in desperate times. Such as these.

JimP| 1.26.12 @ 12:18PM

Seems like we've got a dilemma on our hands. I don't buy the idea that Romney is more like Reagan than Newt. No disrespect intended. If that's the case I want evidence of it because Romney's record is the opposite: and his business career isn't convincing for him being conservative. Lehman Brothers are in business too.

On the other hand, while I like Newt's accomplishments, his action plan if elected [which is much better than Romney's and actually is like Reagan] and his combative nature and intellect, I don't want a nominee that is going to have bimbo erruptions or other scandals of which we are not aware.

Mr. Tyrrell's column is the first 'anti-Newt' piece that I've read that offers a credible reason to not support Newt over Mitt. Tyrrell himself also has credibility with me, unlike most of the anti-Newt columns I've read. The anti-Newt columns I've seen have offered reasons like: Newt is the devil; he's skipper of the Exxon Valdez; he belonged to two other denominations before he became Catholic; he's a pit bull; and Larry the Cable Guy. Literally, these were the reasons.

I've spent as much time as I have had available researching Mitt. In sum, I'm less in favor of him now than when the campaigns began. That's based on his political record and his business history.

I have no doubt Mitt would be better than Obama, but that's a measure of how awful Obama is, not how good Mitt would be. I was impressed by Mitch Daniels' after TOTUS speech. He sounded Reaganesque and Coolidgesque. I don't know if that is genuine though since the Bushes like him [Anyone one they like I am profoundly suspicous about]. Maybe a brokered convention would be the best course- assuming Newt has unrevealed scandals ahead.

Help us out, Bob. Can you give us more details or would that be libelous?

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 12:20PM

I'm sick of regressive lauding Republicans. Newt is one. Jackson (ok, not a progressive, but a precursor), Teddy Roosevelt, WILSON?! Gimme a freaking break!

Santorum is the only one with the conservative bones in this race. Period. There are those who say. "but, but, but he LOST his re-election bid. He could NEVER win national office." To this I say the following:

He lost that race in a year where the Repubs bled out in Congress. He lost for his support of Specter, whom he was ASKED to support in order to ensure Specter's clout on the Senate Judiciary committee when Roberts & Alito were up for confirmation. If you like those 2 on the court, you can thank Rick for committing political seppuku to ensure that Specter, vindictive old cuss that he was, would give his thumbs up on those 2 nominees. The PA of '06 is NOT the PA of now. We just elected the equally conservative Pat Toomey in Nov. Both chambers of the State House are Republican, as is the governorship. He'd win this state today in a nanosecond. And keep in mind, he held his job in Congress & the Senate for quite some time as an unabashed conservative in a VERY union heavy state.

nova9047| 1.26.12 @ 12:42PM

You just made my day. Bravo for taking a courageous stand for character, which is on death's door from what I'm hearing on talk radio.

OLDRAY| 1.26.12 @ 12:44PM

Re ANTHONY'S Post...Beautiful. You've nailed itThis 87 year old (long time reader of the American Spectator ) never imagined that publication could turn against the American people as it is now doing.

Nancy| 1.26.12 @ 12:46PM

Bill and Newt are both scum bags and not worthy of discussion !!!!!!

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 8:18PM

So you'd rather re elect Obama??

rhortus| 1.26.12 @ 12:51PM

A testament to our "Sad Sick World"

Tom S| 1.26.12 @ 12:54PM

Why in the name of God you want four more years of President Hussein is beyond me. Because if we nominate Romney or Santorum, that will happen. Go Newt !!!!!!!!

dick toomey| 1.26.12 @ 1:01PM

Let's see -- 72 congressman for Mitt -- only 11 for Newt. That says it all for me. The 80-20 rule. If the establishment and impressive, important thinkers like yourself are for Mitt, that speaks volumes. By the way, millions of moderates voted for Obama. And now we're supposed to trust these same people who favor Mitt. Trouble with moderates? No spine. Mr. Tyrrell, you're bashing of Newt may be warranted for his failures, but the ferocity of your presentation reveals something more sinister than objective thinking.

David Pipkin| 1.26.12 @ 2:46PM

Very well-said... BRAVO!

Renee| 1.26.12 @ 1:02PM

I find it very coincidental that all the former elitists have come out just today in media print coordination to blast Newt! If Nancy Reagan and Mike Reagan vouch for his being the closest to Reagan ideals, that's good enough for me!

David Pipkin| 1.26.12 @ 2:52PM

It is almost as if the talking points went out from Establishment Republican Central HQ, isn't it? Very strange.
Mr. Tyrell has even gone so far as to say that even Ron Paul would be better than Newt... The same Ron Paul who says that Iran has a right to have a nuclear weapon and it would give them more respect - you would choose THAT as Commander-In-Chief over Newt?

"Methinks Ye Doth Protest Too Much."

I could have bought an argument against Newt that doesn't pose Ron Paul as a more viable candidate without hardly mentioning Santorum, but that is exactly what Mr. Tyrell has produced. As such, he has revealed himself.

Kade| 1.26.12 @ 1:02PM

Rush trashes Newt and is praising Santorum -- this will spilt the conservative vote and ensure a Romney win. Rush is the tank for Mitt.

don| 1.26.12 @ 1:02PM

I'm beginning to think the best thing is to let the whole system crash and burn and start over...since we have all the guns and the military we should come out on top...

David in MA| 1.26.12 @ 1:04PM

ANYBODY BUT OBOZO!
And. I would like it to be Ron Paul, but, unless he turns ruthless it ain't gonna be him, or unless, he tips it that his VP will be his son Rand Paul or the pizza guy, Herman Cain..

Goldwaterite| 1.26.12 @ 1:05PM

"He [Newt] is playing the liberal media card..."
Someone really should; it's a bona fide trump card for conservatives. If Romney spoke with substance & passion instead of tired platitudes, he might get somewhere.

G| 1.26.12 @ 1:05PM

ANYTIME the Republican establishment bashes a candidate, it's good enough for me. Gingrich has my vote. The same establishment that lionizes Reagan today, loathed him when he was running for office. Gingrich is in pretty good company.

David in Ardmore| 1.26.12 @ 1:24PM

Are you talking the Newt who sat knee-to-knee with Nancy Pelosi demanding conservatives submit themselves to the climate change agenda (i.e., the establishment), and held press releases telling us we face imminent danger from climate change (an establishment tactic)?

Are you talking about the Newt who still belligerently supports the ethanol mandate (an establishment crisis structure), who refuses to tell you about the motivation behind the ethanol mandate (positive outcomes for the establishment)?

Are you talking about the Newt who pushed methods toward socializing medicine and providing amnesty to illegal aliens (more establishment agenda).

You gotta be confused, G. For the sake of the country, Newt needs to be remanded to playing tuba in the New York City St. Patrick's Day parade, blending into the crowd bellowing much less threatening notes that can't be deciphered as words.

Newt is a bain to any nation of good law, and a favored son of the establishment. WAKE UP!!!!

JimP| 1.26.12 @ 3:07PM

Your concerns are well noted: and if the Newt critics weren't indicating Mitt as being preferable your argument would be persuasive. The problem is that Santorum is still in it, but the Newt critics are telling us that Romney is more like Reagan than Newt , but there is NO evidence of that. No one apparently is saying we better get behind Santorum instead of Newt. Hence, the reaction to the "establishment" criticisms is understandable. Jeff Lord and Peter Ferrara as well as Nancy and Michael Reagan don't have these problems with Newt, so what are people to believe? I look at what was accomplished while Newt was in Congress in the 90's and compare it to what the GOP majority accomplished during the G.W. Bush years and prefer Newt obviously. I don't want unexpected scandals popping up, but I don't want people who have personal issues with Newt spreading disinformation either. It's getting impossible to evaluate what is truth and what is personal dislike.

The whole situation is pushing me, and others I know, toward abandoning the GOP altogether.

JLG| 1.26.12 @ 1:11PM

Newt Gingrich : Bill Clinton :: Mitt Romney : Barack Obama

JLJordan| 1.26.12 @ 1:11PM

Whew! Time to call Ghostbusters. It really is becoming a chore to know which side the websites that offer political information are playing for. On this very website there is this by Jeffrey Lord: http://spectator.org/archives/.....ieutenant/

Bassboat| 1.26.12 @ 1:15PM

Hmmmm, narcissists? both Bill & Newt? How about a whole cavalcade of presidents before them? Womanizers? Need I name Kennedy, Cleveland for starters? Emmett, surely you can do better than this in trying to disparage Newt. It is articles like this that make me stop and think is there a rino in the room that no one wants to question.
I appreciate articles on ideas, substance of policy, and strategies but not this type of an article. Free speech gives you the right, it also gives me the right to call you out on what I and many consider a grievous error in judgement.

David in Ardmore| 1.26.12 @ 1:27PM

Bassboat to the world: "Call the dogs off Newt the womanizer; character doesn't matter anymore! Calling oneself a conservative doesn't mean one must act as a principle conservative anymore! Conservatives can now redefine the term "is" to fit their agenda, just like the liberals!"

Bassboat, Newt's a fraud.

jstwndring| 1.27.12 @ 3:36AM

"Bassboat, Newt's a fraud."

Yeah! We need someone who walks the walk! Like, Romney. He doesn't just talk about socialized medicine, he does something about it!

betty| 1.26.12 @ 1:16PM

King David, (old testament Bible) was also a lover of women and he had a big ego. He also murdered his best friend so he could have his wife. ALL men have clay feet. My question is, can Newt Gingrich get the job done. I believe he's smart enough to get it done.

David in MA| 1.26.12 @ 1:25PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....r_embedded

http://www.conservativehq.com/.....tive-power

Adrian Snare| 1.26.12 @ 1:26PM

Conservatives make me sick !

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 4:07PM

Good. Nice to see we're doing our jobs.

David in MA| 1.26.12 @ 1:26PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htw7shWR3oU

AGENDA21:
http://www.infiniteunknown.net.....yk.aolmail

bill| 1.26.12 @ 1:26PM

It's very insulting to compare Newt with a "serial rapist" like Bill Clinton. Newt is nothing like Bill. Newt has multiple marriages, but he never commits adultery, unlike Bill Clinton. Newt has become a target for the MSM since he won SC because that scares Obama and DNC. If Newt wins in FL, he will get the GOP nod. With his debate skills and courage, conviction, charisma, Newt will shred Obama in the debate.
If Newt gets the GOP nod, Obama is doomed.

David in Ardmore| 1.26.12 @ 1:31PM

bill,

You need to get back to church, back into the law. It's obvious you don't understand the whole concept of adultery.

Emmett's correct: In simplest terms, Newton Leroy Gingrich is just another William Jefferson Clinton, but badly pretending to have conservative values.

Anybody but Obama or Newt!

bill| 1.26.12 @ 2:39PM

Newt never committed any adultery. Clinton was a "sexual predator." Newt had affairs with different women, but he never raped or sexually molested them, in any circumstances. Newt married three times, and that is legal.
Newt won SC with 40% of the vote, winning 43 out of 46 counties, no GOP nominee has ever done that. Newt is the "Million Dollar Baby."
Newt is i surging in the poll, and his debate performance scares Obama and the MSM. If Mitt gets the GOP nod, Obama will have 4 more years. With Newt being the GOP nominee, Obama is doomed.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 8:17PM

Are you seriously saying that having an "affair" isn't Adultery, or did you word that incorrectly?

Cara| 1.26.12 @ 1:27PM

My favorite phrase from this piece
"tireless hustlers". Bingo!

David in MA| 1.26.12 @ 1:27PM

Obama makes a confession.
http://www.youtube.com/watch_p.....SWSzY#t=28

Iska Waran| 1.26.12 @ 1:29PM

Carter was a faithful husband and the second worst president. Romney is a faithful husband, but despite having run for office continually for 20 years, as of two weeks ago, he hadn't even crafted an answer to whether he would release his tax returns or what his net worth is. Romney's core electoral challenges relate to his wealth and he hadn't even come with a retort to obvious questions. Romney is unelectable.

Anthony| 1.26.12 @ 1:30PM

Our friend and fellow poster, Grymlyk, has been opining recently on the R establishment's "all in" for Romney.
He has concluded many of his posts with the comment, "we are so screwed".
I have ment to respond to our friend that it's not yet time to panic.
After today, with all the attacks on Newt at TAS, NRO, and Drudge, our friend is totally correct, "we are so screwed".
The R establishment, but for an absolute revolt by the American people, will produce four more years of Obozo, hence, the destruction of our Constitutional Republic.
It is indeed time to panic.

Kade| 1.26.12 @ 1:43PM

Add Rush and Hannity to the R establishment list.

Kevin kelly| 1.26.12 @ 1:31PM

Newt is simply the only current candidate that can handle a face to face debate with Obama. So with his flaws we may have to live. Heck look at the Obama flaws. Romney only looks republican standing next to the president. Stand him next to Reagan or WFB he looks marxist! Big government. Big taxes. Medical. Abortion. He barely qualifies on any of the platform. The republican party since bush one decided if they acted like deems they'd be loved and get elected. Sadly the electorate says, "if we want a dem let's take one of own" versus the wanna be. Anyway appreciate the party line of smashing their populist pick, gov Romney, but till I have to I will go another one of two directions. Thanks. Days like this I miss WFB ,Barry and Ronald.

KLM| 1.26.12 @ 1:34PM

There definitely seems to be a concerted effort today to attack Newt. Visiting Drudgereport shows how Drudge is virulently going after Newt. No links to any positive articles about Newt like in washingtonexaminer about the truth in the ethics case against Gingrich.

But why all this today?…hmmm. Could it be to preemptively frame the debate discussion tonight? Make the debate start off about all these attacks on Newt today. Put Newt on the defensive early and then let Mitt pile on.

Mark in LA| 1.26.12 @ 3:11PM

Drudgel knows he can't beat Obama - better he get out now than waste everybody else's time and money dealing with him.

Boris| 1.26.12 @ 1:35PM

Romney has "character"? I guess that depends upon how you define "character". I do NOT define "character" as someone who claims to be a Conservative when everything in his record suggests he is, AT BEST, a moderate.

Who Knows?| 1.26.12 @ 1:36PM

All you Gingrich fans, go to the Intrade website, and check out the GOP presidential bets.

Romney is NOW at around 85%. Up, from around 70% just a few days ago.

Money talks. Who will listen?

paul3165| 1.28.12 @ 4:04AM

I looked at that site a little bit. They're smoking crack!! They're predicting...get this...that Obama has a 54% chance of getting re-elected. I almost fell off my chair in laughter. High unemployment, massive debt, no way. He has a record this time, unlike 2008 when he was a blank slate.

David George| 1.26.12 @ 1:37PM

Pretty dumb article. You R's are never going to learn are you? How'd you do with McCain? Cancel by membership to this dumb club.

steve talbot| 1.26.12 @ 1:44PM

Any you think Romney is better? What has Romney done for conservatism? I'd vote for Mickey Mounse before Romney. He is a cocky wise guy and a fraud, a stealth liberal.

Jacques Bakke| 1.26.12 @ 1:58PM

Romney is worse than any of the entire original group of candidates and I do not understand why he is still standing. You'd vote for Mickey Mouse, I'd vote for my shoe before voting for the RINO.

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 2:28PM

Thanks in part to Romney's support, we have more conservatives in Congress than we had in 2008. Yes, I wish he were more conservative and less scripted but we can only choose from among who decided to run. Of our options, Romney is the most likely to defeat Obama. Like it or not, we will have to attract independents and disaffected Democrats to do this. Mark Steyn perfectly described Newt Gingrich as the worst of both worlds: a pushover for progressivism who has nonetheless succeeded in painting himself as a ferocious right-wing bastard. Thus Newt is too progressive to be a true conservative yet (at least by reputation) too stridently conservative to attract independents. Can you honestly picture large numbers of independents voting for Gingrich? Me neither. Sure this is a compromise but now that we know with absolute certainty just how transformationally bad Obama is for our country, staying home is not an option and compromise is the patriotic thing to do.

BackToBasics| 1.26.12 @ 1:45PM

from the article - "Newt Gingrich is conservatism's Bill Clinton, but without the charm"

Which makes Bill Clinton worse. Serpents (meaning shining one) are slippery and subtle. I'll take a rascal straight up over the smooth but trachersous operators anyday.

Jacques Bakke| 1.26.12 @ 1:55PM

The other thing that should concern voters is Newt's weight problem and he might perhaps be a walking heart attack.

MarkinIdaho| 1.26.12 @ 2:33PM

Hope Exists! If he commits to Alan West as a VP, I will support him. Maybe, he will have the Big One!

David| 1.26.12 @ 1:58PM

KLM, although I don't support Newt, I have defended those 68 bogus ethics charges against him. To Romney and Paul supporter, your candidates know the truth and yet they lie about those charges against Newt.

Kevin kelly, only Newt can debate Obama??? First, do you think obama is going to agree to 7 lincoln-douglas debates with Newt? Our candidate will be fortunate to get 2 debates with him, AND they will be 90 min - 2hours in the same old debate format. Knowing that Newt's strongest appeal as a candidate is his debating style, two debates will not be enough. Newt has to have a lot more to go against Bam Bam with.

He can't argue against the individual mandate as Newt has supported it for about 20 years. Neither can Romney.

He can't go after Bam Bam on policies that are destructive based on global warming when he sat on the park bench with Pelosi to warn us about it. Neither can Romney.

He can't go after Bam Bam on the Wall Street bailout because he supported it. Neither can Romney.

Newt will come across as attacking our sitting president in a very unflattering manner. The media and the dems will make sure of it.

Romney simply won't attack.

Santorum will forcefully attack Bam Bam on the above mentioned issues, AND many others, AND he will come across as gentlemanly and statesman-like when he does it.

Jacques Bakke| 1.26.12 @ 2:08PM

How sad to have lost a number of candidates to the jaws of the press. We have one Conservative Candidate left and he will be swept under the rug as well.
The remaining cast, however left they are, cannot win the big event without some drama added to their package, such as a Condi Rice, JC Watts, Thomas Sowell, Star Parker, Col. West or a new up and comer Taylor Haynes (ran for governor in Wyoming as a write in---will be a super star I predict). White guys cannot win this alone, Mormon money or not. That is not racist, that is reality. They need ethnic help in this race and while Newt may have something up his sleeve, they need to make some announcements quickly!

KLM| 1.26.12 @ 2:26PM

David, I do like much about Santorum, but I must disagree with you about how he comes across. In fact, that's what I dislike most about him. He comes across as bitter and rude.

Not meaning to say he is bitter and rude, but that's how he comes across. Just not very likeable when he is on the attack. That's not the media pushing an agenda, that's how my wife and I saw him.

Its a shame too, cause like I said, I like much about him. Wish it didn't matter, but really think its what dooms his chances being able to win the nomination and presidency.

Larry| 1.26.12 @ 1:59PM

Um, Bob, Romney has character? I guess you didn't read Jeffrey Lord's post today in your own magazine's online blog.

The truth is, while you savaged Clinton in 1992 and throughout his term, his party was still making every effort to defend him, and successfully to boot. While the media was savaging Reagan, we continued to defend him strongly, even when he was wrong (which was not often, but nevertheless, did occur). So what is different now? Because you decide to support the likes of the guy who won't reverse the train at all, only slow it down a couple of miles an hour?

Politics stinks. None of them have character, because of what they have to do to win.

But I like BackToBasics's take on this savagery. I'll take our rascal over their snake, any day.

talkradio200| 1.26.12 @ 2:00PM

"there are private encounters with the fair sex that doubtless will come out. "

Is there evidence of this or are the Newt haters panicking because Romney hasn't wrapped this up yet? While it is true that Newt has demonstrated questionable moral character in the past, that doesn't justify making this bogus claim.

And who cares that most current members of Congress are endorsing Romney? How many of the people who served with Newt are upset because he forced fiscal responsibility on Congress?

If you look at records, Newt governed conservatively and forced Clinton to sign the first balanced budgets since Coolidge while Romney brought socialized medicine and gay marriage. You can criticize Newt on the adultery and other liberal things he's said over the years, but to argue that Romney's more conservative or that to elect Newt is to spell the end of conservatism is just a complete crock.

Jon Boone| 1.26.12 @ 2:03PM

I've long referred to Gingrich as Bubba Lite.... And Romney channels the ghost of Wendell Wilkie.

Jacques Bakke| 1.26.12 @ 2:10PM

And Harold Stassen!

Jabber3| 1.26.12 @ 2:05PM

Conservatives who are considering joining Newt's wagon train should be thinking Donner Party because they surely will perish at the polls.

Patrick J. Burwell| 1.26.12 @ 2:12PM

@AMPSEC - SO what do you prefer Tyrrell? A Coward, the Casper-milk-toast or the Mormon Caliphate by the lflip-flopper who will say ANYTHING to get elected? The RNC already blackballed the REAL conservative, Michele Bachmann. What other choices are there? People like me want a REAL Godly candidate but I can't run because I have NO MONEY (I'm not rich like your other guys). So I can only vote for what's left, Newt Gingrich. He is, after all, a real junk-yard dog and he KNOWS how to bite HARD. And remember, he is OUR junk-yard dog, so get off the high horse and get behind him... unless you want to DESTROY America with ANOTHER Socialist term with the Democrat BHO.
-Patrick Burwell, OnlyJesusSaves.com

jerry betts| 1.26.12 @ 2:19PM

How could anyone who isn't a narcissist want anything to do with the job?

David Pipkin| 1.26.12 @ 2:20PM

While you make some good points, you discredit yourself with drastic overreaching. In terms of the size and scope of their indiscretions, framing Newt as our Bill Clinton is like comparing Acer to Apple.

Clinton's behavior was serial, impulsive and uncontrollable. Newt has one ex-wife making a scurrilous claim, and your other vague references do not even begin to compare to Gennifer, Paula, Monica, Kathleen... What the heck - let's just put up the whole list!
From http://alamo-girl.com/0262.htm :
Juanita Broaddrick (AR)- rape
Eileen Wellstone (Oxford) - rape
Elizabeth Ward Gracen - rape - quid pro quo, post incident intimidation
Regina Hopper Blakely - "forced himself on her, biting, bruising her"
Kathleen Willey (WH) - sexual assault, intimidations, threats
Sandra Allen James (DC) - sexual assault
22 Year Old 1972 (Yale) - sexual assault
Kathy Bradshaw (AK) - sexual assault
Cristy Zercher - unwelcomed sexual advance, intimidations
Paula Jones (AR) - unwelcomed sexual advance, exposure, bordering on sexual assault
Carolyn Moffet -unwelcomed sexual advance, exposure, bordering on sexual assault
1974 student at University of Arkansas - unwelcomed physical contact
1978-1980 - seven complaints per Arkansas state troopers
Monica Lewinsky - quid pro quo, post incident character assault
Gennifer Flowers - quid pro quo, post incident character assault
Dolly Kyle Browning - post incident character assault
Sally Perdue - post incident threats
Betty Dalton - rebuffed his advances, married to one of his supporters
Denise Reeder - apologetic note scanned

I have little doubt this is far from an exhaustive list, and there is nothing you can put up about Newt to even begin to justify this comparison.

In essence, sir, all you have done is produce another hit piece on a truly viable candidate.

Speaking of viability, Ron Paul, better than Newt? On one front alone, the most important job the President has, Commander-In-Chief, Ron Paul has shown himself to be wholly unsuitable.

Like the 13th chime on a clock, that statement alone discredits all that preceded it, and all that came after.

jstwndring| 1.27.12 @ 3:55AM

Best response to this hit piece on Newt I've read so far. In fact, it destroys this article completely with something the author sadly lacks---perspective. Please get some Mr. Tyrrell.

Nice job Mr. Pipkin.

(Actually, your previous posts were excellent as well)

Joan of Argghh| 1.26.12 @ 2:29PM

And what did the Left accomplish through Bill Clinton? What will the Right accomplish through Mitt?

What has the Right already accomplished through Newt? Or Romney?

Also, if you have dirt, let's hear it NOW. That's what the primaries are for. Otherwise, this is just so much tittering gossip. More women? More unsavory behavior? Polly Purebred Conservatives got that way by playing everything safe. Even purely good things were tamped down for fear. Fear of what? We've seen what the purebreds are afraid of and how much it has cost us as a nation. They fear a violent motion to the Right at the wheel might jolt the passengers.

I couldn't care less about his egoism, women, personality or bank account. Will he lead us to the Right or keep us in the rut?

You got dirt on his "progressivism"? THAT is something I want to know about.

Substance, not opinion. I haven't seen it in this article.

MarkinIdaho| 1.26.12 @ 2:31PM

How I wish you were wrong! Alas, you are right - only you have not yet explored Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, or Mitt Romney.

Sam| 1.26.12 @ 2:36PM

Spoken like a true Romney supporter, Emmett. Now, how about a column castigating Santorum?

Pam| 1.26.12 @ 2:48PM

Thanks for a great article. I can't believe how many fellow conservatives are gullible enough to swallow Newt's Kool-Aid. I'm not Romney fan, either, but Newt would be enough to keep me home or voting third party. Ewww!

Konnie| 1.27.12 @ 10:30PM

Third Party is a vote for Obama. Look it up.

Thom| 1.26.12 @ 2:53PM

Can’t' argue with a single thing Bob TYRRELL says here. Not one. Never the less Bill Clinton won the Presidency twice despite being a despicable and morally bankrupt character. He would have easily won a third time in 2000 against George W. Bush if he could have run. As long as the electorate is prone to being immature, unprincipled, unserious and willingly ignorant about fundamental truths of life American politics is not going to rise to the Christ like standards some would wish. Electing Republican Presidents that can't or won’t articulate the tenets of Conservatism and defend them is part of why the electorate is as blazingly ignorant of the proper function of government in the first place. It is one thing to bash our version of Bill Clinton; it is another to put forth an alternative. The Republican base is reacting to the "message" not the "man" at this point. That is the case because none of the other "choices" can articulate even the most basic understanding of what is at stake here and a vision for the future. It doesn't help that speaking truth to power isn't real popular among the "moderate" wing of the "Can't we all get along" political Party. Newt is Hamlet with more personal flaws. Being able to articulate what the "base" believes and being unafraid of speaking that which the base sees as lacking in the political process (so called debates) is not one of his flaws or weaknesses.. "Good men" won't come forward and step up to the plate in American politics because the process of nomination has become nothing but a prime time trashy reality TV show. I give you "Trump" and "King Obama" as examples. Each TV debate is nothing but a ratings game for the sponsors of the debates. Candidates are little more than props. What purpose is an audience in a TV debate that is sworn to silence? Props. The outcome of this silly process will be the candidate that has the most money and is willing to undergo the indignities that go along with the ratings seeking media that controls the "debates" and the agenda for the election at large. Whether or not the "winner" can articulate an effective reason to vote for them is entirely secondary in the existing process.

You are absolutely right "Bob". When Ron Paul or Mitt is the last man standing in this process and goes down in flames in Nov because they can't inspire the "base" to vote for another suicide pact with a Democrat "lite" candidate please come back and tell us how character counts but not being able to articulate and inspire what enough Conservatives believe in is not a character trait flaw or simply the nature of a man that does not believe what the "base" believes in the first place. The worst Presidential election in US History took place in 2008 and the worst Presidential candidate in American history won because a majority of the electorate bought into the lowest common denominator pandering of a devout Marxist and his "opponent" couldn't find the courage to speak the truth about the man. John McCain couldn't articulate his way out of wet paper bag with help. 2012 is going to be a replay of 2008 if someone doesn't get a clue here.

If you are going to become part of the slander media machine at least have the courage to put your pick on the board rather than just sniping from the peanut gallery.

John OB| 1.26.12 @ 3:07PM

That does not get me to Romney. In fact, it drives me farther away. Talk about violating the 11th commandment! There is a lot of that going on, on all sides. But an assault from the Romney campaign coordinated on the same day with the long knives of those who preen themselves Conservative journalists, and using Reagan as the poison to the tip of the lance; that is more than outrageous; that starts the “death wagons” rolling for the whole Party establishment. Why is that? In Romney’s closing remarks at the final SC debate, he sounded so much like a Tea Party Patriot. That is right, he SOUNDED like one. Remember, Tea Party Patriots co-sponsored that debate and two hundred of its ‘captains’ were there. They have become the base. On April 15, 2009, the date of the first Tea Party national rally, Newt Gingrich spoke at its NYC event; he was there from the beginning. Whether you consider him a founding tea-father or an early bird opportunist, he was there at the start, and the base knows it.

Mark in LA| 1.26.12 @ 3:08PM

Newt, Romney or Santorum cannot win against Obama. Joe sixpack will never identify with Romney. They won't vote for someone who pays a lower tax rate than them, is arrogant about how he made it and did so with tactics only Wall Street can applaud. Gingrigh is toast as well. Only die hard Republicans can vote for either Gingrich or Santorum.

The way the corporate controlled media and the Republican establishment has treated Ron Paul has not gone unnoticed by the people who support him. Every 2 years these same people come to get my vote with the same promises and same scare tactics. Once they have my vote (although it has been awhile) they proceed to crap all over me. Why should I vote for their candidate when mine was never given a fair hearing?

Joe D.| 1.26.12 @ 3:11PM

I would not go with what Ann's says about this election. She was for Christe, who is turning moderate by the day (gay marriage, gobal warming and something else I am forgetting). Will he be another RINO? We will see.

Romney is not a true conservative unless you believe him now but forget his policies in Mass.

Newt is a narcissists. However, I think we can keep him in line with the need to be liked. Also, he was a good conservative in the 1980s and 90s.

A narcissists does like to be liked. Which would explain why he went off the reservation in the early 2000 until now.

Santorum is my guy. He did get carried away in the spending of the 2000s. That is unfortunite.

Paul is not a conservative. He is a libertarian. That is why he is no conservative on social issues or defense. He is only good on economic. Put him as head of the Treasury and be done with it.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 3:16PM

So maybe my inklings about Tyrrell are correct.
He's a Ron Paul admirer and believes like Clint does.
I'm still wondering if he IS Clint?
LOL!!
Yeah, Ron Paul has "character", eh?
Eh, Tyrrell?
Ya mean like how he blames America for terrorists being terrorists and hates Jews?
Maybe Newt isn't perfect but comparing him to RON PAUL?
Yikes.
You are reminding me of the other filthy old men that post here.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 8:51PM

Your concern for Jews is amusing, since we're "liars."

Hypocritical charlatan.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 9:04PM

I love Jews, as Christ does. He told them to repent and believe His Gospel.
THAT is what LOVE is, kiddo.
So, it's up to you, and you openly reject Him. And you know who He calls liars.
It isn't me who says it.
You're in BIG BIG trouble, Con Artist Chef.
And all the vile personal attacking and lying you do about me won't save you because I'm not the issue, Jesus is.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 9:39PM

Sorry, I'm happy with the choice I made when I chose my religion with my parents blessing. Go convert someone else, I ain't interested. Somehow or another, I don't think Jews who've lived good lives for 2000 years are stoking furnaces in Hell, as YOU do.

But I forget, you're G*d's messenger here on Am Spec.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 10:45PM

You're a dishonest little punk is what you are.

You have railed on me about not believing in the Divinity of Christ, you little two-bit hack, and yet... and YET, you're own posts elsewhere reveal what you really are:

Cicero's Ghost (NB) Wrote
Nov 09, 2011 1:01 PM
"How bout a glass of Blantons, a cigar & some BB KIng? And the Christmas card would be nice. My Mom is Catholic (Sicilian & Calabrese). I was christened in the Catholic church, I just chose Judaism because I didn't believe in the divinity of Christ. I don't need an intermediary between myself & G*d."

NOW: You not only deny Jesus Christ, but you deny God.
God says if you deny His Son, you deny Him. 2 Jn. 1:9.

And that should be the last time you call me a fraud.
Unless of course you want to continue revealing yourself for the filthy, lying hypocrite that you are, here for all to see.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 10:54PM

And I made that choice at age 12, with my parent's blessing, you f-ing idiot. Post it all, FRAUD. Who are YOU to question a decision the child of a mixed marriage makes with the blessings of BOTH those parents? Oh, that's right. I didn't chose "correctly," according to your dumb ass.

I also know what Christians believe. And with the exception of you & your husband, all of them believe in the divinity of Christ & the Trinity. I can read, you old crone.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 10:57PM

That post was a response to a blatant anti Semite who thought he'd be cute & try & piss me off by saying he'd send me a Christmas card.

Since you're so good at cherry picking stuff out of context, maybe whichever one of you who's on MY dole could get a job for Media Matters.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 11:05PM

Right. So you're denying that you DON'T believe in the Divinity of Christ, then?

Here you are, such a blatant hypocrite and liar, utterly disgusting, openly denying the Divinity of Christ, utterly rejecting Christ, and yet you insist on saying it is I who reject Him.

You're a filthy little punk, with no conscience, headed to Hell. And you fall into this category with the rest of them:

"But know this, that in the last days
grievous times will be upon us.
For men will be lovers of themselves,
money-lovers, braggarts, arrogant, blasphemers,
disobedient to parents,
unthankful, unholy,
without natural affections, unyielding,
slanderers, without self-control, savage,
haters of good,
betrayers, reckless, being puffed up, lovers
of pleasure rather than lovers of God,
having a form of godliness, but denying
the power of it; even turn away from
these." 2 Tim. 3:1-5.

Con Chef (NB)| 1.26.12 @ 11:18PM

Can you f-ing read? Where am I denying anything? I made a choice at a young age & stuck to it. Again, who the HELL are YOU to criticize that choice my parents left me. If you think they did a piss poor job in that respect, I'm sure that my Mom would be more than happy to talk to you about that.

Margie| 1.27.12 @ 2:32PM

You are void of reason.
Either you deny the Divinity of Christ or you don't.
Your post says you deny Him.
And I couldn't care less you filthy punk if that's what you choose to do, scumbag~ my point IS: take your filthy, HYPOCRITICAL mouth and shut it as to you judging ME, therefore!!

Your sickening lying and hypocrisy is what I AM DEALING WITH HERE, PUNK.

Mike Dar| 1.27.12 @ 11:23AM

Paul says we cannot avoid 'blowback'. That we need to take responsibility for the concequences of our actions. He does not hate Jews.
But it seems that you believe a disparaging others must be a sign of charachter.(filthy old men- Newt fits the bill)

Joe D.| 1.26.12 @ 3:24PM

With regards to his prior character I agree with you. However, this is a new day and he appears to be different on that issue. But we do not know yet. As for repentance, I have always been told it means not only to turn away but run away from your sin after you ask for forgiveness. If he is still with the sam woman he cheated on with his second wife, and 1st mistress I am hard pressed to see repentance. However, that is between him and God.

I do not see any more of the character flaxs for the last 16 years. So please bury that issue.

bill| 1.26.12 @ 3:26PM

NEWT IS THE "MILLION DOLLAR BABY." HE IS INVINCIBLE.

Todd Wolf| 1.26.12 @ 3:29PM

What would William F. Buckley Jr. say and how would Reid Buckley say it? There seems to be an orgy of infantile gossip and emotions intertwined with deceit expressed about Newt these days. Meaningful information seldom equals its disinformation.

Trish| 1.26.12 @ 3:30PM

I refuse to hold my nose and cast a vote for someone who actually voted for Paul Tsongas (sp?) Dem, in 1992! I did not march in the streets in DC for that warmed over crap sandwich.

bill| 1.26.12 @ 4:11PM

Newt is a Christian. He is a passionate conservative. He scares the RINOs and the liberals and the MSM. That is why they waged a war on Newt and his family and his faith and believes.
Newt is poised to be the next POTUS.

Patrick Read| 1.26.12 @ 4:11PM

Mr. Tyrrell,

I'm rather disappointed with you. How long has it bothered you that Newt converted to Catholicism, and has since remained a faithful husband, devoted father & regular at the Basilica, here in DC?? Does it bother you that YOU, sir, are NOT the only one with connections? A lot more will come out about ol Establish-Mitt; and hopefully you won't be so preoccupied with "love" -- which is someone other than Mitt Romney & his cronies' DOMAIN. As a Mormon, Romney sure must be a bastion of fidelity . Bu8t personal issues are not the best line of attack, right Mr. Tyrrell??

I love forgiveness, those opposes, will not get it when most needed. I love redemption & spiritual renewals of faith in God; those opposed deny the Redeemer and take God's glory. I also love Balanced Budgets, the largest Capital Gains Tax cut in US History, income tax cuts, major entitlement reform via workfare, the successful BLOCK of Hillary Care, the surplus AND even Newt Impeaching Clinton for PERJURY & OBSTRUCTION -- for which THIS publication made a GREAT deal of money.

I ask Mr. Tyrrell, is "taking from the rich" and "giving to the uninsured" an example of class-warfare? Would Mr. Tyrrell be so bold as to call it what it really is -- Social Engineering??

Perhaps Mr. Tyrrell would care to SEARCH Paul Ryan's Health Care plan on his government site. Refer to question Number 8. This is the very definition of redistribution, even when promoted the establish-mitt's wonder boy, Paul Ryan.

Taking more from one group and giving it to the other is Social Engineering. Furthermore, Paul Ryan's Plan is ROMNEYCARE.

So while some of the more established find comfort in their Mitt's on our money; I'd prefer a candidate with a little more courage than to consider "We The People" so ignorant as to not be able to accept what is proposed & promoted by the establish-mitt --- class warfare

Conservatives USED to have courage. Now it seems they just run for handouts. Where is the article on the 1991 taxpayer bailout for Bain (when Romney was CEO) or the one detailing how much TARP money Mitt received via his Fannie & Freddie investments??

Right-o, chap! There isn't one...

Nelson H.| 1.26.12 @ 4:28PM

Hat-tip to you, Mr. Tyrrell, from a 33-year subscriber to TAS! One of your boldest and bravest columns, if not the best ever!

We cannot and must not win the presidency by exploiting the frustration and resentment within our own ranks. Gingrich did just that in SC; let us hope his patent medicines don't sell in other states! For my part it seems obvious that none of the candidates running is an acceptable nominee and the party must draft someone else. Daniels is eminently qualified and has long been my #1 choice. How about making your next column an indignant demand that he take the front ranks?

David| 1.26.12 @ 4:33PM

Hey Patrick Read, thanks for the sermon.

I notice you failed to mention that there are consequences for our sins. Yes sir, even after asking for forgiveness, repenting, and being forgiven.

Are you suggesting that we REWARD Newt with the most powerful position on earth simply because he has been forgiven? You need to get your theology straight.

That said, my opposistion to Newt is not based on his personal failings, but on his political failings as a true and CONSISTENT conservative.

Patrick Read| 1.27.12 @ 3:09AM

There's an astute observation by David, who I will not even charge for the sermon.

What David seems so "miffed" about is that neither he, nor E Robert Tyrrell, are responsible for taking confession, nor submitting the articles of Penance' of which FORGIVENESS is necessary and then rendered. The evidence is in the above article, for those not blind enough to read.

David, while you're busy excoriating Newt for a sin that most Americans commit, perhaps you'd be so kind as to throw a dog a bone?

Ronald Reagan said, "Facts are a stubborn thing." After looking into the Establish-Mitt's charge that Newt is no Conservative, I decided to present some facts...

The FACT of the matter is, Newt's 90% Career Conservative Rating is the highest of ALL on stage http://t.co/llRNM58j

Newt's 90% is even higher than Rick Santorum's rating; who incidentally just told the world he is Pro-Progressive income tax (because it was good enough for Reagan; who operated with a Democrat Congress), he is Pro-"each according to their 'means testing," and as part of Santorum's Manufacturing Plan, he is also Pro Big Union (bankrupting states).

Dave, you & Bob need to be made aware of something else. Irish (Italian, Hispanic etc) Catholics are with Newt, and there are an awful lot of us here, for one reason or another...

What Santorum falsely proclaimed are "Reagan Democrats" were not the result of Reagan's "pro-working-guy platform," (which was non existent) but was result of Reagan shining a light on Freedom of Religion and standing firm on the Right to Life.

Right-o, then. Peace (through power)

Jon Bryden| 1.26.12 @ 4:53PM

This is a good article except for one thing to say that Mitt Romney is a conservative is ridiculous. Mitt Romney is not even close to Reagan. The Republicans he is close to are Bush Senior and Junior. He is another Big government Republican just like them. I don't care which ex so and so says he is a conservative. These same people said The Bushes were and what did they give us except biggger government. The only true conservative in the race is Ron Paul!!!!

rightasrain| 1.26.12 @ 5:00PM

So many of us are disappointed with the choice we're going to have to make. One can only imagine what Daniels, Pawlenty, Ryan and Christie are saying in private about their decisions either not to run or to quit so early. On a lighter note, what do you suppose Newt is saying to Bill in the picture?

neverends| 1.26.12 @ 5:15PM

Who in the hell do you think you are? I'll tell you who I think you are...someone who just got his little peepee pinched! We "fly-over" "rednecks" don't need a PhD-attitude arse telling us what you want or how to think. (By the way, in our redneck world, Phd stands for Piled Higher and Deeper!) If you think that horrific bashing is the answer to your future wants and wishes, you are deadly mistaken. If people like yourself, Coulter, Kristal, et al keep this up, there WILL be a third party candidate that will provide you and your fellow "my turn" groupies the responsibility for the complete downfall of this country when Bamey gets back in.
I hope you have your crony capitalism, soft socialist plan ready for that day!

CalMark| 1.26.12 @ 5:33PM

Tyrrell and his whole crew have been off the conservative rails for awhile. Remember how gleefully they trashed Hermain Cain? With Democrats, it's always, "wait till we have the facts." With Republicans it's always, "let's trash him immediately." (I guess they like compliments at cocktail parties.)

If Gingrich is such a bad man, why are we just learning all of this now? And why have all these establishment types lined up against him, recycling old lies?

Here's why: they're Establishment dinosaurs destroyed Gingrich in the late 1990s for rocking the boat by implementing a conservative agenda. Who replaced Gingrich? A worthless RINO, not a conservative. These worthless losers wanted their nice, quiet loser life as permanent minority. Newt shook 'em up.

P.S. Rush Limbaugh can't say, "I have personal things and can't be objective about Newt," but instead is trashing Gingrich under the guise of objectivity. I never thought I'd say this, but I hope Rush's dishonesty puts him out of business.

P.P.S. This is my first post here in many months because AmSpec is moving rapidly left. This Tyrrell rant just confirms it. I'm outta here, for good.

Margie| 1.26.12 @ 5:49PM

He didn't "trash Newt".

Patrick Read| 1.27.12 @ 3:11AM

Yes, he did trash Newt. And only other trash wouldn't be able to see it.

Margie| 1.27.12 @ 2:34PM

Well, you know what God says, don't you? To the perverse, all things are perverse.

PERVERT.

And my comment was to the above poster's saying that RUSH trashed Newt.

Care to amend, or are you too proud??

Patrick Read| 1.28.12 @ 12:55AM

Sure, I can comment. I never said "you" were trash, did I? So, let's not PERVERT the issue: Rush has taken shots at Newt, especially relative 3rd party attack ads regarding Bain; the owner of the very same Clear Channel that pays Rush. He also refuses to report Bain's 1991 $10M taxpayer bailout made while Romney was CEO -- as does this very publication.

Granted, Rush has recently taken-up for Newt & he and Mike Reagan trashed Romney and some of the established elites. As did Mark Levin, and Peter Lord. It's hard not to do, with respect to Mitt's liberal record as a flip-flop Governor & his blatant lies.

More to the point, Pam Bondi (FL-AG) refused to admit that Romney Care is Obama Care, in it that BOTH are a direct refusal of the 10th Amendment. "Powers not addressed in the Constitution shall fall to the States or to The People." The Government is NOT entitled to our lives, health, insurance, retirement, marriage, children, educaiton & our very labor.

Bondi's denial of the MANDATE-similarity makes crystal clear what Mitt thinks of the "Free-Market." She went onto say that she was asked to join Romney's Admin and lead his Health Care Task Force; "which is to implement 50 different Romney Cares, each to a Big State Government. She will be the lead regarding helping Big State Governors implement it.

The difference between the establish-Mitts and conservatives? Romney and those with him assumed the 10th Amendment gives the STATE the authority over We the People & our health care. 50 different Romney Cares in each state is just another nuclear MANDATE.

I wonder, which so-called impeccably conservative publication will adMitt the same!

Patrick Read| 1.28.12 @ 1:00AM

The 10th Amendment. "Powers not addressed in the Constitution shall fall either to the States or to The People."

Romney falsely assumed the State, not We the People!

Bondi should remember that the States sued the Federal Government over the mandate; and likewise The People can sue the state for the very same reason.

It says "Declaration of INdependence" - not more dependence, just via Big States each with its own mandate.

Margie| 1.28.12 @ 3:52PM

Spare me the lies, I'm not an idiot. You said. "only other trash wouldn't see it."
That's saying I must be trash.
UGH.
But moving right along.
The point IS~ at least the one I was trying to make is that just because Rush says things about what people are doing, doesn't equal his "trashing" them.

Why is it that people can't discern speaking the truth in fact about something or someone is just that~ speaking the truth.

If it's TRASH what the person themselves is doing, then it's their trash and they are trashing themselves.

Trish| 1.26.12 @ 5:37PM

Trotting out ol' Dole and McNasty is the Romney campaign idea of inspiring the base? Two glaring non-conservative failures? What sort of judgement is that? No thanks.

CalMark| 1.26.12 @ 5:42PM

Agreed. Perhaps the two worst GOP candidates EVER.

And why now? The Establishment is in a panic, co-opting everyone (Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, the idiots here at AmSpec, the little children at NRO, etc.).

We are seeing Establishment rats in a corner. Let's finish 'em off politically, instead of letting them escape to run around some more.

Craig | 1.26.12 @ 6:02PM

Ever since you founded TAS, when it was in newspaper format, I've always been an avid reader and supporter. You have now joined the disgusting fratricide of the Republican candidates. Do you recall Newt's conversion to Catholocism? His apologies for his past. Is it not possible that Newt has sought redemption? Unlike "Slick- Willey'?

Paul| 1.26.12 @ 7:43PM

Is it not possible that Newt has sought redemption???????????
Naivety of that kind demonstrates precisely why America is digging itself ever deeper into a political and economic black hole. The explanation for every aspect of political life in the US becomes clear the minute one stops wasting time on silver linings.

CforUS| 1.27.12 @ 10:57AM

I choose to believe he has sought redemption until he does something to prove me wrong. I have to ask Paul (based on his statement that those of us that believe Newt has turned over an new leaf are naive) for some sure fire stock tips or a hot horse tip. He obviously has an ability the rest of us are lacking. He can read minds and knows what's in peoples hearts. Paul, can you read my mind on what I'm thinking about your comment?

Long Ben| 1.26.12 @ 6:05PM

While Romney has remained with his first wife and all , he has demonstrated in his Govenorship the total lack of loyalty to Christian principle .
Abortion Yes , Gay Marraige Yes , public funding of Abortion Yes . Unprincipled will to power ----- Reckon so .

Ted Galey| 1.26.12 @ 6:18PM

To be four square behind either Gov. Romney or Speaker Gingrich one has to take their histories with a lot of tolerance and forgiveness. On the record, Gov. Romney is not conservative and appears with people and programs he’s supported to be a left of center progressive. Moderate is a kind descriptor. He says he’s learned from his experiences, is now conservative and I’ll take him at his word but need to be shown to believe it.
Speaker Gingrich is a brilliant man and inside the beltway tactician. His character is less than historically great. He also says he’s learned his lessons, has contrition and has asked for forgiveness through his faith for his personal transgressions. I’ll take him at his word but need to be shown to believe it.
Both are significantly to the right of President Obama and each has knowledge, skills and experiences that so far exceed the President that either are a preferable choice for POTUS. Senator Santorum and Congressman Paul are both preferable too, but unless something big changes the landscape there is little possibility that either will rise to the top of the Republican field to get the nomination.
The Republican Party and its pundits in my view are more in line with Mitt Romney-past. The Republican Party in my view is in general center left, progressive and more elitist by the day. The main stream of Republicans has no narrative and as a group seems to spend their time “eating their young.” Rather than supporting and finding good in all the likely candidates they are repeating 2008 in their damning of non-main stream Republican candidates often supported by the Tea Party or more specifically conservatives who mostly vote Republican.
I’m for any of the four Republican candidates. None are perfect. All are overwhelmingly superior to President Obama. Unless conservatives and Republicans can start looking for the good that these people represent and stop focusing on mistakes related to distant history, start talking about the real and many serious issues and creating a real narrative/plan to address the issues the electorate can get behind, President Obama’s prospects for re-election begin to look very good.

mikhail silo| 1.26.12 @ 7:00PM

Listen to this and try to imagine the voice of each of the four GOP candidates saying these words.

Which candidate could actually say these words and mean them?

When you're finished, you'll know who to vote for.

Patton's speech to the 3rd army

John786| 1.26.12 @ 7:00PM

http://www.spectator.co.uk/ale.....lain.thtml

RM Russell| 1.26.12 @ 7:10PM

It's just too much of a coincidence that all of these Republicans(note I didn't say Conservatives) have just come our with all this "evidence" that Newt is not who he says he is. Well,I'm sorry, it just sounds like they are splitting hairs, maybe not telling the whole story,jealous, cowards back then, and desperate now.I'm still supporting Newt because our country's life is hanging by a thread. Newt will rise above all the politics and save this country.

1389AD| 1.26.12 @ 7:13PM

How wrong you are!

If you are worried about bad character, you should have crossed Mitt Romney off your list.

http://1389blog.com/category/politics/mitt-romney/

The "race card" is overdrawn and doesn't work any more. Same with the "woman card." And last I checked, Newt is running for president, not pope. So he made a mistake and ended up with an obviously bad, unstable woman when his first marriage broke up. She most likely had a hand in that breakup, and then she has the nerve to complain when her bitter personality and her selfish refusal to help him with his political career led him to find someone else. Many of us have made mistakes with the opposite sex (or perhaps the same sex, as in the case of many journalists). At least Newt now seems to have a good relationship with his present wife. And he is articulating a strong message, which makes him the best bet for defeating Obama. Who are you to condemn him?

Paul| 1.26.12 @ 7:38PM

Sometimes apologizing for someone's vulgarity can be quite noble, other times it just sounds spineless and partisan.

Soljerblue| 1.26.12 @ 7:37PM

Maybe Newt, with all his damaged goods, is exactly the right guy to take on the charlatan in the White House. Romney is a gentleman, and he'll lose like a gentleman. Newt is a knife fighter, and MAY win. I'd rather take my chances with Newt, the 'conservative' punditocracy notwithstanding.

John Schuh| 1.26.12 @ 7:39PM

Conservatives are looking for a spokesman, and Romney is a poor one. He started a mud fight with Gingrich in Iowa. He could not explain in plain language how he made his fortune, in part because he deals only in money, not people and not goods. Turns out is is the most-cold-blooded of capitalists, a financier.like Jay Gould.

Mrs.Vito| 1.26.12 @ 7:40PM

Oh, get a grip, Bob, and get off your high-horse! This article is the epitome of you hypocritical 'establishment' types, who, in the last election, presented us with John McCain. Gee, how did that work out?

And now, you're shilling for Romney, the fake conservative with great hair, who couldn't beat McCain, who couldn't beat Obama in 2008!!
You're out of your f*cking gourd to think that we real conservative are going to let you guys shove this douchebag Romney down our throats. You should be ashamed.
Whatever you can dig up on Newt, HE IS STILL BETTER THAN OBAMA, and there are millions of us who thinks so!

Jordan| 1.27.12 @ 1:02AM

Geeze Vito, what was a real intelligent response.

PCP Smoker| 1.26.12 @ 8:11PM

I'll take Bill Clinton (Newt) over Barack Obama (Romney). If not, then let's welcome socialism under Barack 012.

Konnie| 1.27.12 @ 10:34PM

Do you really smoke PCP? BTW, I agree with you. (Newt over Romney, not the PCP.)

avagreen| 1.26.12 @ 8:20PM

HE'S BETTER THAN ROMNEY!!!!!

I'll vote for Newt twelve days a week. Romney, Obama-lite, zero!

Rick| 1.26.12 @ 9:36PM

Your a antisemite!

Abigail Adams| 1.26.12 @ 9:43PM

That is quite harsh and badly timed, considering the state our nation is in and the election looming ahead. Bill and Newt may have similarities, but they are not the same person-- Newt has repented; Bill has not. In addition, America is in need of a President who is FOR America, who is knowledgeable on the issues and the way our government needs to work, who knows and respects our Constitution, who is brave and courageous in asserting the truth to opponents both at home and abroad.... Newt is that man. So, please stop pointing out his faults because in continually doing so, many people will choose not to vote at all, which guarantees another term for Obama. Please focus on this: Whom do you prefer: Newt? or Obama?

Trish| 1.26.12 @ 9:43PM

I hate adultry as it wrecked my parents marriage and was a catastrophy for our family. That being said, we are not electing my pastor. We are up against an iron willed despot. Only an iron will can defeat him. It ain't Romney.

POST American| 1.26.12 @ 10:15PM

-----------------------FINAL WORD---------------------

AS we take in that photo of 'regular guy'
Rockefeller blood-clinked Clinton
----and the arch Globalist and 'warm'
EUGENICS advocate ---NEW 'IT'
'Getting--RICH' ----REALLY take in
that description of PSYCHOPATHS
and PSYCHOPATHY.

---------------------------------------REALLY

Trish| 1.26.12 @ 11:00PM

My suggestion is that Mitt Romney repent for being a big gov liberal up until he decided to run for prez. Where was he in the Reagan years? Oh yes, an 'independent' progressive. This is not a far cry from the manchurian Obama. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me!

Pimarily Exhausted| 1.27.12 @ 7:24AM

Oh well, another GOP-stamped contender who will go down in flames against the Democrat. Romney doesn't stand a chance against Obama, really. The media and the Democrats will savage him and he will be standing there, helpless, while all of these GOP establishment poo-bahs slowly creep back to their cushy lobbyist jobs. But Romney will be okay. The islands are very nice in early November. Plus he'll take all the money from his campaign and dump it into a trust fund or foundation that his cronies can use as a piggy bank.

4 more years of Obama and that's good. More damage must be done so those who voted for him don't forget what they did, especially those dumb kids who should be in their late 20's or 30 learn a good hard lesson.

Margtc| 1.27.12 @ 7:26AM

Romney's and Santorum's problem is that they don't like us, and therefore we cannot like them back. Newt may not be our ideal candidate, but he has shown he is willing to like us, talk like us and put up a fight against you insider types who don't care about what we want. It's really not that complicated.

Mike Dar| 1.27.12 @ 11:18AM

willing to like us- cough,gag...have you heard his responses to people whom do not agree with him?
Newt likes Newt.

POST American| 1.27.12 @ 8:00AM

AS America tries, however fitfully, to
come to grips with its own complicity
in the handover of the entire US economy
to history's --MOST-- awesomely genocidal
regime across the Pacific -----while here
at home we've exterminated
some 51,000,000 unborn
as we descend into Oprah selfhood
---consider:

"When you elect someone
you are giving them absolute trust.
We MUST know who these people
ARE ---where they're from ----and
even more important ---who they've
been in with ---what occult organizations
and NGOs they've received support from and
sworn oaths to. Understand, if they're involved,
in any way, with the likes of the Rockefellers
---or the CFR ---and their legions of tax free,
ultra rich NGOs ---they've already sworn
on to world government -----and they've
already BETRAYED you. In essense,
they are TRAITORS. Capstone TRAITORS."

--------------------------UNDERSTAND?--YET?

The American Hitman| 1.27.12 @ 9:38AM

So Newt is "our Bill Clinton." What does that make you "our Joe Goebbels"?

50 years in the "conservative movement," and you're reduced to doing character assassination on command for The Party? Get out with what's left of your soul, Mr Tyrell.

Mike Dar| 1.27.12 @ 11:16AM

The entire political system has become a for profit 'hustle'.
I'm for Ron Paul. When a politican doesn't take the retirement, voluntary 90% pay cut and doesn't interest the lobbyers,, all I can see is less HUSTLE
to get part of the Fed Fiat money from playing the game'what's in it for me'.

Steve in Wi.| 1.27.12 @ 3:17PM

What do you do with Ron Paul's twelve terms of shameless pork barrel voting?

HarryS| 1.27.12 @ 11:34AM

1/26/11 a date that will live in infamy. The date the Republican establishment gave Obama his re-election.

Soljerblue| 1.27.12 @ 2:37PM

Hell, they've been trying ever since they got shellacked in the midterms. True conservatives -- thinking conservatives who know some real history -- scare the c3@p out of them. There are some really good writers here at AS -- RET ain't one of 'em. More of a water-carrier and polemecist for his elite buddies.

Steve in Wi.| 1.27.12 @ 3:15PM

Tyrell hasn't written anything interesting here. His take on Newt is the typical Lame Stream line of propaganda. Newt is the most unjustly maligned GOP candidate I can remember. I happen to know the man and to have been present during most of his tenure as Speaker and I know for a fact that most of what the media (and the Paulbots and the GOP Establishment) say about him is either flat out untrue or wildly distorted to fit their template. It's sad. It's also sad that AS doesn't care more about the tenor of their comment streams. It reduces their credibility.

tex| 1.27.12 @ 3:35PM

This is BS. First off Republicans are running against a president that in his self writing book states he was a drug addict, thug, poor student, socialist, and hints that he was a male prostitute. Who in the dem party can throw stones at any of those running against him. None our the candidates have anything like Obama in their past. Republicans need to use his self proclaimed faults against him. Remember " I didn't inhale " or "bush may have used cocaine in college".

Newt at least can stop attacks on him in just a few short sentences, and a lot of us out here like to see a candidate that isn't afraid to stand up and fight.

dgatlin| 1.27.12 @ 10:19PM

On the other hand, Newt took the House and Senate from the Marxists only to be forced out of office so the new "compassionate" "conservatives" could spend us into oblivion, same as the Democrats. What are your conservative achievements?

POST American| 1.27.12 @ 10:40PM

"---Learn to recognize psychopaths
and psychopathy. Teach your children
to recognize psychopaths and psychopathy.
We are living in a psychopathic system
run by paychopaths."

--------------------WINNING ADVICE

The Bruce| 1.28.12 @ 12:02AM

"Newt, like Bill, has a proclivity for girl hopping. It is not as egregious as Bill's, but then Newt is not as drop-dead beautiful."

I'd say it's more egregious. Bill kept a harem over time, while sticking to the frigid woman that is his wife.

Newt jumped wives like a game of hop-scotch. He even did a double-jump over a wife diagnosed with MS.

No, if you want to give conservatives their own Bill Clinton, that person would be JFK-- somewhat conservative, good looking, charming, but stuck to his wife while molesting the entire female staff.

The Bruce| 1.28.12 @ 12:04AM

Note: JFK would fit perfectly in today's Republican party. His anti-communism credentials would be anathema to today's liberal Democrats.

Art laVois| 1.28.12 @ 3:41AM

But at least Clinton balanced the budget. His successor was a disaster in both fiscal and foreign policy.

POST American| 1.28.12 @ 9:12AM

"They ALWAYS gravitate toward power,
SO learn to recognize PSYCHOPATHS
when you see them. Thereby safeguard
your nation, your family and your soul."
---POST American

---------------Teach your children too!---------------

Ken (Old Texican)| 1.28.12 @ 2:19PM

Well Emmett,
You have seen the feedback...heh...all over the spectrum.

...if you even read the feedback.

Bottom line:
Romney is impotent. (Down here in Texas we call that a limp d*ck.)

Santorum is an afterthought, as is Paul.

My suggestion?
Let's have a fight at the ballot box instead of the bullet box.

We Texans will NOT accept being communized and serfed.
Your article moved us THREE steps toward the bullet box.
Kiss my buttocks.

Uncle Samuel| 1.28.12 @ 2:24PM

Yet another cheap hit piece.

NARCISSISTS LIKE ALL SINNERS CAN REPENT AND BE REDEEMED.

If this were not so, all jail sentences would be permanent.

Thank God for redeemed sinners. They are sadder, but wiser. More reluctant to enter into sin again because they have suffered its consequences.

We have the most dangerous kind of narcissist in our highest office presently - the unrepentant and extreme sort. Look up some of the profilers work on Obama. Look at his friends (Ayers, Dohrn, et al) We will be blessed immensely if Soros' and Hoffa's and O's Islamist buddies evil threats are squelched by capable friends here and abroad...and he is voted out asap.

Get a grip on yourself, Mr. Tyrrell - remember your love of country and of your fellow man and woman. If you took money to write this, return it or give it to Newt's campaign. We need him in this hour... and not your friend Romney's fake conservatism and willingness to compromise and give in to every social agenda group's pressure.

There is a Constitution and a Law that stands above it, that gives it credence and strength. We cannot break that Law without breaking ourselves...individually, relationally and nationally.

Uncle Samuel| 1.28.12 @ 3:30PM

Finishing my thought about the Constitution and Law:

Obviously, Mr. Obama does not respect either. He seems to be partial to either his own inner self-serving law or the Sharia system.

Neither is compatible with our national code of law that produces the character and stability of The United States of America. Our system works despite the occasional eruption of greed, bias and incompetence of legislators and judges IF and only if there is a national will to uphold them.

The Law of a Nation produces the Character of the Nation. This is a nearly inviolable law like gravity, sowing and reaping, and one that appears to be Biblical as well. The whole purpose of the Commandments of God was to make for Himself a nation that was distinctive from the barbaric, hedonistic pagans whom He despised, but grieved...a nation like Himself, a nation that would be His friend and instrument of salvation. At her best, America is thus...at her worst, ignoring her own law and God's, America is as much a devil as any inhumane pagan nation.

We had better wise up, repent and stop our infanticides, laciviousness, our back-biting and betrayal of friends of America, foreign and domestic, and vote in someone who knows the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Federalist papers and the writings of the founding fathers and the principles of economics and government that produce a healthy, prosperous nation, respects these principles and knows how to implement them.

That, sir, would be Newton Leroy Gingrich.

Uncle Samuel| 1.28.12 @ 3:31PM

Clarification - The Sharia system = being a marxist/fascist/totalitarian and misogynistic, unjust, racist system.

moreBS| 1.28.12 @ 3:34PM

Romneycare vs Obamacare?
What is the difference? Capitalism vs Socialism?
If you cannot see the similarities and how stupid both approaches are then you are just as stupid as Romney.

POST American| 1.28.12 @ 10:38PM

-----------------------FINAL WORD---------------------

'New 'IT' Getting RICH' ---was and remains
a KEY figure advancing the capstone EUGENICS
agenda as put forth by the deadly sinister
Toffler's in their 'Third Wave' screed back in
the 80's.

--Destruction of the family
----Destruction of the REAL cultures
------Destruction of culture itself
--------Seamless integration of the Soviet
(--and RED Chinese) with the now reigning
corporate USURY fascim of the U.S.
------------TOTAL dependence on --THEM--

------------------FINAL EUGENICS--------------------

--"DO YOU UNDERSTAND HOW DARK IT IS?"--

Though we expect the likes of the NSA
set up, Rockefeller linked Bill Gates
to be around for a while ---thanks to access to
the elite's meds, organics and procedures
----all others take heed!

Porch servers and chumps reading this
should take in deeply the fates of other
fronts and covers for 'the plan' --a la Steve
Jobs, Hitchens, Russert and Holbrook.

HELL and eternity are FAR more all-consumingly
REAL than the fleeting, slavish consolations of
your Rockefeller rectum bennies.

---------------------------AMEN---------------------------

Gialee| 1.29.12 @ 9:25AM

So where are all these women who supposedly had affairs with Newt and or are accusing him of sexual misbehavior? So far all I see are three women, who each entered into a marriage with him. The first his high school teacher, who at 25 married her teenage student; the second a woman, who supposedly had previously dated a married man and began seeing Newt when he and his first wife were having problems; and number three, his current wife, whom he started seeing during the six years, that he and his second wife were separated. You can't compare Newt's marital record with Clinton's record of criminal sexual behavior. Newt may not have the best marital track record, but there are no women accusing him of Clinton type behavior. Let's refresh your memory, regarding Clinton. He was accused of rape by Jaunita Broderick and sexual assault by Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey and carried on an office affair with intern, Monica Lewinsky, which he denied in court to his employer, the American people. All Newt has is at least one disgruntled, if not two disgruntled ex-wives and a current third wife who seems happy and content with their relationship, as does he. While Clinton had and still has a wife, who was and still is willing to "stand by her man" no matter what bad behavior he is accused of, in order to further her political ambitions, but don't ask her to bake any cookies.

stubob| 1.30.12 @ 6:12AM

Nevertheless, Clinton is considered by many to be a very successful President despite his womanizing. The correlation just isn't there: Clinton, Kennedy, Jefferson. Kennedy cut tax rates and the economy boomed. He sent us to space. If I'm correct, Harding very successfully and conservatively presided over the great depression of 1920 before he died simply by not intervening. Ironically, it was the Republican Congress under Newt that allowed Clinton to preside over a great economy with balanced budgets and welfare reform, yet Newt gets no credit. Meanwhile many among the 72 endorsers mentioned above controlled both houses and the Presidency under G. W. Bush, yet spent like sailors and yearned to build bridges to nowhere, clearly moving the ball in the wrong direction. Yet the creator of Romneycare [a rose by any other name] and the above 72 are considered the keepers of the flame. Which House was more successful, the Newt House or the subsequent non-Newt House where RINO's controlled everything? These are the same RINO's now attacking Newt. Romney cannot stand next to Obama in a debate format and successfully attack Romney's creation, Obamacare. Womanizing is a bad thing, but it doesn't trump everything else one must consider.

stubob| 1.30.12 @ 6:17AM

Also, Nancy Reagan literally passed the torch to Newt and Michael Reagan endorsed him. Those 2 endorsements are worth more than those of 72 RINO's

LLKyle| 1.30.12 @ 9:40AM

If John Bolton supports Romney, then so will I. Mr. Bolton has my respect and support.

ClarkeUSMC| 2.12.12 @ 8:15PM

I find it both disturbing and disappointing that a supposedly "conservative" periodical finds it necessary to equate the accomplishments of creating the first GOP majority in the House and Senate in over four decades, forcing a balanced budget and welfare reform upon a recalcitrant pathological misogynist and criminal in chief. Newt reformed the House on gifts and other unsavory access practices. He gave us D.O.M.A., made federal funding for abortion illegal and stopped Clinton's anti-second amendment agenda.

I was there in 1995 as the Communications Director to one of the very conservative freshman House members that Newt had take the lead on reform legislation. You can pile on Newt all you care to for the benefit of another Rockefeller RINO that will ultimately lose to the Marxist machine dismantling this republic, but your comparisons are refuted by historical fact.