For Truth, Honor, and Freedom
Try Acutemania's Conservative News Search

Newt’s Third Party Run and Rise of Santorum

I have been documenting the so-called conservative media’s attempt to hijack the primary for Mitt Romney. The media’s strategy constists of two parts: Some, like Matt Drudge and Ann Coulter, have been hammering Romney’s conservative challengers, particularly Newt Gingrich (click the image to the left to see for yourself). Others, like Rush Limbaugh and Michelle Malkin, have been promoting conservative alternatives, like Rick Santorum, in an effort to split the conservative vote.

The establishment forces for Romney hit a fever pitch after Newt Gingrich trounced Mitt Romney in South Carolina. The National Review and others smeared Newt as an opponent of Ronald Reagan. The lies were coordinated with attack ads that Mitt Romney was running at the time. On a thursday January 26, 2012, a day that will live on in infamy for conservatives, Drudge linked it all together on his website.

In response, Michael Reagan came out to defend Newt Gingrich and his true legacy of working with and supporting Ronald Reagan. Newt Gingrich and his supporters spread a video of Nancy Reagan proudly proclaiming that Ronald Reagan had “passed the torch” onto Newt. However, all of it was too late to correct the lies before the election.

Additionally, Michelle Malkin and the Limbaughs came out to endorse Santorum in an effort to split the conservative vote. A parade of has-beens, including Tom Delay and Bob Dole, were brought out by the republican establishment to smear Newt’s record. Ann Coulter wrote an article entitled “Re-Elect Obama: Vote Newt!” The coordinated attack was so obvious that even many liberal media outlets took notice.

The result was that Newt Gingrich went from a commanding lead in the polls in Florida to wide loss by the time the election took place. The establishment and their comrades in the press cheered. All of their attacks, along with Mitt’s multi-million dollar attack ad bonanza, had secured victory for Mitt Romney, and he went on to win in Nevada too. Everything was finally right with the world, they thought.

However, something was not quite right. Newt gave a concession speech after Florida where he said what many interpreted as a hint at a third party run. He said that he would no longer run a “Republican campaign but a people’s campaign.” Whether Newt meant it or not is hard to say, but many of Newt’s supporters picked up the idea of a third party run and vowed not to back Mitt.

Other troubling signs existed in Mitt Romney’s wins. The voter turnout in South Carolina was up 35% from 2008, where Newt won. In Nevada and Florida, the turnout was way down. Romney’s campaign had been strictly negative, and it showed.

It has become increasingly apparent that Mitt Romney can not win the general election and that conservatives voters are likely to go to a third party or stay home. Worse still for the old conservative media, people have been tuning them out (I have switched to Newsmax, CNS, American Thinker, etc.).

What could the old media to do? They decided to take the farce and run with it. They all got behind the other anti-Romney candidate, Rick Santorum, and pushed him to a three-state sweep: MN, CO, and MO.

Will the old media continue to back Rick Santorum? Will Mitt Romney come back? Will Newt stay in and attempt a comeback or plan for a third party run?

If Mitt Romney does manage to win the nomination at this point, conservatives will need a third party candidate. Mitt Romney would lose anyway, but having him as the leader of the party would leave the base so despondent that the Republican Congress would suffer greatly. A third party run by Newt Gingrich would not only have a chance of winning, but it would be the best method for getting conservatives to the polls.

, , , , , ,
February 8, 2012 at 3:22 pm Comment (1)

Is Hopeless Mitt Romney a Sociopath?

It’s another presidential election and once again the republican establishment is telling us who we really should want: Mitt Romney. This is the same establishment that gave us the previous losers, Bob Dole in 1996 and John McCain in 2008. Not suprisingly, both Bob Dole and John McCain are behind Mitt Romney this time.

Amazingly, Mitt Romney is even worse than either McCain or Dole. They both served in the military, while Romney hasn’t. Dole was dull, McCain was ornery, but Mitt Romney is outright loathesome. And while McCain and Dole were not great speakers, Romney is a robotic gaffe machine. Mitt Romney’s gaffes are not just absurd, like Joe Biden’s, either. His gaffes are downright nasty: “I like to fire people.” and “I’m not concerned about the very poor.”

Here’s a chilling thought. Maybe Mitt Romney’s gaffes aren’t really gaffes at all. Maybe those gaffes reflect a man who is truly out of touch, or maybe worse. Maybe deep down, Mitt Romney is really an unfeeling sociopath. After all, this is the same man who put his dog in an “air-tight” container on the roof of his car for a 12-hour drive. He is also the man who proudly declared that “corporations are people, my friend.”

There’s much more to support the sociopath theory. Mitt Romney’s flip-flops on issues are legendary, even among politicians. It isn’t just that Mitt flip-flops, but that he does it with utmost conviction–without thinking or caring what the consequences are. In fact, he seldom considers the consequences of anything that he does.

In this election cycle, Mitt Romney has created huge attack ad campaigns filled with lies and character smears. He dragged out former colleagues of Newt Gingrich to trash him. Before the South Carolina primary, Romney backer Matt Drudge broke the phony story that Newt Gingrich asked his ex-wife for an “open marriage.” Before the Florida primary, Matt Drudge and the National Review screamed bald-faced lies, echoing the Mitt Romney ads that claimed Newt Gingrich had opposed Ronald Reagan.

It was around that time that I realized that Mitt Romney had been behind the parade of countless women and sex lies that were brought out to smear former, front-runner Herman Cain. The fingerprints matched. Who else would do such a thing?

Campaign ads from Mitt Romney have been close to 99% negative. Voter participation has dropped and most of the conservative base now hates Mitt. He hasn’t yet considered the consequences of all this in the general election. He always assumed that he would pay off who he has to when he gets there.

That’s how Mitt Romney lives. His company, Bain Capital, bought out Clear Channel so that now he literally owns the conservative talk radio hosts Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, etc. He paid for endorsements from TEA Party candidates, like Christine O’Donnell and Nikki Haley, through campaign contributions.

It seems reasonable to conclude that he paid off Ann Coulter and many others in the press to lie for him, as well. Never before have we heard so many lies and smears.

So goes the mind of a sociopath. He believes that he can do whatever he wants without consequence. It’s not surprising, then, that in this election cycle, the cliche has become reality: This really is the most negative campaign ever.

This is Mitt Romney; he will say anything to win. He doesn’t just lie, he does so with absolute insistence. Words like “never” and “always” are used frequently, along with tones of strong indignation–the bigger the lie, the stronger the indignation. How dare anyone doubt him?

Finally, the true mark of a sociopath is his belief that commonly accepted rules don’t apply to him. Nowhere was this more apparent than when Mitt had his interview with Brett Baier on Fox News. Brett is as mild as they come, but Mitt Romney became extremely testy over common questions on immigration and health care. At the end of the interview (see the video), Mitt Romney complained that the interview was “overly aggressive” and “uncalled for.” And this was Republican-friendly Fox News.

, , , ,
February 6, 2012 at 2:29 pm Comments (0)

Matt Drudge Helps Mitt Romney Coordinate Attacks on Newt Gingrich

Today, Mitt Romney organized an attackapalooza on Newt Gingrich with great assistance from the republican establishment and their servants in the new media. How extensive was the attack? Well, the Drudge Report ran a linkapalooza of anti-Newt attacks, which the New York Times even pointed out were gross distortions (left-click the image to enlarge it to see the 12 links and 2 images against Newt).

Many others joined in, as noted by Politico: Elliott Abrams at the National Review accused the Newt Gingrich of repeatedly attacking President Ronald Reagan. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. wrote an article in the American Spectator, which linked Newt Gingrich’s infidelity to Bill Clinton and called them both 60s narcissists (For the record, Newt had an affair over a decade ago while separated and married the woman, while Clinton was a serial adulterer). They even brought out old 1996 loser, Bob Dole, to attack Newt (that might actually help him). A piece was written by the editors of National Review called “The Hour of Newt” (Is William F. Buckley turning in his grave yet?). Ann Coulter, who has become a regular Mitt Romney cheerleader, penned her obligatory attack piece entitled “Re-elect Obama, Vote Newt!” (How original?). FInally, they dragged out Tom Delay to declare “[Newt]’s not really a conservative.” (an obvious lie).

Considering the volume of attacks directed at Newt, it seems reasonable to assume that Mitt has been doling out the cash. The anti-Reagan line of attack, in particular, seemed directly coordinated with the ads that Mitt Romney has been running against Newt in Florida (see the video below). Ironically, Michael Reagan himself came out today in defense of Newt, and Newt’s campaign dug up a video of Nancy Reagan commenting that Reagan was passing the torch to Newt. This was bound to backfire on Romney.

The National Journal has more information on these attacks and some of the history of Gingrich and the other parties involved.

, , , , , , , ,
January 27, 2012 at 12:39 am Comments (0)

Republican Establishment Smears Herman Cain . . . and the Tea Party

It difficult to say who started the sexual harassment smear campaign against Herman Cain, but it’s obvious today that the republican establishment is fully on board with it. Since yesterday, Bill Bennett, Karl Rove, and Mitt Romney have piled on and sanctioned the smears against Herman Cain. It’s clear at this point that the republican establishment is trying its best to destroy the Tea Party via its representative, Herman Cain.

Yesterday, Bill Bennett wrote an article entitled “Cain must confront sex harassment issue,” where he stated:

It is no longer insignificant. Neither is it insignificant that the Cain campaign discounted the charges in the initial stories, saying they were based on anonymous sources, only to make a mockery by blaming other campaigns with less substantiation than the original stories.

Today, Karl Rove did his best to make the charges seem credible in an interview on Foxs News, where he asserted the following:

Credibility matters here. And Gloria Allred, while she is a Democrat and a liberal Democrat and openly so — nonetheless, has been involved in a number of high profile cases like Tiger Woods and others where the charges have been borne out.

Not to be outdone, Mitt Romney lent what little credibility his words have to the charges in an interview for ABC, stating,

These are serious allegations, George, and they’re going to have to be addressed seriously. I don’t have any counsel for Herman Cain or for his campaign, they have to take their own counsel on this.

This is an intesting turn of events, since we now know that the woman leveling the charges of sexual harassment against Herman Cain, Sharon Bialek, has an incredibly shady past, filled with multiple bankruptcies and a failed paternity suit against a media executive (the media might take a closer look at that if they aren’t too busy trying to destroy Cain). Those of us who are conservative and members of the Tea Party should understand one thing about this whole saga: It has almost nothing to do with Herman Cain and everything to do with destroying conservatives and the Tea Party.

, , , , , , , , , , ,
November 8, 2011 at 7:28 pm Comment (1)