The Washington Examiner warns conservatives that they should think twice about Newt
Which is fine, albeit startlingly surreal coming from a paper whose editorial page says we should all rally behind Mitt Romney, unrepentant architect of state-run health care and careful, proactive steward of a planet beset by noxious human exhalation.
It is to laugh. All of it. This whole primary season.
Here: let me just get this out of the way. Not a vote has yet been cast. So the race is not down to Romney and Gingrich (and maybe Huntsman, with a 10% chance of Uncle Ron letting loose a downpour of abject crazy) — unless, of course, we the GOP sheep allow our kingmakers to sell us on the “extremism” evident in our outlandish, “purist” desire for conservative / classical liberal representation.
Which is why I am throwing my own feeble endorsement right now behind Michele Bachmann. With Rick Santorum and Rick Perry to follow. After that, Newt gets my vote.
I have no interest in a Mitt Romney candidacy — largely because I see it as a pointed, establishment rebuke to the TEA Party, which establishment it is increasingly clear views the ideological-driven segment of its base with obvious disdain and distrust, if not absolute disgust (witness, eg., John Boehner’s forcing a vote on a 1200 page omnibus bill nobody read). I have no interest in a Ron Paul candidacy, because Paul’s foreign policy is not much different from Obama’s, with the caveat that Obama may in fact be more of a hawk, and that, in the final analysis, Paul may be even more of a pander (though to a niche bloc of supporters). And I have no interest in a Jon Huntsman candidacy because, well, why the fuck would I?
So there you have it. The secret is out. And off the rails I go.