Think it’s only those squishy, Chardonnay-swigging, elitist Republicans who are opposed to a Gingrich nomination? Not necessarily. Yesterday two prominent, right-wing talk show hosts launched into controversial anti-Newt diatribes, and both for very different reasons.
First, here’s Glenn Beck, who caught a lot of heat for the following comments, made on Fox Business:
If you have a big government progressive, or a big government progressive in Obama… ask yourself this, Tea Party: is it about Obama’s race? Because that’s what it appears to be to me. If you’re against him but you’re for this guy, it must be about race. I mean, what else is it? It’s the policies that matter.
Beck’s remarks caused a firestorm on Twitter, with some conservatives saying that he used the “race card” as an attack in the same way that the left does. But it doesn’t sound like Beck was trying to smear Tea Partiers as racist here. He was making a slightly different point that gets lost under the hyperbole, which is that Gingrich’s policies are supposedly so similar to Obama’s that there’s no reason to vote for one over the other.
Of course, that’s self-evidently untrue. Gingrich may be a centrist in a lot of ways, but he’s to the right of Obama on a number of things, most notably foreign policy and social issues. There are plenty of reasons for a Republican to support Gingrich over Obama that have absolutely nothing to do with race. Beck may be right that Romney is more of a conservative than Gingrich, but he certainly could have framed it in a better way.
Meanwhile, radio host Michael Savage made a very different case against Gingrich, this time attacking the former speaker as “unelectable.” In order to ensure that this information was picked up by the mainstream media, Savage decided to offer Gingrich $1 million to drop out of the race in the next 72-hours. Instant publicity.
Here’s Savage’s press statement (caps lock is his; apparently he wanted to make sure he conveyed his anger):
NEWT GINRICH IS UNELECTABLE. MITT ROMNEY IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE WITH A CHANCE OF DEFEATING BARACK OBAMA, AND THERE IS NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN THAT FOR FUTURE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THEREFORE, I AM OFFERING NEWT GINGRICH ONE MILLION DOLLARS TO DROP OUT OF THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE FOR THE SAKE OF THE NATION.
Ridiculous media ploys aside, Savage’s comments have a lot of truth to them. Gingrich really does have serious electability problems, and would be much more vulnerable than Romney in a general election. And beyond the race card controversy, Beck had some good points, too – Gingrich is hardly the true conservative in the race. Others have been making both these arguments for awhile now. If more conservative talk show hosts start picking these points up, that could eat into Gingrich’s support from the base.
That is, unless Gingrich saves them all the trouble by taking Savage up on his offer at some point in the next 72-hours. The clock is ticking.
Two far-right loons are against Gingrich? That makes me more likely to support him.
I don't know that Sean Hannity has taken sides. But Rush Limbaugh clearly prefers Gingrich. I do find it interesting that Glenn Beck, Michael Savage and Ann Coulter are all dead set against Gingrich.
n nCorrection. These intellectual giants of our time are against any frontrunner who is not Willard Mitt Romney. When it wasn't Gingrich it was Perry. Before that, Bachmann. Discredit the conservatives and we're left with the progressive, Romney.
Newt may be right of Obama when talking about social issues, but the President is way to the right of Newt when it comes to living social values. It seems that Republican voters want to proove themselves just as irrational as Democrats were in 2008. Too many can't be happy to just win the election, they want to win and flip off the "Washington establishment" at the same time.
Alana, you've unintentionally highlighted one of the biggest problems we have. Savage is not right wing. Beck is not right wing. They are flat out hucksters who've found bountiful hunting grounds in Right Wingdom. And the number of Americans (both Right and Left) who have become addicted to rage and conspiracies is a real problem. n nFoxNews is a major part of the problem as well. I could go on for weeks about that but for now I'll just use two words to support my statement: Donald Trump.
Hey, does anyone remember back in the 2008 cycle when Bain Capital entered into a deal to buy Clear Channel and Rush Limbaugh and other Clear Channel talent began–suddenly, mysteriously–to shill shamelessly for Romney? Do you remember the electrifying effect it had on GOP base voters, how they scrambled to stand beneath the banner of Team Romney?–because, as you know, we’re all just zombies shambling lockstep with the talking heads of conservative media–well, neither do I, because it availed Willard Mitt Romney precisely nothing in polls or primary contests.
That is a great point. The talking heads had no effect on my opinion of Romney either. n nMy worry is more about how the loudmouth nuts influence non-partisans, indys, young people, and less ideological folks. There are a whole bunch of self described conservatives with microphones who do NOT represent me at all, yet they end up being our representatives in the media.
If the future of Zionism rests in the hands of these circus geeks, you're in big trouble.