Rick Santorum is all about traditionalism, from his seven children, his obsession with the womb and Teh Gays, and his sweater vest. But in yet another example of how topsy-turvy his party has become, he's running a web add titled "Rebellion". And you know what? It's awesome. Derivative of Apple's infamous "1984" ad, but still awesome:
Far too many liberals are rubbing their hands together with glee at the thought of ANY of the Final Four Clowns being the Republican nominee. I'm the least worried about Romney, because his tin ear for the real concern about income inequality and his now-demonstrated short fuse have combined to remove him from the "most electable" category. It's Gingrich and to a lesser extent Santorum that have me worried.
Remember when Al Gore debated George W. Bush? Al Gore was sober, serious, and clearly annoyed at having to debate a numbskull like Bush. And the media all decided that Bush was the winner. Now imagine a debate between Newt Gingrich and Barack Obama. Obama will be his typical cool self, and Gingrich will be up there pontificating and name-dropping and throwing red meat at the racists -- and then calling Obama out as "playing the race card" if he responds...or weak if he doesn't. Gingrich's success in South Carolina seems to have largely come because he "put Juan Williams in his place", as Dave Weigel just pointed out on Up With Chris Hayes. Yesterday on the same show, Melissa Harris-Perry pointed out how Gingrich also put both women and the media in their place with his response to John King's question about his ex-wife Marianne's interview with ABC. Compared to the robotic Mitt Romney, Gingrich seems "real" by comparison. And for some reason, his pseudo-intellectual babbling about Saul Alinsky and Kenyan anti-colonialism is the kind of "smart-guy" stuff that the drooling masses like those who just went to the polls can accept -- because it feeds their pre-conceived ideas. A Gingrich nomination falls into the Wildean notion of there being two tragedies in life -- one is not getting what one wants; the other is getting it.
Santorum, who seems unlikely to get the nomination, is probably the "realest" of the bunch. Whereas Ron Paul, who is worshipped in some circles for his "consistency" has a libertarian doctrine that stops at the womb and the bedroom, Santorum is a true believer in even his most insane notions. He's not a babbling idiot like Rick Perry, nor does he sound like a zombie channelling Aimee McSemple Pherson the way Michele Bachmann did. He's the real deal, the channeller of Father Knows Best America, right down to the dorky sweater vest. I still think that in a head-to-head matchup, Obama could beat Santorum, but I think he'd be a tougher opponent than most of us would have thought when he first decided to run.
As I write this, the scrappy New York Giants have just tied it up against the 49ers, by not letting their guard down for a minute. The outcome of this game is still up for grabs, but you can bet Eli Manning has no illusions of a cakewalk. We can only hope that Barack Obama and those around him have the same realization.
As you probably know, NY is currently above SF and my guess they will prevail but I disagree about your GOP choice analysis. The GOP establishment is in charge - we're talking about a sober,serious businessman not a flaming social warrior like the Newtster.
Well, re the masses thinking Gingrich is "real": I just think of Paul Krugman's comment that Gingrich "is what a stupid person thinks a smart person sounds like."
Some rights of this page's plain text stuffs are reserved for the author.
The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the authors of said opinions, and do not in any way represent the opinions of other contributors.
The Template is generated via PsycHo and is Licensed.
Oops now Sf is ahead and looking pretty strong.