There was a remarkable outpouring of anti-Newt rhetoric over the last couple of days. The scare initiated by his victory over the presumptive next-in-line candidate of the establishment got a lot of voices to speak up. We knew Ann Coulter was a Romneyite. I was a bit surprised that R. Emmett Tyrrell came out with something this harsh:
Newt Is GOP's Bill Clinton
Seriously? With friends like Tyrrell in the GOP stalwart media, why would we ever worry about Rachel Maddow?
Then we had Elliot Abrams, a former Reagan staffer take serious issue with the Gingrich--Reagan nexus. Sure, it is common for a conservative aspirant to cloak himself in the mantle of the great one, but it is rare to have that linkage so severely challenged.
Newt Exaggerates. Reagan Never Liked Him.
Apparently the coordinated attacks were supposed to be so overwhelming that nobody expected fact checking. Certainly there wouldn't be much challenge from the mainstream media. Does Wolf Blitzer even know how to Google?
That's why this "not so fast" dismantling in the American Spectator should be read carefully:
Abrams Apparently Panders For Romney Appointment Later
This coming Tuesday is going to be interesting. I suspect that Romney will win, but the margin won't be as large as he would like. The interesting, if insignificant outcome will be whether Santorum stays ahead of Ron Paul.
What counts now is contributions. Who can keep the campaign going at the accelerating pace required to travel and make an impact for Super Tuesday. That takes money. Romney has got it. Gingrich is capable of getting it. Santorum needs an infusion to remain viable. And the Ron Paul campaign runs on Ramen noodles and loyalists Tweets.