The Great Karl Rove Super PAC Scare

Posted on | February 20, 2013 | 31 Comments

Having said nothing about all this previously, my inclination is to discourage pre-emptive panic among grassroots conservatives. Until we get down to cases — in a clear-cut situation where a Republican primary pits a solid conservative against a Establishment RINO type hand-picked by Karl Rove — there’s no point getting all angry or frightened about it. Look for an opportunity to beat one of Rove’s picks, to teach the Establishment a lesson, but in the meantime, keep your powder dry.

So, anyway . . . Newt Gingrich is now anti-Rove:

I am unalterably opposed to a bunch of billionaires financing a boss to pick candidates in 50 states. This is the opposite of the Republican tradition of freedom and grassroots small town conservatism…
That is the system of Tammany Hall and the Chicago machine. It should be repugnant to every conservative and every Republican.

Allahpundit has further commentary on this theme at Hot Air. But you’ll excuse me for not buying Newt’s new act as populist defender of the Tea Party grassroots. When the entire Tea Party was backing Doug Hoffman in NY-23, Newt was for Dede Scozzafava.

“You have to answer for Santino, Carlo.”

Category: Election, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, Tea Party

Comments

31 Responses to “The Great Karl Rove Super PAC Scare”

msnbc
February 20th, 2013 @ 2:42 pm

John McCain’s town hall gets ugly on immigration reform.

Watch the exchange.
PATR2014
February 20th, 2013 @ 6:13 pm

RT @smitty_one_each: TOM The Great Karl Rove Super PAC Scare http://t.co/PrFvTUjr93 #TCOT
Kriskxx
February 20th, 2013 @ 6:16 pm

@smitty_one_each @KarlRove cottage industry to keep the fat cats fatter PAC
RubySlipperblog
February 20th, 2013 @ 6:31 pm

RT @smitty_one_each: TOM The Great Karl Rove Super PAC Scare http://t.co/PrFvTUjr93 #TCOT
Dai Alanye
February 20th, 2013 @ 6:43 pm

Give Newt this much credit–he’s our ally when it’s to his benefit.
mtranquilnight
February 20th, 2013 @ 6:43 pm

RT @smitty_one_each: TOM The Great Karl Rove Super PAC Scare http://t.co/PrFvTUjr93 #TCOT
Red
February 20th, 2013 @ 7:27 pm

Whichever way the wind blows so goes Newt.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
February 20th, 2013 @ 7:44 pm

I would encourage Republicans and conservatives to reject both Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich. There are a new class of Republicans rising in the ranks and our future lies with their vision.
Bob Belvedere
February 20th, 2013 @ 8:54 pm

They both should head on over to the dogtrack.
Adjoran
February 20th, 2013 @ 10:40 pm

And not one silly millisecond longer!
McGehee
February 20th, 2013 @ 10:46 pm

He does at least seem able to tell which way the wind is blowing. Rove, not so much.
Adjoran
February 20th, 2013 @ 10:51 pm

Excuse me, but didn’t Rove already have a Super-PAC? I have to laugh at his skillful manipulation of all these hopelessly stupid media (and new media) rubes that he can re-brand it and make everyone think it is something brand new – Yes, Folks, it’s Brand New Rovenin® with Xtra Power™, cleans 78% better!.

But that’s right, Rove’s new PAC will have even more money, power, and influence because . . . Rove says so!

Of course, conservatives hate Rove because he “only” gave $42 million to “Tea Party candidates” in the last cycle, about 10% of his total. Not bad, really, considering most went to the national race. So, how much did you give?

You just can’t make this stuff up.
Adjoran
February 20th, 2013 @ 10:54 pm

Yeah, Newt prefers a single billionaire to fund him. And for a supposed history professor, he seems strangely ignorant of Republican history. I wonder if he even knows who Jay Gould or Mark Hanna were?
Finrod Felagund
February 21st, 2013 @ 12:18 am

To be fair, Newt now freely admits he was wrong regarding Scozzfava.
K-Bob
February 21st, 2013 @ 1:55 am

Newt has answered. He lost. He’s done. Now let him be a decent voice for conservative strategy. Hammer him when he’s wrong, not for showing up and offering advice.

I’ve seen the same thing happen over Herman Cain going to Fox. Supposed right-siders are all angry that Fox is such a RINO organization, that they’d hire Cain.

Yeah, that’s what they are saying.

Cain was not a solid candidate. He was shaky on the stuff a Presidential candidate should not be shaky on, and I don’t just mean that some of his answers were terrible. The fact is, he’s not skilled in changing the subject from an embarrassing “gotcha” question to the message he is selling. And he couldn’t get past the bimbo problem (because of the RNC types and his own refusal to fight back). So he lost. News flash: He isn’t running again, either, just like Newt won’t run again (they are both past it, and we aren’t gonna prop them up like Andropov).

So let these two guys sell conservative solutions. Until they fall off the wagon.

Meanwhile, beat back the Karl Rove wing, and this foolish Libertarian Solution that Beck is pushing (which won’t work unless all the ACTUAL libertarians move to a different party).

We need to get behind the right guy now, and not let the machine shove Rubio down our throats, or any other guy who isn’t talking about Restoration.

Being “Conservative” or “Libertarian” doesn’t mean a damn thing anymore unless Restoration is the top priority.
K-Bob
February 21st, 2013 @ 1:58 am

How much did he burn for what results?

That’s right, he burnt it all and got nearly zilch.

You don’t have to make this stuff up.
McGehee
February 21st, 2013 @ 7:06 am

We need to get behind the right guy now

The right guy for what? Inevitableness?
McGehee
February 21st, 2013 @ 7:07 am

WTF does any of that have to do with my comment?
ReaganiteRepublican
February 21st, 2013 @ 7:52 am

Apparently the messenger won’t be winning any popularity contests around here, but what Newt is saying is entirely correct imho, that billionaires funding a power broker like Rove to choose the candidates and attack GOPers running to the right of his picks is no different than Tammany Hall, and should be resisted. Rove is a nightmare, he has little to offer us but damage to the right, and I applaud anybody willing to try and hook him off the stage, sooner the better if you ask me.
Andrew Patrick
February 21st, 2013 @ 9:33 am

Disagree. If Rover gets to set up his Super-Pac, it will be too late. He will set himself up as Kingmaker, and we’re going to get stuck with a hundred Romneys. If we want more Tea candidates, we need to free the money up.

Rover’s day is done. The sooner he gets that message, the happier we’ll all be.

This remains true even if it should be Newt Gingrich who says it.
Kevin Trainor Jr.
February 21st, 2013 @ 11:57 am

Kevin Trainor Jr. liked this on Facebook.
Dai Alanye
February 21st, 2013 @ 12:02 pm

Be content that you were noticed, regardless of any logical connection.
Dai Alanye
February 21st, 2013 @ 12:09 pm

On the basis of pain in the personal pocket, I gave more than Rove, and didn’t take salary and expenses while doing so. This is how people like Rove make their living–by convincing others to “invest” in what often turn out to be failed causes.
Dai Alanye
February 21st, 2013 @ 12:11 pm

At what future date will he admit being wrong about not quitting the nomination race after Florida? Without Newt in the race, Romney doesn’t win it.
Yeah, about that Karl Rove Super-Pac « The Daley Gator
February 21st, 2013 @ 1:03 pm

[…] Another blogger who I think balances self-promotion with sincere patriotism is Stacy McCain, and he has some solid advice on how to deal with Karl Rove and his Super-Pac […]
Newt Gingrich Was for Billionaire Meddling in Primary Elections Before He Was Against it - Liberty News
February 21st, 2013 @ 1:33 pm

[…] Robert Stacy McCain has a post up pointing to Newt’s scathing rebuke of Karl Rove’s involvement in the GOP primary process. The key paragraph of Newt’s rant is as follows. […]
Finrod Felagund
February 21st, 2013 @ 4:23 pm

You’re presuming that Gingrich voters preferred Santorum to Romney. As much as I loathed Romney (my name for him: the lying suckweasel), I still preferred Romney to Santorum, and so did most of the Gingrich voters I knew.
K-Bob
February 21st, 2013 @ 4:28 pm

no
Dai Alanye
February 21st, 2013 @ 5:10 pm

We’re both presuming, and I further presume that I’m correct. Do you truly think Sarah and Tod would have gone for Romney had Newt pulled out? Naah!

By way of an example regarding presumption, in 1992 the chief engineer of a small company at which I was interviewing predicted Ross Perot would win, because all the customers of the barber shop he patronized–a diverse sampling of humanity, though overwhelmingly male–universally preferred good old Ross.

I scoffed, and was not hired. Should I presume the statement of my political views affected his decision? Not necessarily. Should I presume that Perot’s run led to G H W Bush losing to Clinton? Quite possibly.
Finrod Felagund
February 22nd, 2013 @ 4:59 pm

Saying that Santorum would have won if Gingrich had dropped out is as silly as saying that Gingrich would have won if Santorum would have dropped out.

Do you really think Sarah Palin would have endorsed Santorum? I seriously doubt that.
Dai Alanye
February 22nd, 2013 @ 5:29 pm

You should note, FF, that I haven’t actually said the things you assume I’m thinking. But congratulations! That mind-reading course has paid-off.

Yes, it’s my opinion that had Newt pulled out after Looziana, a fading Romney would have succumbed to Santorum, especially if Rick’s wife could have withheld her debating advice prior to the Arizona debate, or if Rick would have had sufficient confidence to continue on the path that was leading him to victory.

Now, would he have defeated Obama? Hard to be sure, but BO Plenty would have had his work cut out for him when facing a feistier opponent.