If there transpires a Newt vs. Hillary matchup in 2008 my head will explode. And not in the good way.

Um, no.
Newt’s personal life is way too sleezy to be subjected to any kind of scrutiny. My guess is he’s trying to do a distraction thing, that’s all.

Is li’l ol’ Newtie a Neocon? Where do you get that? I don’t disagree, I just recall him ever tied into that cabal.

Sorry about the broken post above – that’s what I get for trying to comment from my Treo (I know, I know. . . my family is planning an intervention).

Here’s what I was going to say:

I wonder if this might prompt someone frmo the jihad wing to stake an early claim to that aprt of the base (Brownback?). The ricochet effects of Newt’s early push for ’08 could, if copied by others, really throw Harriet into the grinder. Think: Steve Buscemi at the end of Fargo. Not pretty.

Notice how unlike Republicans this all is. They usually have an heir apparent for future nominations. But with the party leadership set to implode in scandal, there is no heir apparent (not that they had been lining one up anyway since W fears being upstaged, but still).

So bizarre to see circular firing squads from that side of the political spectrum. I find it most edifying.

Newt’s connections to the neocons run through the military egghead set — the War College theoreticians who have concocted most of this all-the-eggs-in-one-basket bullshit that has left both the recruiting and worldwide credibility cupboards dry. He always went in for their wonkish crap, because it was the only way a draft dodging â€historian†could appear sufficiently versed in militaria to don the hawk’s clothing. Or at least, it used to be, before the Bush crowd did away with shame, and just said they were tough guys and smeared anyone who asked if it was really true.

It’ll be interesting to see if he can keep the press docile enough not to reveal that he’s the inventor of the game DeLay may go down for. It was his good fortune to have been caught first, when calling it â€just politics†was a novel enough excuse to work.

1. I don’t think the War College theoreticians are the problem, at least not this time. They’ve complained from the first about the obvious violations of the Powell Doctrine. The War College has, amazingly enough, been a hotbed of dissidence over Iraq.

2. I agree with saugatak that we should return to the methods of the early Roman empire, where the emperor himself had to be on the field of battle. After one was captured, and spent the rest of his life as a footstool for the Persian emperor, the Romans decided this was maybe not the best recruiting poster and changed their strategy. I suspect the anti-abortion Republicans would be totally cool with Presidents and Vice Presidents simply having an extra son who was the designated military sacrifice.

Actually, I’m not sure you could fairly call Newt a neocon. He’s rather ideosyncratic in his foreign policy views, in my opinion. But perhaps he is concerned with imposing some discipline on the Republican party more generally. I’m not sure what kind of funding clout the guy has these days, though he does have lots of connections with movement conservatives.