Observing Newt Gingrich slip -- plummet is a better word -- in polls, opinion surveys and straw polls, caucuses and primaries, I thought that "Newt Who?" would be a catchy and appropriate title for a quick post on the rise and (mostly) fall of this once bombastic, now meek, Republican front-runner.
But lo-and-behold, when I Googled "Newt Who?" to make sure that I would not be stealing anyone's brilliant idea, I came upon "About 79,400 results [in] 0.26 seconds." Wow, that was a rude awakening for me, but can one imagine what kind of even "ruder" awakening this must be for the once grandiose Newt?
Some of the "Newt Who?" pieces have comments such as this one discussing the recent CPAC:
The other presidential candidates saw fit to ignore Newt -- even Santorum, who took several unsubtle shots at Romney. After drawing blanks in Tuesday's election contests, Newt needs to [blah, blah, blah].... But instead of being a tiger, Newt was a pussycat. It makes you wonder how serious he is at this point.
And this one:
It is hard to believe that as recently as this Monday, Newt Gingrich was still considered to be the alternative to Mitt Romney. But judging by yesterday's speeches at the Conservative Political Action Conference, Gingrich has become something of an afterthought, at best.
But not only did [Herman Cain nor Rick Perry] make a case for Newt, both former candidates didn't even mention his name. Not even once. It's like Newt never existed. ... As he continues to tank in every state and national poll, one wonders how long Gingrich will stay in the race.
Or the American Spectator in "Time for Newt to Do the Honorable Thing," after reviewing Newt's abysmal recent polls:
All of which suggests that Newt should consider his own analysis of the conservative split as expressed to ABC. It's increasingly obvious that he isn't going to win the GOP nomination.
Even if Gingrich somehow manages to rise from the dead yet again and emerge victorious in Tampa, his record is so messy that the President and his reelection team would certainly beat him like a dirty rug in the general election. Thus, if he cares about the country as much as he claims, and truly wants to prevent the man he calls a "Massachusetts liberal" from winning the GOP nomination, his most honorable course of action will be to fall on his own sword.
Newt's voluntary departure from the nomination race, combined with an enthusiastic endorsement of Santorum, would give the latter a real shot at beating Romney.
Bottom line: Since there are more or less 79,400 stories on "Newt Who?" there is no need for me to write story #79,401 -- it would be just a tad redundant and not original at all.
Of course, in the 79,400 "Newt Who?" results there are many duplicates, many "Newt, who [has so much baggage,]," "Newt who [should step aside,]" and other variations. But this is not a scientific article -- just satire -- and who is counting.
Finally, talking about satire, it is still possible that "Newt Who?" could arise from the dead a third or fourth time and become "Newt who [fooled everyone]", but then it wouldn't be satire --funny -- anymore.