Posted on 12/07/2011 2:12:04 PM PST by Syncro
NEWT PRESENTS A FRESH NEW VIRTUAL FACE
December 3, 2011Before you newly active Republicans commit to Newt Gingrich as your presidential nominee on the basis of the recent debates, here's a bit of Newt history you ought to know. I promise you, it's going to come up if he's the candidate.
The day after the Republicans' historic takeover of the House of Representatives in the 1994 election, Newt was off and running, giving a series of Fidel Castro-style speeches about "the Third Wave information revolution." It had the unmistakable ring of lingo from his new-age gurus, Alvin and Heidi Toffler.
(Newt, who was married at the time, also began dating again.)
A few weeks later, when Newt was elected House speaker by the incoming Republican conference, there was a small elderly couple standing by his side as he gave a one-hour acceptance speech. It soon became clear who they were, when he issued a reading list to the Republican legislators. At the top of the list was a book by the Tofflers.
Hadn't Republicans just won on a platform of smaller government? Instead of a Republican victory, the '94 election seemed to be a victory for the Tofflers' cyber-babble about "social wavefront analysis," "anticipatory democracy," "de-massification," "materialismo," "the Third Wave" and "decision loads."
Then, in his first week as speaker, Gingrich was again promoting the Tofflers around town, introducing them at a technology conference and giving a speech titled "From Virtuality to Reality."
How about a speech on Republican plans to reform entitlement programs?
Gingrich soon announced that all legislation passed by the new Congress would have to pass a test: Will it help move America into the Tofflers' vision of a "Third Wave"?
If this guy ever became president, he could end up foisting EST on the nation.
It was also a Toffler-inspired idea that led Gingrich to propose giving poor families a tax credit to buy computers -- an idea he called "dumb" just one week later.
(Newt's denouncing Paul Ryan's Social Security reform as "right-wing social engineering" and then apologizing a week later -- and then retracting his apology -- was not uncharacteristic.)
The Tofflers were a couple of old folks who couldn't figure out how to program their VCRs, so they began writing about the "shock" of technology and how we needed government planning to deal with technological overload.
Their big idea was that the world was about to change faster than it ever had before, creating a technological explosion that would frighten and baffle the masses -- much like the bewildering VCR clock. The government would have to have advisers and committees in order to ease the transition.
The facts are nearly the exact opposite. In the first half of the 20th century, we got widespread use of the automobile, the airplane, the telephone, electricity, radio and television, indoor plumbing, air conditioning and refrigeration, the computer, nuclear power and rockets.
All we got in the second half of the 20th century were some improvements on one of those inventions -- the computer -- with the personal computer, the Internet and the iPhone. (Boomers were more focused on acid trips than space trips and dropped the ball on the hard work of pushing scientific progress forward.)
It's poetic license. I guess if you have a bunch of bestsellers you can push it a little.
She does have a bizarre sense of humor, which I like.
Yeah, we know. Ann likes Mitt. She’s right about Newt, though. And don’t give me any false choice between Newt, Mitt and Obama. There are others.”
Not til they are on a ballot. And if it’s write in or third party just go ahead and pull the lever for the Socialist ticket.
Ann couldn’t lean further left if she broke a heel.
Chris Christie?
Romney?
You seem a bit conflicted...
I’m voting Perry, but I’d support Gingrich if he wins the primary.
Gingrich was quite the cult-guru after the 1994 elections, and blew a lot of the gains in the following year or two.
And he didn’t seem to “get better” in the years after that.
I hope he’s “gotten better” since. :-)
Yes.
Ann failed to mention that while Newt trumpets that he was a history professor, he was also a Professor of Environmental Studies. In fact, he founded the ES departmet and West Georgia college. Moreover, one of the first things he did as a congresscritter was sponsor a federal law to address global warming.
That was in the early 1980’s.
In 2009, Newt was still a believer in man-made global warming. But when it became a problem for his campaign, he backtracked.
Ping
He said he didn't know.
He should know, and speak against it because it isn't caused by man or anything we do.
Bolton is a neo-con’s neo-con. If this happens, get ready for more military mis-adventures and needless expenditure of our treasure.
Go, Ron Paul!
Only Hillary’s “bulge”...no conflict. ;~)
That's an interesting argument. Forty years ago, when Future Shock first came out some critics pointed out that if you'd been born in the 19th century before railroads and telegraphs and lived to see automobiles, airplanes, and telephones you'd have seen more change than most 20th century people had.
And that holds true in what's happened since. If you were born in the late 19th century and survived into the mid-20th century you'd have seen more change than those of us who were born in the late 20th century and lived into the early 21st.
It's an interesting argument, but do people really make the comparison? And isn't it pretty subjective? The first people to get telephones and phonographs used them in a very limited way. The development of cell phones and smart phones was a major change from what our parents or grandparents knew, even if the installation of that first phone a century ago was a major historical milestone.
Yeah, we could go with Perry who openly welcomes Muslims and helps them build Mosques. Or maybe Santorum who strongly exudes mush. Maybe Huntsman who thinks Obama is an all right guy? We got a mess this time. It think Newt will end up the nominee.
You are dead on. The argument still isn't catching with the grand old party however.
Yeah, lets go with the guy who encourages more Muslims in the country. NOT.
What ever blows yer skirt up, fella.
Since Ann wants Romney to win (and possibly be one of his plural wives) I think she has lost all credibility to speak on the issue....she is biased and won’t admit it.
BTW - I remember reading “Future Shock” circa 1971 while still in High School. It was an interesting book about how the knowledge spiral was occuring. The time “knowledge” doubled was growing smaller and smaller. I don’t remember there being anything in it that was big government. However, I was probably 17 at the time.
“Go, Ron Paul!”
Yes, Ron Paul, Go...Go away and stop pretending to be a Republican when you are a hardcore libertine that wants to ignore the rest of our planet like the fools did that led to Pearl Harbor....which we remembered today.
Go away Ron Paul and take your foolish supporters with you.
Ann Coulter is not a Mormon, she is a Christian.
There never has been, nor will there ever be a perfect candidate.
That said, Newt would be a gift to the Dem political ad writers.
It's so important to keep this in mind about Mister Obama. There never has been such an antithetically "American" socialist seeking a second term as president (a term, one suspects, to be scorched-earthedly destructive to our Country and very way of life) .
This is a good time to think of this indescribably critical election in practical terms.
I'm with Ann.
.
It wasn't "knowledge" that was doubling, though, it was 'information'. There's a difference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.