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.)
Dear Newt, your enthusiasm of years back for the technological revolution is forgiven. Funny how futurology got old so fast.
Progress, that comparative without a superlative has fooled more than you. Is it true that complaints about goods and services are handled in India?
Her point is what? That Newt’s a big government solutions guy? And, Mitt is the antithesis thereof? Tedious!
Yea, that would be dumb.
I remember shortly before this time, giving out copies of “Future Shock” to a group of clients who were bank owners.
The point was to convince them that the world of information concerning investing and banking was going to change dramatically soon. We were trying to get them to be in the forefront in offering online investing and banking to their largest clients. They didn’t of course.
My point here is that Future Shock was a huge buzz at the time because it was predicting a large technology increase that would affect all of society. A lot of people could see this coming. Ann’s article here is kind of silly to me as I remember the time.
[Bonus points for anyone who can remember the phrase: “high tech; high touch.”]
Newt’s not the only one who has a past — Rick Perry was a top supporter and campaign organizer for Al Gore’s presidential campaign back in 1988. And the old saw “older but wiser” comes to mind.
With my favorite Palin not running, your favorite Christie not running, Bachmann stumbling at the gate, Perry shooting himself in the foot, Cain dropping out, Santurum and Huntsman (who?) bringing up the rear, this race is now boiling down to Newt vs Romney. I don't particularly like it but comparatively speaking, if Newt has warts, when it comes to abortion, gay rights, liberal judges, big government programs, mandates, running a state government into the ground, running a state party into the ground, etc, etc, Mitt has Leprosy.
At least Newt did support Ronald Reagan and the Reagan Revolution. He did build a successful Republican majority. He did cut taxes, did reduce the deficit, did balance the budget, did block HillaryCare, did reform welfare, did allow us to reap the whirlwind of the Reagan economy.
Romney saddled Massachusetts with budget busting RomneyCare, taxpayer funded "safe and legal" abortion, gay marriage, leftist judges and a completely destroyed Republican label. And RomneyCare did become the model and impetus for ObamaCare.
Not to mention the fact that Newt has the support of the Republican conservative base and the grassroots tea party supporters:
Romney has the support of the establishment elite and shares the moderate/liberal RINO vote:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/151355/Gingrich-Romney-Among-GOP-Voters-Nationwide.aspx
Who you gonna call?
Love always,
Jim
Me either, I’m voting for Perry.
Me either, I’m voting for Perry.
What's so horrible about Eastern Standard Time? ;-)
(A rather outdated reference there, Ann. A large portion of the "younger GOP supporters" referenced in this article have no idea what that is.)
This is exactly why I have also been saying that Newt cannot help being Newt. He talks about all the dumb things he’s done, even recently, but still goes on doing them. He cannot think things through to see any consequences, apparently, but then he apologizes for things he does as being dumb. That’s nice, and had it been a couple isolated incidences several years ago, then I’d be saying let’s let bygones be bygones and move forward. But he continually does this stuff. Infuriates the YOU KNOW WHAT out of everybody. Let him get the nomination and he trips up. A lot of people would stay home. I just know it.
Well stated, Boss. You should email that to Ann.
This is exactly why I have also been saying that Newt cannot help being Newt. He talks about all the dumb things he’s done, even recently, but still goes on doing them. He cannot think things through to see any consequences, apparently, but then he apologizes for things he does as being dumb. That’s nice, and had it been a couple isolated incidences several years ago, then I’d be saying let’s let bygones be bygones and move forward. But he continually does this stuff. Infuriates the YOU KNOW WHAT out of everybody. Let him get the nomination and he trips up... a lot of people would stay home November 2012. I just know it. He sounds good, but soundbites do not make a man/leader. We have ample evidence of that DAILY.
GRATE letter Jim!
Ann, Ann, Ann....WHY are you pushing Romney??????
Looking over the field, I’ve got..the funk.
I was so looking forward to the Nov. 2012 election.
Now, argh!
That’s nice, Ann. Now tell us about Mitt Romney.
Alvin Toffler published Future Shock in 1970, when he was 41 or 42. He wrote most of it in the 1960s when very few people had VCRs.
I don't actually disagree with her much about the Tofflers or Newt Gingrich, but this habit of treating everyone she disagrees with disrespectfully for cheap laughs can be pretty grating.
“An air of mystery surrounds Coulter’s age. She says she is 38 but her publicist puts her at 40. After the interview, she sends me an email: ‘I think you should go with one of the incorrect younger ages.’
“At the moment, she is without a boyfriend; curiously, her last beau happened to be a Muslim. ‘The relationship was complicated by his interest in committing jihad,’ she jokes. ‘I took away his box cutters. At first, I thought he was a terrorist. I just kept on running into this handsome Muslim on the street. He was a fan of mine.’
“So was he stalking her? ‘He was, but he was a good-looking stalker. I'd been so looking for one of those.’
“Coulter is still searching for Mr. Right-Wing. ‘I've been engaged many times. Four, I think. But I'm not like every other American. I thought I'd meet the right person before getting married and having children.’
“Who were these dumped fiancés? ‘Oh, I don't even remember all of them. I really don't think about exes five minutes after they've gone.’”
Ann is another Laura Ingraham — a bitter, menopausal spinster who can't attract and keep a mate. She remembers everytying about her exes and is taking out on anyone & everyone.
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.