Pointed partisan rhetoric has been a longstanding element of campaigns in the USA – “Polytics ain’t beanbag,” cf Mr. Dooley (Finley Peter Dunn about a century ago. But for sheer nastyness, the “Daisy” ad is hard to top. Though later on the Republicans gave us Willy Horton. Still, it seems a good case can be made, as CS has done so effectively, that for the better part of 40 years the left has simply operated on the presumption that if you disagree with their ideology, you are evil, and the discussion stops there.

Newt Gingrich is probably unelectable, because, like Mrs. Clinton, he is a polarizing figure. But both of them DO have some good ideas, and we would all be better served by looking at them and thoughtfully discussing them, rather than simply dismissing them as the ravings of a nut. The energy proposals are probably simplistic – no surprise, Dr. Gingrich has an earned Ph.D in history, not engineering or physics. However, having a politician on the Republican side make the call for a program to support research into energy that we don’t have to buy from overseas makes a lot more sense than just harping about how dependant we are on foreign oil.

To tie this in with the recent thread on who is winning the war of the blogosphere, the answer is again, the extremists are problematic, but the left has been much less willing to tolerate differing views than the right.

- We don’t need more laws on it. We just need to enforce the ones we already have. Passing more laws that the exectutive branch will just ignore doesn’t do squat.

Energy:

- Hyrdrogen is not an energy source, it is a fuel we can make from water by using electricity to make it. How much energy does it take to turn water into usable volatile hydrogen? Well, your basically just reversing the process of oxidation, so you need put at least that much energy in, plus the efficiency cost whatever that is. Needless to say, if we wanted to power all our vehicles with hydrogen the US would have to double it electricity generation.

What we really need is a clean source for electrical energry, solar, wind, that sort of thing.

And while I think a 500 mpg car is a total pipe dream, a more modest goal with a large prize like that is a good idea. We can fund it by getting rid of the over $8 billion/year in tax breaks that have been passed for the oil industry despite their last few years of record profits.

Education:

- The part about looking into why college tuition/book costs are skyrocketing is pure genius. I think this really bears investigation. Also a stronger emphasis on math and science I think would greatly help out nation

Space:

- I always get suspicous when someone decries a bureaucracy. Sometimes they are necessary in the functioning of any large project, which of course NASA is. I think NASA as a whole should be given large tasks that seem impossible. Its what they were created to do.

But while I disagree with those who think that Gingrich was the beginning of uberpartisan rhetoric, I can understand why the Clinton impeachment took the partisan divide to a new level. I think that was one of Gingrich’s mistakes and I think that along with his moral failings will prevent him from making a successful return to the political scene. The Democrats will never trust him to make honest efforts at bipartisanship, and the GOP will never forgive him for his personal flaws.

As Kim noted, Gingrich’s warts are in the opinion of many people including myself worse than many. Why? He was a key figure in creating a tipping point that made vicious, venal vindictive attacks on the opposition the SOP of the GOP. I despise that movement and everyone who was key in creating it.

In any case, his “Contract With America” was soon abandoned by his party. How many actually lived up to the provision on voluntary term limits? He demonized Jim Wright for ethics violations surrounding his book, then was driven out for almost the same exact thing. He demonized Clinton for his affair with an intern, while carrying on an extramarital affair of his own. He also bears some responsibility for the current climate in which political adversaries treat each other in the spirit of enmity, rather than comraderie. He provided language tapes to Republican up-and-comers who were to refer to themselves as decisive and stalwart- the opposition as weak and waffling.

Its not his brilliant ideas I object to as much as his character. Gingrich obviously thought that he could be the “comeback kid” after a decent interval away from public life. But its not going to happen. I believe even he knows that, because he said he wanted to hold off declaring his candidacy until he sees how Giuliani, McCain and Romney do. The think tank environment is where he belongs, not the oval office.

“This car would probably combine an e-85 ethanol fuel with a hybrid motor using electricity.” Since the energy content of ethanol is significantly less than gasoline only a fool would try go after a $1 billion high mileage prize using e-85 ethanol.

And so one. Newt is a very frustrating politician. He can be a strident partisan one minute and the next minute be discussing bold initiatives that others in his party disdain. He has a better understanding of science and technology than most politicians, but he thinks he knows more than he does and therefore often suggests specific ideas rather just letting the experts find the best solutions.

shoot…i have some bold ideas too….pay me to have a think tank

and as for his guest worker program….puleeze

like these people are gonna leave after they get here….and notice that he has no plan regarding what to do with the millions of illegals already here

let newt sit in a classroom and come up with all the brilliant ideas he wants….big deal

This is a little late, but it’s not all or nothing. However, I confess I see a fair amount of fear- and resentment-mongering in the list of ideas, however tamped down.

And the messenger’s credibility is an issue for me. Gingrich is, in my opinion, the most divisive political of our time. I’d be interested to see who else is at the National Review Institute’s “Conservative Summitâ€?. Will they be dividers or uniters?

It may be that I’m nothing but close-minded and mean-spirited, but as I said above, the amount of pushback you’re getting against Gingrich ought to be instructive.

The language issue is real, and it is worth noting that a lot of states and municipalities have been accommodating immigrants, both legal and illegal, by providing services in a variety of languages, from Spanish to Vietnamese. In my state you can take the drivers licensing exams in something like a dozen langauges. Now, considering that all the traffic signs are in English, this seems rather odd. Although much of the pro-foreign language sentiment comes from people who argue that bilingual education helps new immigrants learn English, the evidence from anyone outside the teachers unions and colleges of education seems to suggest the opposite. In fact, my ancestors came from a variety of foreign countries, and they promptly learned enough English to get by, while insisting that their kid would learn English, and move up the socio-economic ladder. That seems to have worked just fine. Groups which have striven to retain their original language have tended to become marginalized. We should not encourage such behavior. You want to come here and be a citizen? Fine. Do it legally, and learn English.

Additionally, note that Gingrich is not alone in his arguing that English only for official business is wise. Richard Lamm, the former DEMOCRATIC governor of Colorado, said the same thing. See his 10-point plan for how to destroy America, and think about it. He and Gingrich are not as far apart as some of the posters on this list might think. I’m not a member of the Democratic party, but I would have gladly voted for Lamm, and would vote for him if he were running for national office in my state, instead of the current Democratic folks our state has sent to Congress.

I used to watch him on those roundtables that Fred Friendly hosted. It was really jarring. He’d talk like an intelligent, reasonable human being – and then go out and advocate policies, and conduct his own life, at complete variance with what he said at the roundtable.

Gingrich is an ass. He was an agent of destruction when he was in office. That anyone’s taking him seriously now is a monument to Americans’ fabled lack of memory and attention span.