Look for Newt in coming days to bring up his old ideas in borrowed sequins:
WIDEspread orphanages for children, work/labor programs for poor children, “Newt’s plan for the improvement of poor people” to the tune of huge amounts of money in the Federal and State budgets that are already overwhelmed… and others of his oddly stentorian-gleeful workhouse-like throwbacks to a Dickensian’ culture no one wanted to live in…
so much so, many many left 19th century England to come here to the US where there was something called ‘freedom.’ If Gingrich were in charge, I think we’d have the largest mass immigration/migration from the US, back to modern England, which nowadays is head and shoulders above what Newt envisions for America. Newt’s America, is not going to be “our America” that’s for certain, rather a “dour, sour,” and of course very Catholic-Civil War glossed version of America with child labor and child storage til age of majority.
Enough of my opinions. There are others who are far more articulate about Newt….
George F. Will is one of the few who has dared to analyze the frontrunners thus far in the GOP. He is an Opinion Writer for Washington Post.
Mr. Will, is an articulate writer with a streak of educated and ultra dry humor a horizonline-wide. In the article below, he coulda been a contendah for premiere analytic psychologist as he writes sharply dissecting another seeming manic set of ideas that seem to surge through Newt Gingrich. Here are excerpts: read Will’s entire column here:
Romney and Gingrich, from bad to worse
By George F. Will, Published: December 2, 2011
Republicans are more conservative than at any time since their 1980 d… They anticipated choosing between Mitt Romney, a conservative of convenience, and a conviction politician to his right. The choice, however, could be between Romney and the least conservative candidate, Newt Gingrich.
…Gingrich, however, embodies the vanity and rapacity that make modern Washington repulsive. And there is his anti-conservative confidence that he has a comprehensive explanation of, and plan to perfect, everything.
Granted, his grandiose rhetoric celebrating his “transformative” self is entertaining: Recently he compared his revival of his campaign to Sam Walton’s and Ray Kroc’s creations of Wal-Mart and McDonald’s, two of America’s largest private-sector employers.
There is almost artistic vulgarity in Gingrich’s unrepented role as a hired larynx for interests profiting from such government follies as ethanol and cheap mortgages.
His Olympian sense of exemption from standards and logic allowed him, fresh from pocketing $1.6 million from Freddie Mac (for services as a “historian”), to say, “If you want to put people in jail,” look at “the politicians who profited from” Washington’s environment.
His temperament — intellectual hubris distilled — makes him blown about by gusts of enthusiasm for intellectual fads,… On Election Eve 1994, he said a disturbed South Carolina mother drowning her children “vividly reminds” Americans “how sick the society is getting, and how much we need to change things. .?.?. The only way you get change is to vote Republican.” Compare this grotesque opportunism — tarted up as sociology — with his devious recasting of it in a letter to the Nov. 18, 1994, Wall Street Journal…
Gingrich, who would have made a marvelous Marxist, believes everything is related to everything else and only he understands how. … Conservatism inoculates against the hubristic volatility that Gingrich exemplifies and Genesis deplores: “Unstable as water, thou shalt not excel.”
…Gingrich might stop being (as Churchill said of John Foster Dulles) a bull who carries his own china shop around with him. But both are too risky to anoint today.