Posts tagged ‘Newt Gingrich’

Clockwise, from left: Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich.

Clockwise, from left: Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich.

Question: Who is the best of the four remaining Republican candidates?

Answer: There is no best of these four professional politicians.

None of them has proposed remedial action for, or even shown they know a problem exists with, the most serious problem we and the rest of the world faces, namely the mounting ferocity of weather disasters, caused primarily by global warming. Every one of them, to the extent that they have programs for the future at all, is on a track that will make the problem worse instead of ameliorating it.

Question: Did President Obama speak to these dangerously worsening weather problems in his State of the Union address?

Answer: No, but his options are still open. I do devoutly hope he will, once the election gets close.. He is the only remaining hope we have. If he doesn’t see the danger we are in, and propose measures to minimize it, then we have no hope for at least the next four years, and by four years from now it is very likely to be too late.

Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich

You have now read about the fascinating life, or lives, of the man who has looked like our next president more often — but also more briefly — than any other American. And in the last two days, two things have happened. Newt has released his tax returns, while his main opponent, Mitt Romney, has continued to refuse to release his.

On the other hand Newt’s ex-wife, the one he asked for a divorce while she was in her hospital bed, gave a widely viewed interview in which she said that what Newt really asked for was an open marriage, that is one in which the partners are free to have sexual relations with all the outsiders they like.

Newt answered questioning on that with a furious blast at the liberal media who, he said, slandered conservatives like himself and let other politicians go free.

This is not statistically true — it’s the conservatives, not the liberals, who own their own major periodicals and television networks which all read from the same right-wing page, but he got applause. He’s a star-class orator when the chips are down.

One more time he may again be beginning — temporarily — to look like our next president.

 
Related posts:

Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich

Way back when — specifically in 1996 — the world was different in several ways. I was writing a regular column for Andy Porter’s great old newsmagazine SF Chronicle and my great but definitely never old wife, Betty Anne Hull , had allowed herself to be nominated to represent our 8th Illinois district of Congress by the Democratic Party. Unfortunately both enterprises came to naught. When the votes were in, Betty Anne had lost the election to the long-entrenched Republican incumbent, and the person who legally owned Andy’s magazine (never mind how that happened. Long story) had pulled the plug. An article I had written for its next issue on Newt Gingrich thus never appeared.

In more recent times, it occurred once more to me (having forgotten all about that earlier piece) to write about Newt, so I did. But then Andy, somewhat sharply, asked if I had forgotten about the first piece. Which, of course, I had, my memory having once been described as the envy of all the other sieves. So he sent me a copy of the piece and when I read it ,it seemed interesting enough to share with you. But do, please, remember that it is a 1996 piece and all the things that I speak of in it as current matters are very much not any more.

(Incidentally. Andy has retained copies of all my SF Chronicle pieces and thinks it would be a good idea for one of you editor guys to bring them out as a book, maybe an ebook. I agree with him.)

War with the Newts
For SF Chronicle, 1996.

I hope Karel Capek wouldn’t mind my borrowing the title of his old SF novel, although since he’s no longer around we’ll never know. Capek’s book was actually a pretty good read, being about these evil, slimy creatures that did their best to ruin the human race.

And for some reason it keeps coming up in my mind these days.

Well, that’s disingenuous of me. I know the reason perfectly well. Perhaps you do, too: it’s because my wife, Betty Hull, is running for Congress here in Illinois. If she happens to beat the odds and get elected she will spend her term in the House doing her very best to thwart the designs of our current Head Newt, a.k.a. Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich.

Of course, since their districts are about a thousand miles apart, her technical opponent won’t be Newt Gingrich. The adversary on the scene is a massively funded and well entrenched incumbent named Phil Crane — best known in some circles for the hissy fit he threw when some reporter said he had favored the use of nuclear weapons in the Gulf. Crane wasn’t going to sit still for a libel like that. With great indignation he protested that he hadn’t said a word about nuclear weapons, all he had suggested was the use of neutron bombs.

Isn’t it a pity that so many Congressmen know so little of what they’re talking about? They used to have an institution called the Office of Technology Assessment available to help them keep from looking stupid. Happens I know a little bit about the OTA because once or twice they invited me down to Washington to help figure out what to do about things like electronic copyright. The OTA worked hard to try to distinguish facts from airy hopes and delusions. They were pretty good at it, too, but they don’t do it any more. Apparently Congress didn’t want to hear anything that conflicted with what they wanted to believe, so — as an “economy” measure — they shut the OTA down.

Anyway, it isn’t really Phil Crane that Betty’s running against. It’s Newt and all his ilk, and, like the fellow says, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that we set forth the reasons which impell us to this.

A lot of people like Newt Gingrich. Actually, in my one personal encounter with him, a couple of hours, five or six years ago, I found him to be an affable guy who — a big plus for us SF fan — actually has read a lot of science fiction, even attends a con now and then (that’s where I met him, in fact) and doesn’t mind admitting his SF interest in public. (He even says that Asimov’s Foundation books were one of the most seminal influences on his life. God knows what Isaac would have thought of that.) He even went so far as to write, or at least to collaborate on, an SF novel, 1945, an alternate-history job that I’m told isn’t bad at all. (I haven’t got around to reading my copy yet.) Gingrich is a buddy of people like our own homies, Jerry Pournelle and Jim Baen, some of whom arranged for him to give the keynote speech at the Nebula awards banquet a while ago. He writes for the World Future Society‘s magazine, The Futurist; he goes to futurists like Alvin and Heidi Toffler (you know, the Future Shock guys) for advice and suggestions, and he is a perfect marvel at generating one-liners for the TV news sound bites. What’s more he has declared himself in favor of science in general and the space program in particular; as a Congressional freshman the first legislation he introduced (unfortunately never passed) was a bill to set up procedures for governing colonies on the Moon. He has gone on record as predicting that by 2020 newlyweds will honeymoon in space; that, too, may be a little premature, but, hey, it’s a nice idea.

All that sounds really nice, this year. But you have to wonder where he’s going to be next year, because the man does switch sides so.

Consider, for instance, Newt on the environment. From 1984 to 1990 Newt was a member of the Sierra Club. In its March–April issue this year the club’s magazine, Sierra, took a look at Newt’s record with the organization. On paper at least, he was a dedicated conservationist if ever there was one. He took all the right positions. Drilling for oil in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge? Certainly not, Newt said; that would be only a “188-day quick fix” for America’s energy needs, which would be better served by “fuel efficiency and conservation measures.” Giving away the national forests? “Subsidized logging operations, as well as subsidized forest roadbuilding, should cease.” Protecting the wetlands? “The ecological significance of fresh- water wetlands … cannot be overemphasized. It is vital that our wetlands be protected.” He also favored strong controls on toxic emissions and just about everything else the Sierra Club stood for, and he said it all so convincingly that the club endorsed him in several elections.

That was the Newt that was. The Newt that is is a quite different person. As Speaker, he picks the chairs of, among others, committees dealing with the environment; the people he picked were Don Young (R, AK) and Thomas Bliley (R, VA). These gentlemen are not conservationists; in fact, they were so stalwart against every conservationist measure that in 1994 the League of Conservation Voters rated them both, on a scale of 0 to 100, a flat zero. Newt’s “Contract with America” promises radical revision of Clean Air Act standards for measuring toxic emissions. (Which is politician-speak for cutting the heart out of anti-pollution measures.) And, insiders say, under this former Sierra Club crusader applicants for House staff positions are now asked if they are members of the Club, and it is marked against them if they are.

Well, if you’ve happened to come across the book I wrote with Isaac Asimov, Our Angry Earth, you know I don’t have much time for “futurists” who kiss off the future environment for the sake of somebody making a few extra bucks today. There are other reasons why I don’t like what Newt and his stalwarts are doing, but let’s just let it stand with that one big one.

Is that what we all really want?

Newt claims it is, claims a “mandate” from the people. When you look a little more closely at that mandate it turns out not to be really overwhelming; by and large, just about 22 percent of eligible voters cast their ballots for Newt’s Republicans in 1984. Even fewer of the votes — only about 18 percen t — went to Democrats, so they got their “landslide.”

But the arithmetic shows that 60 percent of the eligibles, an overwhelming majority, cast a Kafka ballot — “none of the above” — by not voting in that Congressional election at all.

Considering what Congress is like it’s easy to understand the voters’ distaste for the whole ugly mess. But the effect of voting with the feet is that the doctrinaires and the obsessed are the ones who are going to come out and vote anyway, no matter what. So they are the ones who elect the people who govern us; and so we get the government we deserve.

What can we do about it?

Well, what I would really like you to do is to move to the 8th Congressional District of Illinois and vote for my wife. If that’s too much trouble, I’d appreciate it if you’d vote for a Democrat, any Democrat, to make Newt and his loopy band of brothers history. But no matter what, for God’s sake, vote.

 
Related posts:

Newt Gingrich

    Newt Gingrich

Newton Leroy Gingrich’s latest I’ll-say-anything-for-a-headline proclamation is really pretty weird. What he says is that in order to understand President Obama’s political activities you have to know that Obama is really acting according to Kenyan, not American, political practices.

Actually, I think that’s pretty dumb. I’ve read a lot on the subject, and I’ve been there myself, but I couldn’t tell you how Kenyan political practices are different from those of any number of other little countries that are trying to figure out just how their new democracy thing should work, and I really don’t think Gingrich could pass a test on it himself. I’m pretty sure that the real purpose of that press release was actually a somewhat slimy one. That is, his intention was to reinforce that preposterous Tea Party nonsensical claim that our president isn’t an American at all.

Their claim is that, in spite of the fact that the official records, the newspapers that record such things and those people, still alive, who were involved in any of those activities at the time say he is an American (and they all say the same thing), they’re all lying. This is, of course, pathological. There is definitely no truth to the Tea Party goons’ claim that Barack Obama wasn’t really born in Hawaii, a fully accredited state of the United States, but in some foreign country.

In spite of all the really unarguable amount of evidence that he was born exactly where and when he says he was, there are a lot of people who are going around claiming that Obama is a foreigner and thus his presidency is illegal under the Constitution and that the 2008 election that he won by such a smashing vote doesn’t count. My personal opinion is that most of them don’t really believe what they’re saying, because it’s just too ridiculous, but they hate Obama so much that they’ll say anything they think they can get away with.

And when I see Gingrich trying to lend credence to what he knows isn’t true, it makes me wonder who Gingrich is getting his political advice from these days, because I used to know one of his advisors pretty well.

 
You see, there was a time when I really thought that if politicians would get in the habit of reading science fiction for fun instead of sticking to, say, the shoot-’em-up Westerns preferred by Dwight Eisenhower, we’d have better government. But then along came Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and shot that speculation down in flames.

Gingrich liked science fiction. He took it seriously enough that he had a major sf writer, my good friend (and political foe) Jerry Pournelle, flying back and forth to Washington to advise him.

I don’t know exactly what the advice Jerry gave Gingrich was, but there was a lot of it — enough so that it used up a lot of Jerry’s time. Which had the result that Jerry was seriously late in delivering his part of a book that I also had a part in. And, as I wouldn’t get paid for my part until the whole thing, including Jerry’s part, was turned in, this caused me to get on Jerry’s case to get the damn thing done.

The advice couldn’t have been too bad, because Gingrich was flying high in those days. Some people were getting the feeling, in fact, that one day not too far in the future we might be looking ar a President Gingrich. Then, however, some of Gingrich’s political adversaries began digging up some of the, well, the nastier parts of Gingrich’s personal history and getting them published in the papers. And he retired from those heights in disgrace.

Well, if you dig deep enough in almost anyone’s past you’ll probably find something that he really wishes hadn’t come up. The Republicans proved that when, after spending $40 million of taxpayers’ money in the search, they finally unearthed Monica Lewinsky and thus stripped President Clinton of the power to act effectively for the last part of his presidential term.

But we’re a forgiving people, we Americans. Clinton is now most Americans’ best-loved living ex-president. Even Richard Nixon, the American president who avoided prison only because his successor gave him a full pardon, managed to raise his head after lying low for a while.

And, as we’ve seen, Gingrich is getting plenty of newspaper space and TV time for his political rebirth.

 
Apart from his (ick) politics, Gingrich didn’t seem to be a bad guy. He visited an occasional sf con and was pleasant to talk to on any nonpolitical subject. Indeed, if I was on my way by rocket to Mars and had to pick one other male as co-pilot of our rocket ship — and that other male had to be someone prominent in government — Gingrich might have been a possible contender.

At one con — I’m sorry to say I don’t remember which one (maybe one of you guys could tell me?) — both Gingrich and I happened to be present and the chairman got the idea of the two of us having a debate on some political subject.

So we did it. I don’t remember all that was said, but one of the subjects we agreed to disagree on was the heroic-sized U.S. defense budget. I said we could better use all that money for some peaceful pursuit, almost any peaceful pursuit. Newt said was I so ignorant that I didn’t know the world was full of enemies of America and we had to be ready to fight them whenever they might attack us? I said that throughout American history up to that point we had fought maybe eight or ten real wars, from the Revolution to WWII, and we hadn’t really been prepared — though our enemies were — for any one of them, but all the same we’d won them all. Newt said, aha, Fred, but you’re forgetting we had the might of the British Navy to protect us while we tooled up, and I said, right you are, Newt, but in at least two of those wars, the Revolution and the War of 1812, that mighty British Navy was on the other side and the side it was shooting at was us, and we licked them anyway.

So I marked that one a win for me. I don’t know how Gingrich scored it.

Foxed TV

As we were departing our last Hawaiian port of call, the captain got on the horn with bad news. He said the part of the Pacific Ocean we were heading into, which was most of it, was poorly served with American TV. Therefore CNN and ESPN and all the other feeds that had supplied most of the channels in our stateroom TVs were now but a memory. They wouldn’t be back until just before we docked in San Diego at the end of the cruise, but he was happy to announce that we wouldn’t be totally deprived of a voice from home. The Fox channel (which reached the Earth’s surface not from a communications satellite, like everybody else, but through a navigation satellite, which covered everywhere) would be glad to serve us while the real news people were absent.

In the event, it wasn’t any worse than I had expected. It wasn’t any better, either. As a news source, Fox suffered from not offering very much of it, preferring to allocate its time slots to its right-wing pundits — Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Ann Coulter and Newt Gingrich were among the ones they promised — for the purpose of explaining the true meaning of the news rather than delivering any. When big news stories broke, Fox did cover them, at least at first, on a reasonably factual basis: the crash landing of a bird-damaged jet in the Hudson River, the inauguration of President Barack Obama, the brief and not really explained in-and-out candidacy of Caroline Kennedy as appointee to Hillary Clinton’s vacated Senate seat.

Each of these events Fox kept alive for days, perhaps so that they could explicate the moral lessons involved: the faith-based explanations for the survival of the jet’s occupants, the theory that, since she was a member of the evil Kennedy tribe, Caroline probably had a trunkful of sordid secrets a fitness hearing would expose to the world. And, in order to give Obama’s inaugural address a fair and impartial review, they engaged a person who truly did know something about inaugural addresses. He had written both of George W. Bush’s.

(Confession: I haven’t actually experienced seventeen full days of Foxiness. Along about the tenth day, I finally figured out that, if I tuned to that channel but turned the sound down to zero, I would never have to hear the crazy-making utterances of Hannity, O’Reilly, et al anymore but could get a rough idea of what was going on in the world from the news crawl at the bottom of the screen, which, relatively speaking, was only mildly toxic.)