So, Newt Gingrich is known for having hi-tec dreams of everything from lunar colonies to space based missile defence to geo-engineering. I remember reading on his (Pournelle's) blog that Jerry Pournelle used to be have some association with him (as an advisor, perhaps) and that would probably explain Gingrich's fondness for all things "space".
In fact, after taking climate change seriously, Gingrich has now flipped to being a skeptic, just as Pournelle always has been. But Jerry Pournelle is getting on (age 78): it seems to be built into the natural psychology of aging males that believing in AGW gets harder and harder for them over the age of 65. How old is Gingrich, by the way? 68, I see. Well, that explains that.
But even Romney is 64: he probably will start genuinely stop believing in AGW next year.
(And just why do Republicans so often go with the old dudes as presidential candidates? OK, so George Bush was an exception, but Reagan, Dole, McCain, Bush Snr?)
Anyway, as a fan of the return to the moon myself, this should make me feel more generous than I do towards Gingrich. But I find the guy hard to like. Seems far too flip floppy on everything (not just climate change), and doesn't really have the right image of a leader, especially against a more youthful Democrat.
Honestly, if the Republicans want to look dynamic, they should chose Huntsman. But he's poison to the doomed idiot wing of the Republicans known as the Tea Party, due to having done terrible things like genuinely believe in AGW (before having to semi-recant for political purposes) and being sophisticated in his knowledge of foreign affairs.
The Republicans are a lost cause, for now.
Update:
This New Yorker article notes that he has written quite a lot in the alternative history genre too.
It also argues that this is what's behind his sudden popularity:
Gingrich’s sudden rise and special appeal to the emotions of “the base,” one suspects, stem less from his vaunted “big ideas” than from his long-cultivated, unparalleled talent for contempt. In 1990, when he was not yet Speaker, he pressed a memo on Republican candidates for office, instructing them to use certain words when talking about the Democratic enemy: “betray,” “bizarre,” “decay,” “anti-flag,” “anti-family,” “pathetic,” “lie,” “cheat,” “radical,” “sick,” “traitors,” and more. His own vocabulary of contempt has grown only more poisonously flowery. President Obama’s actions cannot be understood except as an expression of “Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior.” Liberals constitute a “secular-socialist machine” that is “as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.” There is “a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us” and “is prepared to use violence.” In this campaign, Gingrich’s performances in televised debates have been widely deemed effective. But what has won him his most visceral cheers from the audiences in the halls—audiences shaped and coarsened by years of listening to talk radio and watching Fox News—is his sneering attacks on moderators, especially those representing the hated “liberal” media.
In March, at the Cornerstone Church, in San Antonio, Gingrich declared, “I am convinced that, if we do not decisively win the struggle over the nature of America,” his grandchildren will live “in a secular atheist country, potentially one dominated by radical Islamists and with no understanding of what it once meant to be an American.” Last spring, this was a kind of right-wing performance art. Now it is the language of the man leading in the Republican polls, a man who—in the real world, not the alt-world—could, not inconceivably, become President of the United States. Imagine that.
No comments:
Post a Comment