He was supposed to be courting the tea party in a town hall meeting in Jacksonville, Florida. But Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich did everything but. Google reflects the focus in the media on a single question one toadying attendee asked the speaker; she was bemoaning media bias against Newt, who is the consummate insider. They’ve all neglected Gingrich’s reply to a preceding and very poignant question from a tea partier.
For this reason, I am unable to bring you the question and the answer arrogant Gingrich gave. But the speaker, in essence, told this hard-core fellow that he had asked the wrong question with respect to the candidate’s fidelity to conservatism. He, Newt, would be governing an enormous country and he would, therefore, tailor and aim his policies to holding a 60 percent majority.
Can anyone locate the snake’s exact words?
UPDATE (Nov. 19): Kerry, unless I missed it, the link you provided doesn’t feature the question to which I was referring. It was from a pissed-off tea-partier. He wanted to know how faithful NG would be to tea party principles. Not at all was the sum of the arrogant Gingrich’s reply.
“The dueling perspectives political panel is compatible with the aims of CNN, MSNBC, and the other progressive broadcasters. Here is how it works: You invite a member of the Republican establishment; often a RINO—preferably a bimbo—to do battle with a lefty from similar circles. The sides are ideologically so close, that, in all likelihood, the panelists hang out after the show.
This format is positively postmodernist. Why? Because, by presenting the public with two competing perspectives—you mislead viewers into believing that indeed there are two realities, and that it is up to them to decide which one is more compelling.
The one parallel universe is represented on Fox Business by the likes of Nancy Skinner, Caroline Heldman, Tara Dowdell, Carl Jeffers, Joe Sibila, Erika Payne, and others. …
The philosophical filth spewed by such characters – almost nightly on freedom-promoting programing, no less – is that government can spend and lend to good effect; that it can tax without discouraging and disrupting production; and that our overlords in D.C. can regulate “better” (read energy-squandering) industries into being by steering capital and labor away from bad (energy-efficient) industries (oil and gas). …
The truth is that truth is immutable, never relative. The little truth there is in mainstream media should not be diluted or presented by its adherents as dueling with untruth.
The above Fox News fixtures no more represent truth or promote it than does your average Holocaust denier.
With an exception: Libraries have long since engaged in a robust debate as to how to classify Holocaust-denying literature. While admirably advocating for unfettered free access, Professor of Library Services John A. Drobnicki has suggested moving Holocaust denial out of the History section in US libraries and closer to the ‘Bigfoot books,’ so that Holocaust denial’s Dewey Decimal designation is with ‘hoax materials.’
Indeed, hacks are not historians. Although the dueling-perspectives panel format would suggest it is—the economic bunk spewed by the likes of Skinner, Heldman, Dowdell, Jeffers, Sibila, and Erika Payne is no version of the truth, but a perversion of it.” …
Barnes and Nobleis always well-stocked and ships within 24 hours.
Still better, shipping is free and prompt if you purchase Into the Cannibal’s Pot fromThe Publisher. Inquire about an Xmas special on bulk buys.
UPDATE I (Nov. 18): MSNBC has just inaugurated the nauseating “NOW,” which utilizes the dueling-perspectives panel discussed in my WND column to great effect. Here is the little RINO Lolita S. E. Cupp making a weak case for the right of a man to hire a lawyer, in a pathologically litigious country, which jails more individuals than any other: the USA. By “a weak case,” the hallmark of an establishment Republican (or whatever one chooses to dub this political species), I mean that grimaces, gestures, and a paraphrasing of the host replace serious argument. In particular, earlier in the debate, Cupp picked up on a catchy phrase the host had used, and repeated it again and again (“precipice politics) in order to conceal her vacuity. In the loud talking (for it wasn’t intelligent debate) about the Super Committee, Naomi Wolf was the only individual to zero in on the issue of a soviet-style politburo making decisions in a so-called representative democracy. (Wolf didn’t put it this way, but she made the point effectively. And, of course, the US was supposed to be a republic, not a mobocracy.) Otherwise, everything is all very friendly and flirty.
UPDATE II:Via Facebook: What uncharacteristic intellectual pettiness it is to zero in on a trivial convention used in the column, instead of addressing the issue of natural law and reality, also the core of the column. This is what the column is about. However, maybe some here disagree that “truth is immutable, never relative.” And that “the little truth there is in mainstream media should not be diluted or presented by its adherents as dueling with untruth.”
UPDATE III: LEFT-LIBERTARIANISM. To the “there is nothing wrong with Judge and Stossel” crowd: ‘Cmon: They are the best we have, but there is plenty wrong. They are left-libertarians. For a while, Paul was teetering there too, but was pulled back from the brink by the conservatism of the his base, the majority of whom do not think that, at 1 million a year, the US needs more immigration and that anchor babies are dictated by the Constitution.
Tired of listening to mealymouthed left-libertarians laboring to find commonalities with the Occupy Wall Street “sleepover”? You should be. I know I am. I have no sisterly solidarity for socialists.
Economist George Reisman dissects the farrago of economic errors the protesters and their sympathizers commit: “What the protesters do not realize is that the wealth of the one percent provides the standard of living of the ninety-nine percent.”
“CNN must be desperate for the ratings the network receives whenever it hosts a Republican presidential debate. As moderator of the Tea Party Debate in Tampa, Florida, last month, Wolf Blitzer worked it. And not once did leftist activist-cum-anchor Anderson Cooper mention bullying in Las Vegas, Tuesday night: Viewers of the Western Republican Debate got off lightly. The excuse for a newsman known as Anderson Cooper did only one stupid thing: Demonstrate to the seven presidential contenders how to introduce themselves.
CNN was on its best behavior, which is more than one can say about Governor Rick Perry (R-TX). He sounds a lot like a slightly less stupid ‘W,’ which is still plenty stupid (and cunning to boot). The man is so much like The Decider in demeanor that it’s unsettling.
In bashing Herman Cain’s 9-9-9 tax-reform plan, Perry persistently called Cain ‘brother’ (‘I love you, brother, but…’). This phony, patronizing touch was plainly insulting.
For colorful metaphors that capture the tapped arteries of taxation in the Cain plan—destined to balloon with the lifeblood of the taxpayer—it’s hard to beat Grover Norquist. The president of Americans for Tax Reform likened 9-9-9 to putting ‘tapeworms in your tummy to try and maintain your weight.’ And to ‘having three needles in your arm drawing blood instead of one.'” …
