In a Republican primary, Mitt Romney cannot admit that he speaks French, otherwise those voters would reject him because he might introduce "European" ideas into American culture. For a party that bases a large part of its appeal by fostering fear that the country's original (excluding, of course, the Native Americans whose existence is rarely acknowledged) cultural roots are being overrun by those of non-European extraction, the political schizophrenia is remarkable.
Now comes Newt Gingrich who asserted that President Obama can best be understood by his Kenyan, anti-colonialist roots traced (erroneously, but who cares, this is a Republican, remember?) to his father (whom he met twice in his life, but again, who cares about facts, this is a Republican speaking) that created strong anti-colonialist sentiments (as if that were a bad thing, I recall a fellow named George Washington who also was an anti-colonialist; come to think of it, so am I).
Yet, when it comes to policy and culture, Gingrich rails against anything that smacks of a "European" influence.
Well, almost everything.
He seems perfectly happy living a European lifestyle. For a large fraction of his married life, Newtie has had mistresses. It does not matter so much that he did, or did not, ask his second wife, Marianne, to accept his "open-marriage" request, he was living it, daily. (And, here, one can only chortle at Rush Limbaugh, the man of 4 wives, who differentiated Clinton because Newtie "asked for permission"-- yes, after 4 years of diddling Callista while trying to impeach President Clinton for his Monica Lewinsky dalliance)
It is that European lifestyle of the man-the wife-the mistress that American culture is said to reject.
If Gingrich were to become president and Callista First Lady (yep, the ex-mistress would become a role model for American women), the new role models for American couples would become, like Newtie, just "so European".....
Romney, Paul and Santorum should remark that Newt has chosen for most of his life to live a European lifestyle and leave it at that. Their audiences will fill in the blank... that socialism is lurking around the corner.
Follow Paul Abrams on Twitter: www.twitter.com/pabrams2001
How else do you explain any one making less than 250k/year and voting republican.
I doubt if any analysis of facts would persuade the "faithful"
Once Newt takes office, it would then be impossible for America to convincingly feign indignation should he be caught in the same type of scandal Bill Clinton got nailed for.
Come to think of it, Newt would never just deny it like Clinton did. He would berate the questioner mercilessly for even bringing it up.
I would also add to a lack of travel and thus the total ignorance of the world around us.
fanned!
But, get real about life before that. Our schools were less than perfect. And anyone who taught before the late 70's could have only dreamed of students who could "research and form their own opinions." Please.
Education, by its nature, will always have its limitations. One individual will "get it" and another won't, despite all other factor being equal.
Education's biggest problem is the attempt by private, for-profit businesses, posing as "schools" and their salesmen, posing as "educational reform experts", working to deceive the public and phase out our public schools into a Walmart semblance of "education", pushing "free choice", as if your child's education should be compared to you deciding between shoes at the mall.
There is no mythic past where students were all bright, attentive and proficient at reading, writing and mathematics---and that it was all "perfect" until the evil DOE was established and "The Liberals" came in and ruined this Educational Garden of Eden.
If anything, the "liberals", like the current Education Secretary, Arne Duncan, appears to be a tool of these private, for-profit "reformers" and his policies have been absolutely awful.