Kathleen Parker: Can Gingrich end Republicans' struggle with anti-intellectuals?

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Nov. 25, 2011 6:58 a.m.

    I think the real positive from redshirts comments is that you never trust a single model, any one who has done any forecasting of any kind understands that. Each model needs to be additively mixed into the discussion, and discussed in the context of the other models. Anyone who claims though a single model blows holes in what has been shown before needs to be very carefully vetted.

    What does blow me away though is how can any self proclaiming group who pronounce themselves as the keepers of common sense argue that human activity has no effect on the environment. Chernoble is a shinning example humans can introduce long term climate change. The only real argument is at what level does human activity contribute... Not if.

    We may be only a minor contributor, I don't know. But as stewards to this place we still owe it to future generations we dont trash this plant only to satisfy our own selfishness. It's a balance, and playing the ignorance card doesn't help.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 3:48 p.m.

    Perhaps, Redshirt, you should have your 9 year old fact check for you.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 3:45 p.m.

    The article you are talking about is actually an op-ed by James Taylor a Contributor. The editorial is about a study published in Remote Sensing and co-authored by Dr. Roy Spencer.

    Spencer and Taylor are both authors of the Heartland Institute:

    According to Discover Magazine, Spencer is an author for the über-conservative Heartland Institute (as is James Taylor, the author of the Forbes article), which receives substantial funding from can you guess? ExxonMobil. He is also affiliated with two other think tanks funded by ExxonMobil.

    Also from the Discover article: Stephanie Pappas at LiveScience contacted several climate scientists about Spencers paper, and their conclusions were quite harsh. They say Spencers model is "unrealistic", "flawed", and "incorrect". . . Spencers models are irretrievably flawed, "dont make any physical sense", and that Spencer has a track record in using such flawed analysis to draw any conclusion he wants. -No, new data does not blow a gaping hole in global warming alarmism

    The quote that you claim NASA made: NASA has admitted that "The study indicates far less. . . etc.

    Is not by NASA at all, rather it is written by Taylor in his op-ed.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Nov. 23, 2011 2:45 p.m.

    To "Pagan | 2:06 p.m." I am sorry that you can't find a story knowing the magazine and the exact title of the article. Again, do you want me to send my 9 year old over to your house to do the search for you.

    I think it is funny when you bring out that whine. It shows several things. First it shows that you can't argue against the information listed. Second, it shows that you know nothing about doing a simple internet search. Third, it shows that all of your quotes are not really anything you have found on your own because if you can't find information that other people post, how can we assume that you found any of 15 recycled articles that you constantly post?

    Who says that we can't use multiple display names? You can cange your display name so taht you can have multiple names.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 2:06 p.m.

    'It is you that is probably behind the times, according to NASA and a recent article in Forbes, "New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism". NASA has admitted that "The study indicates far less future global warming...' - Redshirt1701 | 12:37 p.m. Nov. 23, 2011

    1) Redshirt, Your not going to convince anyone of anything if you insult them.

    2) Using quotations around words does not give us the A: author B: Date and C: Source of your claim.

    3) I thought we were NOT supposed to be using MUILTIPLE display names...


  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Nov. 23, 2011 12:37 p.m.

    To "LDS Liberal | 12:12 p.m." they accept it, but that doesn't make it true.

    Scientists once thought they could turn lead into gold, they also thought that the earth was flat. Just because somebody did a good job convincing people of something that doesn't mean it is true.

    You claim that you are an engineer, so you should have some understanding of an energy system.

    According to the smartest, and brightest of the AGW proclaimers, the models do not contain a complete energy balance. If they are modeling something that depends on energy coming in to and leaving it, shouldn't they have an understanding how much energy goes in and how much goes out?

    It is you that is probably behind the times, according to NASA and a recent article in Forbes, "New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism". NASA has admitted that "The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed."

    Even NASA says the alarmists have bad models. Do you trust bad mathematical models?

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 12:12 p.m.

    RedShirt | 9:28 a.m. Nov. 23, 2011
    USS Enterprise, UT

    For someone who can't accept the over-whelming evidence and Scientific acceptance of Global Warming...

    Meanwhile you fully embrace and accept Abstract Conspiracy Theories and the totally un-scientifically proven or Scientifically accepted techno-babble "Abiotic theory" for the origin of oil.
    [which asserts oil is a natural product the Earth generates constantly rather than a 'fossil fuel' derived from decaying ancient forests and dead dinosaurs].

    You can't pick and choose facts to fit and fill your warped sense of the World and reality.
    No matter how bad you want to believe the earth is only 6,000 years old - the facts are -- it isn't.

    Hence, the problem with the Anti-Intellectual College dropout GOP.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 23, 2011 9:28 a.m.

    To "Bebyebe | 9:51 p.m. " that isn't my standard, that is the standard set by most credible scientific journals.

    To "10CC | 5:49 p.m." there are other principals besides the Bernulli effect that allow acrobatic airplanes to fly inverted. If you bothered to do a quick search, there are quite a few aerospace engineers that have posted explainations about how planes can fly inverted.

    So, actually, there is proof that explains how airplanes can fly, and it is well proven and well established.

    Now show us where Global Warming can explain the Midevil Warm Period or the Little Ice age. Better yet, show us the model that contains all of the recent discoveries about how the earth sheds more heat than previously thought, or can contains a balanced energy equation. Even Michael Mann doesn't have that computer model.

  • Kiyo Washougal, Washington
    Nov. 22, 2011 11:54 p.m.

    Besides.............you don't need to be "smart" to be president.

  • CHS 85 Sandy, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 11:22 p.m.


    Why do you continually bring up the fact the President Obama uses a teleprompter. Would you like a list of folks why use or used a teleprompter for speeches?

    Sarah Palin
    Ronald Reagan
    George W. Bush
    Harry S. Truman
    Richard Nixon
    John F. Kennedy
    Lyndon Johnson
    Jimmy Carter
    Bill Clinton
    George H.W. Bush
    Gary Herbert
    Glenn Beck
    Every news broadcaster including the great Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilley, Chris Matthews, etc.

    I've even seen a few speakers at a semi-annual event here in town use a teleprompter from time to time.

    Shall I go on? How about a new shtick? The teleprompter jab just isn't funny or clever.

  • KM Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 10:46 p.m.

    LDS lib

    Why didn't you mention Romney when you were telling us about those dumb republicans?

    Why didn't you mention the telepromter in chief or his brilliant assistant, Biden?

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 10:23 p.m.

    The tea party again.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 10:10 p.m.

    GOP shouldn't have to struggle with dumbing down. They're great at it.

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 9:51 p.m.

    Redshirt you believe in things that confidence intervals way below 95%. If that's your criteria you better take a look at your own beliefs.

  • KM Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 7:31 p.m.

    Roland Kayser
    So you also trust those purveyors of carbon credit exchanges over common sense?

    So you think that all the entitlement and dependent class that the DNC relies on for a vote, those not even taxed, are the intellectuals that voted for Pres. Obama? The same people that bought in on the super hype of Obama that they cried during the ingaguration along with Oprah? ya right.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 6:32 p.m.

    "Using the Republican stance, we should ground all airplanes until we can get the science of aviation completely settled."

    Or more to the point, using Republican "reasoning" we should not listen to medical advice from doctors about diet, exercise and not smoking because the exact causes of cancer are not settled science.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 5:49 p.m.


    Funny you should mention the global warming debate.

    Republicans insist we need to have the science completely settled on the cause of global warming before we consider any action.

    But the same Republicans fly all over the nation on airplanes, like tens of thousands of Americans do, every day.

    Guess what? The science on aviation is not "settled", either. The prevailing explanation of how airplanes fly is easily proven to be inadequate.

    (For pilots or other aviation enthusiasts, the historical scientific explanation of how wings generate life is based on the Bernoulli Principle, which posits that curvature on the top part of the wing creates a low pressure area, "lifting" the wing upward. But this doesn't explain how aerobatic airplanes can fly upside down for extended periods of time, or the commonly accepted aerodynamic understanding that if you have enough power, even a barn door can be used as a wing.)

    Using the Republican stance, we should ground all airplanes until we can get the science of aviation completely settled.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 5:27 p.m.

    'For somebody who claims to be seeking the truth, you sure put on some heavy blinders and just follow the liberal leaders.' - RedShirt | 4:03 p.m. Nov. 22, 2011

    So, the Fairleigh Dickinson University study is 'propoganda' ALONG WITH the 'University of Maryland study...?

    Redshirt, you realize there will probably be MORE studies done, showing the LACK of knowledge Fox spews and supports, right?

    But then again, I would expect nothing less, from the person who today claims Iraq had 'Weapons of Mass Destruction.'

    "The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons.' - George W. Bush - Ohio Speech 10/7/2002

    *'US gives up search for Iraq WMD' - BBC News - 01/12/05

    'Mr Duelfer reported last year that Iraq had no stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons at the time of the US-led invasion nearly two years ago.'

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 4:03 p.m.

    To "Truthseeker | 2:39 p.m." you are funny. I looked up the questions in the Fairleigh Dickinson University poll. They asked "Americans now have more ways than ever before to get their news about politics and world affairs. Im going to read you a list of news sources. As I read the list, just say yes if you got news from that source any time in the past week."

    If you look at their questions, then look at their statistics, you can see that Fox New has nothing to do with how much people know and don't know. It's called "Confirmational bias".

    The funny thing is that if you just read their questions, anybody with any critical thinking skills can see that the poll made no efforts to link a person's knowledge of the world with their favored news sources.

    For somebody who claims to be seeking the truth, you sure put on some heavy blinders and just follow the liberal leaders.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Nov. 22, 2011 2:39 p.m.

    A new poll suggests people might be better off watching no news at all than tuning into Fox. Fairleigh Dickinson University surveyed New Jerseyans about the Arab Spring in Egypt and Syria, among other current events, and found that self-identified Fox News viewers were less likely to answer correctly than consumers of other news outlets. Fox viewers even did much worse than those who dont watch any news:

    [P]eople who watch Fox News, the most popular of the 24-hour cable news networks, are 18-points less likely to know that Egyptians overthrew their government than those who watch no news at all. Fox News watchers are also 6-points less likely to know that Syrians have not yet overthrown their government than those who watch no news.
    (Nov. 21 2011)

    The results controlled for partisanship, education, and other demographics imply that there is actually something counterproductive about watching a Fox News program. Meanwhile, newspaper readers and fans of NPR, The Daily Show, and Sunday TV news, did the best overall.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 2:13 p.m.

    KM | 7:41 a.m. Nov. 22, 2011
    Cedar Hills, UT
    The republicans have the most intellectual and experienced candidates for president.


    Wowzers, are you serious?
    Lets see....

    We have:
    Herman the womanizing [Libya....ah yes....Libya.....um....] Cain
    Rick [...and, I forget the 3rd one....Oops!] Perry
    [Which Telepromptor,
    John Wayne is from Waterloo,
    Jimmy Carter caused Swine Flu,
    The Earth is 6,000 years old,
    CO2 is a harmful gas,
    Paul Revere warned the British,
    Founding Fathers ended Slavery,
    and Happy Birthday to Elvis on the anniversiary of his death] Bachmann.

    IMHO - Jon Huntsman Jr. and Ron Paul seem to be the most intellectual, but they aren't looney enough to apease the ignorant majority of the GOP.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 1:37 p.m.

    Let's look at OTHER examples of the 'not really' truth out there.


    *'Nearly 1 in 5 Americans Thinks Obama Is Muslim, Survey Shows' - By Lauren Green - 08/19/10 - Fox News

    *'Trump on Obama's Birth Certificate: 'Maybe It Says He's a Muslim' - Fox Nation - 03/30/11


    *'Obamas to attend church for Easter Sunday' - By Philip Elliott - AP - Published by DSNews - 04/11/09

    And 'yes'.

    That WAS two years before Trump made the claim.


    *Sen Kyl mocked for making up numbers in abortion debate By Sara Israelsen-Hartley DSNews 04/12/11
    ' Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz) was speaking on the floor of the Senate about his opposition to funding Planned Parenthood because abortions are "well over 90 percent" of what they do.


    'According to data from Planned Parenthood, abortion procedures account for 3 percent of their total services...' - Same article

    Another example:

    *'Walgreens Corrects Fox & Friends: We DON'T Offer Pap Smears' - Media Matters - 04/11/11

    It's a wonder there is not MORE 'mis-spokes' out there.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 1:18 p.m.

    "...As long as the left holds all the microphones, conservatives will be portrayed this way. If the news was truly "fair and balanced...".

    Rupert, Rush, Sean, Bill, Laura, Ann, Mark, Michael, as well as other not so famous sycophants, would beg to differ with that statement.

    Conservatarians playing the "microphone" card?

    Nice try.

  • Mad Hatter Provo, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 12:37 p.m.

    It is a sad state when Newt Gingrich is seen as the "intellectual giant" in a field of mice. Gingrich, the politician, has come far in his pursuit of the cash cow, but his analytical skills are lost in the morass of confusion and noise he generates whenever he speaks.

    Posing as a historian with strategic analytical skills for those with a conservative agenda, he is simply, as George Will put it, "a retail politician" willing to sell himself to supplement his Tiffany's revolving credit account. However, for any educated person with a modicum of intellectual ability, Gingrich is certainly not very convincing.

    William F. Buckley and the intellectual center of conservative thought would be appalled with Gingrich and the current crop of wingnut talking heads. Rather than develop serious arguments based upon conservative principles, these pretenders, as Parker notes, have retreated into jingoistic smear to intimidate their opponents and frighten the base with fear-mongering that the "world as we know it is coming to an end".

    Today, this anti-intellectual component of conservative thinking has developed into a media empire which is long on financial support and short on meaningful ideas.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 12:33 p.m.

    To Solidarity: If you needed brain surgery who would you want to do it? A brain surgeon, or someone with good common sense? That's why I trust people who have earned a PhD in Climatology over the deniers who post on this forum.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 12:30 p.m.

    To "atl134 | 10:01 a.m." you show your ignorance of scientific principals and publishing standards. First, you cannot ever have a CI greater than 100%, just like you cannot ever be correct more than 100% of the time.

    Next, you show that there are no journal articles that meet the criteria. You see, the thing is that you can't just declare a confidence interval to be applied to your research. If their models are less than 95%, why are we even considering them? It is cold fusion all over again, except this time there is a political adgenda behind it.

    To "Brother Chuck Schroeder | 10:48 a.m." I normall just ignore you, but I guess I will respond this time. You seem to forget that while the Republicans were controlling Congress, you know, the body that creates the laws, we had unemployment between 5% and 6%, it was only AFTER the Democrats took congress in 2007 that things went down hill.

  • Kiyo Washougal, Washington
    Nov. 22, 2011 12:00 p.m.

    As long as the left holds all the microphones, conservatives will be portrayed this way. If the news was truly "fair and balanced" conservatives and libertarians would be swept into office. DNews does a good job however, all things considered.

  • Brother Chuck Schroeder A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    Nov. 22, 2011 11:31 a.m.

    Newt Gingrich and the Bilderburgers - The secretive Bilderberg society, a group some believe conspires semi-annually to foster global government, will hold a steering committee meeting in Washington. Among those involved in the discussion of the latter subject will be former U.S. Sens. Gary Hart and Warren Rudman, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, journalist Leslie Gelb and Secretary of Defense William Cohen. McCain, at the special invitation of Kissinger, will speak at breakfast. House Speaker Newt Gingrich agreeBilderberger goals must be met. The UN and IMF will get billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers, and a Gestapo Secret Police network will stifle dissent by Americans who resist the "New Civilization." Newt Gingrich and the Illuminati. Two years in advance, billionaire Jews who comprise the inner circle of the Republican Party leadership have chosen the nominee of the Party to run for President in the upcoming 2012 elections. Newt Gingrich, premier neocon and corrupt former House Speaker, has been given the nod. Already a campaign war chest of over $20 million has been gathered for Gingrich's use. Eventually, up to a quarter billion dollars will be amassed.

    Dump Newt Gingrich and the Koch Brother's con?.

  • Brother Chuck Schroeder A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    Nov. 22, 2011 10:48 a.m.

    Re: RedShirt | 8:10 a.m. Nov. 22, 2011
    USS Enterprise, UT
    What a liberal shill. The funny thing is that the so called "uneducated" talk show hosts know more about what is going on than the highly educated thinktanks.

    The conservative talk show hosts were saying that Egypt was going to end up in chaos, and look at it now, chaos with no end in sight.

    Reply: President Obama came home after a 9-day trip to Asia. Well, he got to see some stuff he never sees at home, like jobs. Where's these GOP jobs here in America for the past decade?. As for Gingrich's rise in the campaign, that's caused by the Koch Brother's looking for more tax loop holes, and more ultra super rich elete "Tax Payer" funded entitlements, and they think they found a new player in their bag of tricks.

  • Brother Chuck Schroeder A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    Nov. 22, 2011 10:41 a.m.

    Republicans' struggle with anti-intellectuals?. Yea, themself.

    President Obama will pardon the turkeys. Unless of course the Republicans step in and block that.

    The latest fashion trend in Hong Kong is eyeglasses without any lenses in them. People just wear the frames. The feeling is that they make you intelligent, even though they're totally useless. Kind of like the GOP congressional supercommittee.

    I'm not sure Rick Perry understands Thanksgiving. When they asked him if he was going to deep-fry a turkey, he said, "Well, if he's found guilty."

    Last week in New Hampshire, Herman Cain said that presidents don't need to know every detail of every country in the world and he said he's going to take that message across America to all 30 states.

    Cain said that we should focus on our neighbor to the south, Mexico, and our neighbor to the north, Cold Mexico.

    It looks like the supercommittee chosen by President Obama to come up with a plan to solve the deficit has failed. The best idea they came up with? A bake sale. Unless of course the Republicans step in and block that also.

    Where's these GOP jobs?.

    That's my truthful views.

  • Brother Chuck Schroeder A Tropical Paradise USA, FL
    Nov. 22, 2011 10:35 a.m.


    Here we go again, with another "blame game" while nothing gets done in Congress again by the GOP. President Barack Obama must carry the blame for the failure of the debt crisis supercommittee because he was "absent from the whole process," Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann "BOASTED". But the Minnesota congresswoman pointed out that the House GOP legislators bent to such an extent that they were willing to raise taxes if that is what it took to get a deal. She failed to state, just as long as it's not done to the super ultra elete rich Koch Brother's and friends. "Politicians derive power from the authority of their office and their access to our tax dollars, and they use that power to enrich and shield themselves." Insider Trading, IPO Gifts, Self-Serving Earmarks, Encouraging Campaign Donations. Insider Trading - using government information not available to the public at large to predict which companies' stocks will rise or fall. WE NEED "real GOP transparency." The middle-class are hurting, the poor get poorer, more homeless on the streets, the elderly suffer, the disabled and Veteran's rot, the hungry rot, Congress could care less about them.

    That's my TRUTHFUL views.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 10:28 a.m.

    Gingrich's rise in the campaign is a surprise since he doesn't meet the basic qualifications required by the Religious Right.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 10:10 a.m.


    *'Obama's TARP Slush Fund' - David Asman - Fox Business - 02/24/10


    *'Univ. of Maryland study finds Fox News viewers to be misinformed on key issues' - By Ryan Witt - Examiner - 12/17/10

    'Over 40% of respondents said President Obama started TARP even though TARP was signed into law by President Bush on October 3rd of 2008.'


    *Fox News Viewers know LESS THAN people who dont watch any, news: Study Huffington Post 11/21/11

    Fox News Viewers are less informed than people who dont watch any news, according to a new poll from the Fairleigh Dickinson University.

    Republicans had BETTER get used to talking with 'anti-intellectuals'...

    they've worked HARD to make people as such.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 10:01 a.m.

    Gingrich is fairly smart; he shows flashes of it, but then seems to reject it in favor of pandering to the base.

    Confidence intervals are just things you set to whatever interval you want. For instance this paper in Nature...

    Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne 30 April 2009
    "results in a most likely peak carbon-dioxide-induced warming of 2 °C above pre-industrial temperatures, with a 595% confidence interval of 1.33.9 °C."

    If they wanted to calculate a 95% confidence interval they could have. It'd probably yield something like .8C to 4.4C. Alternatively you can see it yields 95% confidence that it's at least 1.3C. Are you not going to care about the paper just because they didn't do that? It's not like they aren't stating it's a 90% confidence interval.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 8:48 a.m.


    A truthful column.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 8:10 a.m.

    What a liberal shill. The funny thing is that the so called "uneducated" talk show hosts know more about what is going on than the highly educated thinktanks.

    The conservative talk show hosts were saying that Egypt was going to end up in chaos, and look at it now, chaos with no end in sight. The conservatives warned that Obama's policies were not going to reduce unemployment, and it didn't. They also warned that the Debt comittee would end up a failure, and it has failed in its purpose. They are more correct and educated about the political world than the politicians are.

    If you want to talk global warming, first find me an journal article that meets the 95% confidence interval (results are accurate 95% of the time) criteria that nearly all other scientists have to meet before publishing.

  • KM Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 7:41 a.m.

    The republicans have the most intellectual and experienced candidates for president. Much more capable than the cabal we have at the moment.
    Then the writer uses the global warming scam to butress her idea that the GOPers are dumb. When its the GOPers that are the more curious and inquisitive regarding this marxist plan to redistribute wealth on a grand scale. They ask the real questions like: Who stands to profit from the over-hyped scam? They see how utterly rediculas Carbon credits are. They ask about leftists ties to the Chicago Carbon Exchange and wonder why the DNC media gives the players a free pass on the corruptions surrounding the global warming game.

  • liberal larry salt lake City, utah
    Nov. 22, 2011 7:17 a.m.

    The New York Times had an excellent editorial recently that evaluated the qualifications of a good leader, and concluded that religion could be a liability if it restricted the open mindedness of a person. The Republican party has effectively become a religion and closed its collective mind to all nuanced thought. They have only one acceptable stand on most issues including, abortion, the death penalty, evolution, global warming, Keynesian economics, taxes and health care, and no amount of new information, or persuasion can CHANGE THEIR MINDS. This is nothing like the party of Teddy Roosevelt, Barry Goldwater, or even Ronald Reagan. We can't prosper as a nation when half the nation has taken all rational discussion off the table.

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Nov. 22, 2011 7:05 a.m.

    Conservatism is failing. It has been for 400 years since Galileo had the audacity to tell the truth about the earth not being the center of the universe. Conservatives couldn't conserve thier traditions over science and progress then, and they can't do it now.

    The tea-party is a small pebble in the road to progress. They don't see they are like ants trying to stop an intilectual freight train that's been gaining speed for nearly 5 centuries. We've done away with serfdom, feudalism, the Inquisition, witch hunts, theocracy, dueling plagues and child labor in the west. They would love to bring it back but the rest of the world is following progressive values, not conservatism.

    I could never be part of conservative stagnation.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 6:00 a.m.

    The GOP is pathetic. It really is.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 5:35 a.m.

    Up until very recently Gingritch thought that global warming was a potentially catastrophic issue that needed urgent attention. When he decided he was going to run for the Republican nomination, he immediately changed his mind.

    For years Gingritch argued that we needed to reform end of life care in this country. Then Obama proposed doing just that, and Gingritch was one of the first ones on the "death panels" bandwagon.

    Gingritch supported the individual mandate to purchase health insurance for many years. When Obama proposed it he started calling it unconstitutional socialism.

    If the big criticism of Mitt Romney is that he is a flip-flopper, Newt Gingritch is certainly far worse.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 12:36 a.m.

    Great Article!

    The college Drop-outs [Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck] are the mind and voice of the GOP.

    And as for Academia --
    They have even gone so far as to formed their own scholastic creditials --
    Limbaugh's - Limbaugh Institute
    & - Glenn Beck University.

    Loved this line from the article :
    "Nevertheless, the Republican base requires that candidates tack away from science toward the theistic position only God controls climate. More to the point, Rush Limbaugh says that climate change is a hoax and so it must be."

    And tobacco doesn't cause cancer or emphysema, right Rush?

    Ditto-head might as well mean "DoDo"-head.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 22, 2011 12:34 a.m.

    Gingrich is an intellectual? Seriously?

    "Gingrich has one of the loosest, least rigorous, most pretentious minds in politics. He loves ideas, hes just no good at them; and the idea of ideas is not enough to make a man a serious intellectual. The bloopers in his works of history fiction and nonfiction, and nonfiction that turns out to be fiction are legendary." The New Republic, November 3, 2011.

    Gingrich's pretending to be an intellectual while embracing the distinctly anti-intellectual positions of the GOP is not fooling anyone.