Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich is probably one of the best public policy minds in the United States today. Speaker Gingrich wrote Real Change before the term “change” became the buzz word of the 2008 election and when you read his book you can’t help but be impressed with the real changes that he suggests for America.
To the brainwashed folks out there let me say no, this book is not slanted towards a conservative point of view. In fact, Speaker Gingrich spends quite some time berating the current Republicans in Congress (and the White House) as well as those from the last few years. And yes, he gives it to the Democrats pretty hard, too. And for any independent minded American out there (* raises hand *) you can’t help but know exactly what Speaker Gingrich is talking about when he dresses down both parties.
So what are some of the changes that Speaker Gingrich suggests for our future? Well let me tell you a little bit about my favorite chapter in this book. First, Speaker Gingrich suggests a massive overhaul of the education system in America. As I work with schools of choice on a daily basis, I absolutely loved reading Speaker Gingrich’s ringing endorsement for charter schools. In case you do not know, charter schools are public schools of choice that hold lotteries to determine which applicants may attend.
The innovation here is that these schools are not regulated by the local school board and can choose to teach students in their preferred manner. The students are subjected to standardized testing and their test scores are highly scrutinized by the naysayers, but time and time again charter schools meet or exceed the local district’s achievements. Charter schools (in New Jersey at least) usually have a better rate of high school seniors who go on to college than their public school counterparts. But I digress…
Newt Gingrich tells a great story about the Detroit school system and how it rejected a multi-million dollar investment because the local bureaucrats (i.e. teachers and the teachers’ union) did not want to be held to a higher standard or put to shame by charter schools. Who winds up getting hurt when these people reject such help? The students.
Speaker Gingrich suggests at many points in this book that tax-free government prizes need to be established in order to get America’s scientists thinking about the same issues that America’s people are thinking about. For example, Speaker Gingrich suggests a tax-free $1 billion (with a “b”) reward for the first person/company to design a gas-free car that can be mass produced for the public. Anyway, Speaker Gingrich talks about the need to have better space travel and for America’s needs to lead the world’s innovative breakthroughs for this century.
I highly recommend that anyone who is interested in reading about what real change can mean for America take a look at Speaker Gingrich’s book. What makes the ideas in this book so compelling is that Speaker Gingrich’s new think tank, American Solutions, backs up all of the ideas with nonpartisan poll results showing an overwhelming majority of Americans agreeing with the changes proposed. Again, this is a great read for those of us who are looking for real change that puts America on the right path.
Dude you still have not read conservatives without conscience. I can tell because you still like this guy. Serving divorce papers on your wife’s deathbed. And now defending the suspension of Habeas Corpus? Newt is a jerk! http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/06/15/face-the-nation-gingrich-thinks -scotus-gitmo-decision-could-cost-us-a-city/
He’s certainly not a jerk and I find it odd that a free thinker such as yourself would judge a man on past actions. In that case, Bill Clinton was the worst President in history (obviously not true) because of his past indiscretions.
And on a side note, I would agree that Newt made a foolish decision to serve divorce papers to his wife as she lay dying. That said, I can’t see any value in reading a book that focuses on the negatives associated with individual Republicans or Democrats and then using what that book says (which will obviously be biased one way or another) to affect my decisions on that politician’s policies. That’s like comparing apples and shoes.
Still, I don’t see what that has to do with anything in this book. The book is written based off of finding real solutions to America’s problems. Although I will say that when people hyper-focus on a politician’s negative characteristics and let that supersede anything positive he/she has to offer, that this is where America gets stuck in a rut (see Clinton/Lewinsky).
You should take a read of Newt’s book (or at least see some of the research his think tank is putting out there) and make a decision on the man’s policies based off of that.
I visited his site and I have many questions about his polling data among other things. I used to work for Gallup and I know where bias can creep into surveying both in script, presentation, and interviewer style.
The book I recommended to you, is written by a long standing conservative who claims that Newt is not a conservative. As you can probably tell I am not a fan of Newt or the recent crop of people who call themselves conservatives. I can respect a real conservative, however and I do, when they are genuine.
I will take a look at the book and I will report back to you, would you take a look at John Dean’s book?
As for judging a man on past actions, I think we call that judging his “character”.
So then it’s legit to assume that Obama’s a racist because his Pastor and personal confidant is a racist?
Character may be a good way to judge whether or not a person is someone you’d enjoy having a beer with, but I think the current President proves that it might not be the best way to measure one’s policy goals.
You don’t see my point because you’re looking at it with a biased view. You’re hooked on the fact that Gingrich hasn’t led a good personal life – I’m saying that this doesn’t matter if his policies can give America positive changes.
You stated: As for judging a man on past actions, I think we call that judging his “character.”
I replied: Character may be a good way to judge whether or not a person is someone you’d enjoy having a beer with, but I think the current President proves that it might not be the best way to measure one’s policy goals.
The point here is that it shouldn’t matter what a person does in their personal life if their policies are effective at helping this county and it’s people. Would we tell the man who cures AIDS that his vaccine is no good here because he served his wife divorce papers on her death bed? I don’t think so.
Would we think that guy is a scumbag in his personal life? Probably. Would we think he is a hero around the world for his contributions? Probably.
I’m not saying Gingrich is a hero or a savior of any sort, but to write off a man’s policies simply because he’s not the cleanest person in his personal life is ludicrous and could be the very cause of some of this country’s problems.
I don’t see your point, if one disagrees with their priest or minister one has to leave a church immediately? I know many Catholics who don’t agree with many of the Vatican mandates but remain a member of the church.
In the case of Gingrich it is a life time of duplicitous and immoral behavior. He is not a good man.
Okay I get it now. I am a little thick sometimes. I am biased in that I do not like the man and that somewhat distorts how I view him. I guess you can lump me in with the Clinton Crazies in that regard. I just find it hard to consider policies from an authoritarian type.