By IAN SHOALES

Stanford University recently came up with a marketing plan which urged officials, when touting the school, to put across a positive message by using words like "incomparable," "stunning," "vibrant," "challenging," "boundless" and "western," among others.

The plan was jettisoned when a classics professor termed the plan "embarrassing," "insulting" and "vapid," among others.

Score one for Latin teachers, and zip for new approaches to private sector funding strategies.

In other sports news, the Dec. 4 New York Times unearthed the information that Newt Gingrich and his pseudo-entrepreneurial ilk began plotting the 1994 Republican revolution way back in 1989.

To ensure success in the free marketplace of ideas, the legislative agenda that became the "Contract With America" was actually tested in focus groups -- just like Zima and New Coke. Documents of the time even referred to various political messages ("Liberals are stupid," for example, or "School vouchers are smart") as "product."

For Newt, unlike the Stanford trustees, this strategy paid off. The shiny go-getter zealots in Congress certainly found a place on the shelf, shoving aside greasy left-leaning tonics, the stale bread of the welfare state and the old cheese of bloated federal bureaucracies, to present America with a new improved line of patter.

Near as I can tell, though, the main thing that sets their blather apart from all previous blather is aggressive marketing.

What is bizarre about this?

Well, one of the functions of marketing is to help sell something -- Stanford University, say. Often, as part of a marketing strategy to move a product, a slogan is developed -- "Incomparable Stanford University is not only vibrant but boundless in its westernness," for example. But when marketing moves to the public sector, the slogan becomes the product.

So even if this ad campaign is successful, and an enthusiastic America buys conservative disclaimers by the boatload, when they take them home, what have they got? A bunch of words we'll all have to eat sooner or later is what.

Still, despite the failure of Stanford University to feel good about itself, and despite Newt's recent public relations implosions, the formerly hippie-ish idea of getting something for nothing may be catching on. It may even be a key factor in the global economy of tomorrow. The new global economy may become UP WITH PEOPLE without the people.

Sounds good to me! As a child of the '60s, when the world truly did owe me a living, I want a piece of the action.

Next page: All grotesque gift ideas, all the time!