Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Newt Gingrich to Debate John Kerry on Climate Change
FOX news online ^ | April 05, 2007

Posted on 04/06/2007 2:56:13 PM PDT by Kimmers

WASHINGTON — Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich will face off next week with Sen. John Kerry in a debate over climate change.

The debate is scheduled for Tuesday at 10 a.m. in the Russell Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Announcements; Extended News; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: again; debate; enviroment; gingrich; hanoijohnny; ichabodcrane; joncary; kerry; lurch; newt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-89 last
To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
Rechts!

When will we see debating weathermen on the evening news.
51 posted on 04/07/2007 2:34:31 PM PDT by BIGLOOK (Keelhauling is a sensible solution to mutiny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
 
Why are two non-experts debating a highly complex scientific subject?

I mean, why don’t they debate the complexities of the logistics of sending a man to Mars. I suppose they know about the same amount about that subject too.

The Dems have turned it into an emotional, religious issue and so to them and to the media, science is nearly irrelevant in the discussion.

Because Kerry and Newt are both opportunists in this context, they are exploiting the political nature of the matter.

Neither Kerry, algore or any of the other Dem politicians who are pushing Global Warming will publicly debate a dissenter from the scientific community, and so the whole matter is reduced to this sort of idiotic political theater.

52 posted on 04/07/2007 2:37:55 PM PDT by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Ieatfrijoles
I too think this will turn out to be a mutual JO session for a couple o’ beltway gadflys

And ultimately it will benefit the Dems because the media will portray Newt as "mean" and "uncaring" once again, and so because this Global Warming stuff is all an emotional and religious issue it will end up with more sheeple voters on the Dem side.

53 posted on 04/07/2007 2:41:18 PM PDT by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: California Patriot
Newt will mop the floor with this pompous fool.

He could. Whether he will or not is up for grabs. Newt has a pathological need to be liked, so he may well succumb to an early piece of kerry flattery like Jack Kemp did in his pathetic debate with Algore in 96. The result will be a daft concession on some critical argument that by the end of the debate will have vitiated his position.

54 posted on 04/07/2007 2:43:32 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Kimmers

Climate change is a scientific issue not a political one... (Repeat three times a day, as needed)


55 posted on 04/07/2007 2:46:04 PM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #56 Removed by Moderator

To: streetpreacher

I know what you mean, but I’m uncertain who would “moderate” his image? The media? Fat chance!

Best to just wipe the floor with Jean Francois and give conservatives more reason to overlook his baggage.

I’m not a tremendous Newt fan, but I heard him on Hugh Hewitt recently and the guy is very, very smart!


57 posted on 04/07/2007 2:51:40 PM PDT by incredulous joe ("Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kimmers

If LongJohn incurs a wound during the debate, will he put in for another Purple Cross?


58 posted on 04/07/2007 2:52:19 PM PDT by toddlintown (Six bullets and Lennon goes down. Yet not one hit Yoko. Discuss.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: toddlintown

I wonder which facts skerry will make up this time?


59 posted on 04/07/2007 2:53:29 PM PDT by oldenuff2no
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: taildragger

Wrong end...


60 posted on 04/07/2007 2:55:01 PM PDT by Wolverine (A Concerned Citizen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: streetpreacher
I think Newt may disappoint on this.

I think you're right. I saw him last summer in a forum at the Iowa State Fair with Tom Vilsack, and he sure talked as if he was a global warming believer.

61 posted on 04/07/2007 2:56:30 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Phatboy
Newt Has been practicing for just this opportunity. If the format is wide open and without moderator interference, Newt could make Kerry cry.

Well, if it's unmoderated then Kerry will just use the standard Dem tactic of constantly interrupting and preventing Newt from getting a single complete sentence out.

If it's truly a fair debate where everybody gets equal time and interruptions aren't tolerated then Newt could smackdown Kerry before breakfast and while in a straightjacket, no problem.

Regardless of who has the better argument, the media will portray Newt as "mean" and so he'll be judged by the MSM pundits as being the loser, as usual.  Newt knows this, and that's why I think he's going to embrace much of the Global Warming idiocy, because his main interest is being 'popular' with a national audience and what he perceives as their perspective.

62 posted on 04/07/2007 3:05:28 PM PDT by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

That’s quite possible. But I still think he’ll beat Kerry, and clearly beat him, on substance. One concession, even a major one, is not defeat. Of course, it could be seen that way in performance terms, but very few Americans will be watching.


63 posted on 04/07/2007 3:43:51 PM PDT by California Patriot ("That's not Charley the Tuna out there. It's Jaws." -- Richard Nixon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

No, but word will get out to a few people that there is a sensible, educated Republican/conservative position on global warming. That may prove to be valuable. It also helps to rehabilitate Newt as a major public figure. And it will do little for Kerry.


64 posted on 04/07/2007 3:45:29 PM PDT by California Patriot ("That's not Charley the Tuna out there. It's Jaws." -- Richard Nixon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Comment #65 Removed by Moderator

To: nutmeg
This should be good!!

Thanks much.

66 posted on 04/07/2007 4:48:46 PM PDT by Victoria Delsoul (If you think the world's dangerous, and you need a tough guy... that's me [Rudy] --Newt Gingrich)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: toddlintown
Giggle...would that include breaking one of his perfectly manicured nails?
67 posted on 04/07/2007 5:27:25 PM PDT by Kimmers (Coram Deo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Huck
Glad you have a sense of humor. Newt has accomplished much, so much that the Democrats' first priority was to take him down. But I never bought into it.

Let's hear him out on our present internal and international issues. After all, he's the brightest of the bunch. On what issues, specifically, do you disagree with Newt.

68 posted on 04/07/2007 7:45:42 PM PDT by duckln
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Kimmers
I can only answer this thread title:

Newt Gingrich to Debate John Kerry on Climate Change

with another thread title:

Mary, Mother of God

69 posted on 04/07/2007 7:47:52 PM PDT by Silly (plasticpie.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stoat

I think what the DBM will probably do is say, “see even far right politician Newt Gringrich knows human caused GW is a reality, the only difference is how best to deal with it.”

An instant big win an validation for Big Al, the IPCC and the GW fanatics.


70 posted on 04/07/2007 8:26:17 PM PDT by redangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: redangus

Agreed....it was a mistake for Newt to agree to this, because regardless of what’s said it will be spun as a Dem win, and by a Republican engaging in a political debate on the issue it validates the foundations of the pro-GW arguments, that being that it’s man-made. The matter should be left to scientific debate and study and Republican politicians should steer clear. Newt is undermining those who are courageously resisting this hysterical religion.


71 posted on 04/07/2007 9:11:39 PM PDT by Stoat (Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Kimmers
I don’t understand why 2 politicians will debate climate change. This should be a debate by scientists based on facts. Unfortunately it will devolve into a case of he said/he said. Scientists are out there in the field gathering data. If you want to prove or disprove the theory, lets get together in one room and look at the information side by side. Somehow I don’t think this will happen with Gingrich and Kerry.
72 posted on 04/08/2007 6:31:21 AM PDT by CJ-50
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: streetpreacher
It would be funny if the moderator began the debate with “What makes either of you think you’re qualified to debate this topic?”

Hehe, the tap dancing on that one would put Bojangles to shame.

73 posted on 04/08/2007 9:05:51 AM PDT by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: streetpreacher
On further reflection, Newt could probably defuse the question by replying...

    For some years, I have been close to the principle source of global warming, a phenomenon originating in Latvia which I call the "Callista Effect." I have personally seen this melt the entire frozen section in my local supermarket. Following its dramatic reduction of my home heating bill, I realized its profound implications for an energy-efficient America.

74 posted on 04/08/2007 9:52:19 AM PDT by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Kimmers

Newt had better argue from the principles layed out below, or I won’t be supporting his argument:

#1 Principle, being:

Excerpt:
VIII. Environmental policies which emanate from liberty are the most successful.

Our chosen environment is liberty, and liberty is the central organizing principle of America. To be consistent with our most cherished principle, our environmental policies must be consistent with liberty. Restricting liberty not only denies Americans their chosen environment, but also constrains environmental progress.

Liberty has powerful environmental benefits. Freedom unleashes forces most needed to make our environment cleaner, healthier and safer for the future. It fosters scientific inquiry, technological innovation, entrepreneurship, rapid information exchange, accuracy and flexibility. Free people work to improve the environment, and liberty is the energy behind environmental progress.”

Individuals, Liberty and the Environment
The American Conservation Ethic
http://web.archive.org/web/20050306053745/http://www.nwi.org/ACE.html

© 1996 by the National Wilderness Institute
P.O. Box 25766, Washington, DC 20007
ph: (703)836-7404 fx: (703)836-7405 E-mail: nwi@nwi.org

Preface

The American Conservation Ethic is grounded in experience, science, wisdom and the enduring values of a free people. It affirms that people are the most important natural resource and that we must be good stewards of the world around us for this and future generations. It is founded upon a deep respect for the wonder, beauty and complexity of creation and is dedicated to the wise use of nature’s bounty. It reflects every American’s aspiration to make our environment cleaner, healthier and safer for our future, and it draws its strength from the most powerful force for improving our environment ­ free people.

The American Conservation Ethic works because, like the American people, it is practical. It applies the tried and true principles of individual rights and responsibilities to the conservation of our natural resources. Property rights create incentives that both reward good stewardship and empower individuals to protect their property from the harmful acts of others. The guarantee that we shall reap the fruits of our labor inspires the investment of time, money and effort necessary to expand upon centuries of accumulated arts and sciences. As we learn more, we are better able to be good stewards of natural resources.

The American Conservation Ethic relies upon science as a tool to guide public policy. Science is an invaluable tool for rationally weighing risks to human health and measuring other environmental impacts. Foremost among our measures of environmental quality are human health and well-being. Science also provides a means of assessing the costs and benefits of actions designed to reduce, control and remediate pollution or other environmental impacts. Central to the American Conservation Ethic is the understanding that scientific development, technological innovation and economic growth are essential for a cleaner, healthier and safer environment. As we increase our knowledge, we improve our productivity, efficiency and potential to innovate ­ and these achievements conserve energy, raw materials and other valuable resources. As we learn more about the natural world we discover how to get more than ever before from the resources we use. Progress provides the know-how, time and financial resources needed to fulfill our aspirations to improve the health, beauty and productivity of America.

The American Conservation Ethic is established on the fact that renewable natural resources are not fragile and static but resilient and dynamic. Such resources are continually regenerated through growth, reproduction or other naturally occurring processes which cleanse, cycle or otherwise create resources anew. Because these resources are continually renewed they can be used in a wise and responsible manner without the fear that they will be lost forever. Through progress we come to better understand renewable natural resources and the relationships among them. The knowledge gained improves our ability to wisely use and conserve these treasures for the benefit of current and future generations.

The American Conservation Ethic promotes workable means to reach our environmental goals, rather than depending on an inefficient centralized environmental bureaucracy. By relying on the first-hand knowledge and practical experience of local people and accounting for widely varying conditions, a site and situation specific approach provides practical solutions to the environmental challenges we face. The greater the degree to which solutions to environmental problems reflect the knowledge, needs and desires of those individuals most affected, the more successful they will be.

America has unsurpassed natural wealth. Our abundant mountains, plains, forests and coasts, our lakes, rivers and streams, our wildlife and fish are unique in all of the world. They have provided for and have been cherished by millions of Americans for generation after generation. Our people ­ living, growing and creating within our rich culture of liberty ­ are our greatest resource. Americans today clearly aspire to improve upon our tradition of wisely using and conserving the world around us for generations to come. The American Conservation Ethic is the way to fulfill these aspirations.

The American Conservation Ethic recognizes that free people work to improve the environment. It relies upon empowering individuals to use, enjoy and conserve our environment. It inspires and challenges individual Americans to improve their surroundings and lives, and thereby the world we share. Cumulatively, these are the most effective and dependable means to ensure a cleaner, healthier and safer environment, conserve America’s unique resources and protect that which we all treasure most ­ people and liberty.

Principles of the American Conservation Ethic

I. People are the most important resource.

All environmental policy should be based on the idea that people are the most important resource. The inherent value of each individual is greater than the inherent value of any other resource. Accordingly, the foremost measure of quality of our environment is human health, safety and well-being. A policy cannot be good for the environment if it is bad for people. The best judge of what is or is not desirable is the affected individual.

Human intellect and accumulated knowledge are the only means by which the environment can be willfully improved or modified. Environmental policies should inspire people to be good stewards. Within the framework of equity and liability individuals carry out deeds that create incremental benefits in the quality or quantity of a resource or improve some aspect of the environment. Cumulatively these deeds result in progress and provide direct and indirect environmental benefits to society.

II. Renewable natural resources are resilient and dynamic and respond positively to wise management.

Renewable natural resources ­ trees, plants, soil, air, water, fish and wildlife and collections thereof ­ wetlands, deserts, forests and prairies are the resources we are dependent upon for food, clothing, medicine, shelter and to meet innumerable other human needs. Human life depends upon their use and conservation. Such resources are continually regenerated through growth, reproduction or other naturally occurring processes which cleanse, cycle or otherwise create them anew. While all living organisms and activities produce byproducts, nature has a profound ability to carry, recycle, recover and cleanse. These characteristics make it possible for us to wisely use renewable resources now while ensuring they are conserved for future generations. As Teddy Roosevelt, a founding father of conservation, recognized: “A Nation treats its resources well if it turns them over to the next generation improved and not impaired in value.”

III. The most promising new opportunities for environmental improvements lie in extending the protection of private property and unleashing the creative powers of the free market.

Ownership inspires stewardship. Private property stewards have the incentive to enhance their resources and the incentive to protect them. Polluting another’s property is to trespass or to cause injury. Polluters, not those most vulnerable in the political process, should pay for damages done to others. Good stewardship is the wise use or conservation of nature’s bounty, based on our needs. With some exception, where property rights are absent, we must seek to extend them. If this proves elusive, we must seek to bring the forces of the market to bear to the greatest extent possible. There is a direct and positive relationship between modern market economies and a clean, healthy and safe environment. There is also a direct and positive relationship between the complexity of a situation and the need for freedom. Markets reward efficiency, which is environmentally good, while minimizing the harm done by unwise actions. In the market, successes are spread by example, and since costs are not subsidized but are borne privately, unwise actions are on a smaller scale and of a shorter duration. As a result, such actions are on a smaller scale and of a shorter duration. We must work to decouple conservation policies from regulation or government ownership. In aggregate, markets not mandates, most accurately reflect what people value and therefore choose for their environment.

IV. Our efforts to reduce, control and remediate pollution should achieve real environmental benefits.

The term pollution is applied to a vast array of substances and conditions that vary greatly in their effect on man. It is used to describe fatal threats to human health, as well as to describe physically harmless conditions that fall short of someone’s aesthetic ideal. Pollutants occur naturally or can be a by-product of technology. Their origin does not determine their degree of threat. Most carcinogens, for example, occur naturally but do not engender popular fear to the same degree that man-made carcinogens do. Microbiological pollutants, bacteria and viruses, though natural, are by far the most injurious form of pollution. Technology and its byproducts must be respected but not feared. Science is an invaluable tool for rationally weighing risks to human health or assessing and measuring other environmental impacts. Health and well-being are our primary environmental measures. Science also provides a means of considering the costs and benefits of actions designed to reduce, control and remediate pollution or other environmental impacts so that we may have a cleaner, healthier and safer environment.

V. The Learning Curve is Green.

As we accumulate additional knowledge we learn how to get more output from less input. The more scientific, technical and artistic knowledge we have, the more efficient we are in meeting our needs. As we gain knowledge, we are able to conserve by substituting information for other resources. We get more miles per gallon, more board-feet per acre of timber, a higher agricultural yield per cultivated acre, more GNP per unit of energy. Technological advancement confers environmental benefits. Progress made it possible for the American farmer of today to feed and clothe a population more than two and a half times the size of the one we had in 1910 and triple exports over the same time frame while lowering the total acreage in production from 325 million to 297 million acres. That is 28 million acres less, an area larger than the state of Louisiana that is now available for other uses such as wildlife habitat. American agriculture has demonstrated that as an unintended consequence of seeking efficiencies, there are environmental benefits. As Warren Brookes used to put it simply , “The learning curve is green.” This phenomenon has a tremendous positive effect on our environment and progress along the learning curve is best advanced by the relentless competition in the market to find the best or wisest use of a resource.

VI. Management of natural resources should be conducted on a site and situation specific basis.

Resource management should allow for variation of conditions from location to location and time to time. A site and situation specific approach takes advantage of the fact that those closest to a resource are best able to manage it. Such practices allow us to set priorities and break problems down into manageable units. Natural resource managers, on site and familiar with the situation, whether tending to the backyard garden or the back forty pasture, are best able to determine what to do, how to do it and when to do it. They are able to adapt management strategies to account for feedback and changes. A site and situation specific management scheme fits the particulars as no government mandate or standard can. Additionally, a site and situation specific approach is more consistent with policies carried out at lesser political levels. The closer the management of natural resources is to the affected parties, the more likely it is to reflect their needs and desires. The more centralized management is, the more likely it is to be arbitrary, ineffectual or even counterproductive. A site and situation specific approach avoids the institutional power and ideological concerns that dominate politicized central planning.

VII. Science should be employed as a tool to guide public policy.

Societal decisions rely upon science but ultimately are the product of ethics, beliefs, consensus and many other processes outside the domain of science. Understanding science for what it is and is not is central to developing intelligent environmental polices. Science is the product of the scientific method, the process of asking questions and finding answers in an objective manner. It is a powerful tool for understanding our environment and measuring the consequences of various courses of action. Through science we can assess risks, as well as weigh costs against benefits. While science cannot be substituted for public policy, public policy on scientific subjects should reflect scientific knowledge. A law is a determination to force compliance with a code of conduct. Laws go beyond that which can be established with scientific certainty. Laws are based upon normative values and beliefs and are a commitment to use force. Commitments to use the force of law should be made with great caution and demand a high degree of scientific certainty. To do otherwise is likely to result in environmental laws based upon scientific opinions rather than scientific facts. Such laws are likely to be wasteful, disruptive or even counterproductive, as scientific opinions change profoundly and often at a faster pace than public policy. The notion behind the Hippocratic oath ­ first do no harm ­ should govern the enactment of public policy.

VIII. Environmental policies which emanate from liberty are the most successful.

Our chosen environment is liberty, and liberty is the central organizing principle of America. To be consistent with our most cherished principle, our environmental policies must be consistent with liberty. Restricting liberty not only denies Americans their chosen environment, but also constrains environmental progress.

Liberty has powerful environmental benefits. Freedom unleashes forces most needed to make our environment cleaner, healthier and safer for the future. It fosters scientific inquiry, technological innovation, entrepreneurship, rapid information exchange, accuracy and flexibility. Free people work to improve the environment, and liberty is the energy behind environmental progress.


75 posted on 04/08/2007 12:26:03 PM PDT by Matchett-PI (To have no voice in the Party that always sides with America's enemies is a badge of honor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Matchett-PI

Excellent !!!!


76 posted on 04/08/2007 2:18:04 PM PDT by Kimmers (Coram Deo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Kimmers

Thank you! :)


77 posted on 04/08/2007 2:40:12 PM PDT by Matchett-PI (To have no voice in the Party that always sides with America's enemies is a badge of honor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Kimmers

Newt will clean his clock.


78 posted on 04/08/2007 4:44:53 PM PDT by Tennessean4Bush (When you're flat on your back, everything is looking up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kimmers

Remember Newt.....Ask John-boy about Teresa’s Electric bill for her mansion.


79 posted on 04/08/2007 8:08:54 PM PDT by ustanker (Secure the border!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All; Kimmers

.

NEVER FORGET

.

No Joke.

JOHN KERRY =

Pictures of a vietnamese Re-Education (SLAVE LABOR) Camp

http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1308949/posts

..”JOURNEY from the FALL”.. MoviePremieres = Fall of Saigon CLARITY..

http://www.Freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1806248/posts

.

NEVER FORGET

.


80 posted on 04/09/2007 5:26:47 AM PDT by ALOHA RONNIE ("ALOHA RONNIE" Guyer/Veteran-"WE WERE SOLDIERS" Battle of IA DRANG-1965 http://www.lzxray.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kimmers; StarFan; Dutchy; alisasny; BobFromNJ; BUNNY2003; Cacique; Clemenza; Coleus; cyborg; ...
WASHINGTON — Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich will face off with Sen. John Kerry in a debate over climate change.

The debate is scheduled for Tuesday (April 10, 2007) at 10 a.m. in the Russell Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C.

The Newt Gingrich - John F'in Kerry debate is scheduled to run live on C-SPAN at 10AM ET.

81 posted on 04/09/2007 11:36:49 PM PDT by nutmeg (The Democrats' "new direction" for Iraq: SURRENDER)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg

I was wondering who would carry this, nutmeg; thanks for the heads up. I have to leave for the hairdresser shortly so take good notes :-)

Newt will destroy Kerry.


82 posted on 04/10/2007 5:26:17 AM PDT by Peach (Not banned yet. Too bad. So sad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Nice to see you. I am hoping CSpan repeats the debate. My husband is home with the flu.
I agree. Newt should win this hands down.
Love your tag line! So glad to see you are still here.


83 posted on 04/10/2007 9:44:08 AM PDT by DallasSun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: DallasSun

Good to see you too, Dallas. Hope your husband is better soon; some people with the flu didn’t get well for a few weeks! You’d better get some good books in and store up on that patience because if he’s the typical male patient, you’re going to need it :-)


84 posted on 04/10/2007 9:52:46 AM PDT by Peach (Not banned yet. Too bad. So sad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Peach

I hear you re: male patients. I admire my restraint. He has been home all day..it is not quite noon yet. And I have not hurt him yet!


85 posted on 04/10/2007 9:58:10 AM PDT by DallasSun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: DallasSun

LOL. Well, you know where to come when you need to vent. If he’s anything like my husband when he’s sick, your patience will be tried.


86 posted on 04/10/2007 1:28:43 PM PDT by Peach (Not banned yet. Too bad. So sad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Para-Ord.45

WE TOLD YOU SO ! :

“I get the sneeky feeling Newt will agree with Kerry but

will only argue about the how.”


87 posted on 04/10/2007 3:05:14 PM PDT by Para-Ord.45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Comment #88 Removed by Moderator

To: Kimmers
Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich will face off next week with Sen. John Kerry in a debate over climate change.

Climate change or Global Warming? Two different things dontchaknow.

89 posted on 05/08/2007 12:08:36 PM PDT by Don Corleone (Leave the gun..take the cannoli)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-89 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson