Skip to comments.Gingrich cashed in supporting subsidies for big businessRead more:
Posted on 11/17/2011 1:34:10 PM PST by Fred
Since leaving office in 1999, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has spent much of his time convincing conservatives to support government subsidies for large corporations, reports the Washington Examiner.
In addition to his work as a strategic consultant for government-sponsored mortgage lender Freddie Mac, the Examiner reports that tax filings show Gingrich received money from the ethanol lobby.
Green Energy, a lobbying group that works to secure and create government subsidies for the much-criticized ethanol industry, paid the Gingrich Group more than $300,000 as recently as 2009. Unlike most conservative experts on the industry, Gingrich is a staunch advocate of ethanol, an expensive corn-based alternative fuel opposed by many conservatives due to its price tag and incompatibility at high concentrations with some modern automobile engines.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
I think when people see that Newt keeps him promises as in say the Contract With America. When they see that he reduced government spending, balanced the Federal Budget and reformed welfare they just might conclude that Newt is the kind of insider they would like to see back in the inside. Just saying
Funny how the media’s long knives never seem to be quite long enough to reach Mittens. Only anyone who gets in his way.
This is getting comical.
please see 21
They’re waiting for Mitt to be the nominee before they bring out the knives for him.
Well now we can see how brilliant he is at handling this even though this isnt a debate question.
How is this a criticism and not a hit piece?
” Just saying”
Facts mean nothing to liberals.
The problem with Herman is that he has less breadth and depth concerning world affairs than the average poster here at FR. And I might add that I like Herman and think you are absolutely correct about the debt run up by the best and brightest.
I think the foreign policy stuff is hurting Cain much more than the sexual harassment stuff. His polls numbers held up and his donations skyrocketed after the allegations.
I haven’t heard a word about Herman’s fundraising since his Libya moment and his poll numbers have cratered since Saturday’s foreign policy debate.
Yes, always go where you’re led. Do no research. Do no thinking. Believe what you’re fed. The media will guide you.
So, he made a living doing what people in Washington do after they leave office?
how is this news?
Newt is part of the Bush/RINO wing of the GOP.
Spending was cut
End of welfare as we know it
Compare it to today?
Ann Coulter is right about 1 thing, sorry we don't have Ronald Reagan on the Ballot.
Congressman Gingrich’s strongly supports expanded drilling both onshore and offshore. In 2008, he started a movement for drilling in the US and wrote a book titled “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less.” To aid in energy efficiency, Congressman Gingrich has proposed a series of prizes to be awarded to individuals or companies that develop new energy efficient automobiles and other items. He supports the removal of bureaucratic and legal obstacles to responsible oil and natural gas development in the United States, offshore and on land. He also supports ending the ban on oil shale development in the American West. He has stated that to incentivize safe oil production, the federal government should create a federal royalty revenue sharing to give coastal states an incentive to allow offshore development.
In addition to immediate drilling, Congressman Gingrich supports a rapid expansion of nuclear energy, hydrogen energy, wind, and solar energy. He also supports tax incentives to retrofit coal energy facilities for new carbon sequestering technologies. He has stated that he supports the goal of obtaining 25% of US energy from renewable sources by 2025.
Although his views on energy are definitive, Congressman Gingrich’s views on the environment and it’s relation to energy are not. Congressman Gingrich testified in hearings (not as a Congressman) against the Waxman-Markley cap-and-trade program, and has asserted his strong opposition to the program numerous times. However, Congressman Gingrich has also advocated for programs that incentivize the reduction of carbon emission.
Congressman Gingrich’s views on global warming are also nebulous. In a 2007 debate with Senator Kerry, Congressman Gingrich stated that the evidence was sufficient that global warming existed and that action needed to be taken immediately. The obvious implication being that if action can address the issue, then it was man made. That same year, he introduced a “Contract with the Earth” and spoke about the concept of “Green Conservatism” as a method of winning the environmental debate against the left. In 2008, Congressman Gingrich made a public service announcement with House Speaker Pelosi noting the dangers of global warming and the need to take action to solve the problem. However, at a conference that same year, he stated that as a historian, it was impossible to known the extent of global warming and how much humans were contributing.
Congressman Gingrich has opposed EPA regulation of carbon emissions and has called for the EPA to be abolished.
Look at Greece and Italy soon Spain, Portugal and Ireland and you can gaze into your future America.
If people really want a conservative President there is only one choice Newt. Sorry Sarah is not running, Perry is not ready and Cain is just trying to sell some books. Newt is a proven conservative. Proven to govern as a conservative. No one, and I mean NO ONE has done more for conservatives then Newt since Reagan.
Every green tax credit is a tax loophole
Q: The oil companies got government handouts in the form of tax breaks, tax exemptions, loopholes. Is that fair?
A: Every green tax credit is a loophole. Why did we get to breaks for ethanol, breaks for oil and gas, etc.? We have a simple choice. We can depend on Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela, or we can encourage development of oil and gas in the US. I’m for an energy-independent America, and that means I favor people who create energy.
Q: If you eliminate some of those loopholes, whether for ExxonMobil or some other companies, there are those who argue that is, in effect, a tax increase and it would violate a pledge that so many Republicans have made not to raise taxes.
A: Yes, a lot of people argue that. They’re technically right. Look, I’m cheerfully opposed to raising taxes. We have a problem of overspending. We don’t have a problem of undertaxing. I want to shrink government to fit income, not raise income to try to catch up with government.
Source: 2011 GOP Tea Party debate in Tampa FL , Sep 12, 2011
I don’t know of any conservatives who abandoned Herman Cain over the cheap shots and dirt thrown at him. But you won’t help him by doing the same thing to Newt.
Truer words have never been spoken, Jim! I agree 100%.