Posted on 02/18/2012 1:37:04 AM PST by Marguerite
I just saved your video....loved hearing Newt’s sound bits and they say it all. Foolish people who cannot see that Newt is the only hope we have for this country....he, as with Reagan, knows how to inspire the country once again...and it’s in bad need of just that. Unlike other candidates who simply spew out the same old stuff..Newt believes fully in what he’s saying...and has his great record of accomplishments to back that up...no other can say the same!
I just saved your video....loved hearing Newt’s sound bits and they say it all. Foolish people who cannot see that Newt is the only hope we have for this country....he, as with Reagan, knows how to inspire the country once again...and it’s in bad need of just that. Unlike other candidates who simply spew out the same old stuff..Newt believes fully in what he’s saying...and has his great record of accomplishments to back that up...no other can say the same!
It’s really a very moving video.
Glad you liked it.
I have no reason to believe he did. Of course, several people who were close to Ronald Reagan say he hardly knew Newt Gingrich. And Newt doesn’t figure into his memoirs.
But all I really want to remind people is that Nancy Reagan did NOT say that the torch was passed to Newt alone, but to the entire republican congress. Each time it is brought up, it reminds people that Newt claimed as a personal thing something that was in fact given to his colleagues as well.
If you are saying that Gingrich did not say he’d spend $500 billion on a moon colony, I totally agree. This is typical of campaign commercials, they take the ITEMS people propose, and look around for independent cost analysis for the proposal, and use that as if the candidate was really going to implement the proposal.
I think it’s more reasonable to say that Newt wants to encourage space exploration, and a moon colony is a great idea to do so, but he doesn’t expect to actually build a moon colony in our lifetime, because it would be way too expensive. And no private group is going to do it right now, because it wouldn’t come close to being cost-effective in any way.
“Newt wants to encourage space exploration”
... and to encourage young people to study electronics, space medicine, math, to get the spirit of research and great aspirations (P.S. other than to become rappers).
It is true that China is actively working on the project of a moon colony.
Newt hopes that there will be an American one first. I see nothing wrong with that. The world needs dreamers to advance the progress of humanity. Just remember that 30 years ago the idea of a personal computer was considered impossible...
In his time Leonardo da Vinci was considered an illuminate dreamer ... but his dreams were accomplished centuries later, and people learned to build helicopters, planes and tanks ...
“several people who were close to Ronald Reagan say he hardly knew Newt Gingrich.”
That’s NONSENSE
Ed Rollins, who was Reagan’s national campaignes organizer, said that’s bulls..t, coming right from Romney’s headquarters:
“I’m going to straighten it out once and for all: Gingrich was a very important congressional ally. Congressmen aren’t in the White House all day long, and they’re not basically giving advice. But he and Jack Kemp and Trent Lott and others were among 10 or 12 most important players and most loyal to Ronald Reagan. At the same time, Mitt Romney was an independent and he was not on the political scene at all. It’s stupid argument. They ought to be talk about this future, not the past.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjOMMweAJ_s
If I had a quote from Nancy Reagan, I would have said there was a quote from Nancy Reagan.
I said there were reports, because there were reports. You don’t have to believe the reports. But that doesn’t mean they don’t exist, merely that they don’t meet your standard of evidence.
Which doesn’t concern me — I’m not the one trying to claim that Gingrich was personally handed the Ronald Reagan torch. The quote from Nancy Reagan doesn’t say he was, so it’s really up to you to show that Nancy Reagan really just meant Newt Gingrich. Do you have any “reports” or “quotes” that Nancy has come out and confirmed that Newt Gingrich was the sole heir to the torch?
I guess we could trade competing quotes, but I’m sure you would say that you don’t believe any of the people at the links I would cite, and I don’t really care one way or another.
My point was that of course Santorum wouldn’t be known by Reagan, because Santorum didn’t become a congressman until 1991, well after Reagan was gone from the scene. And I’m not insisting that Nancy Reagan was personally passing the torch to anybody, much less Rick Santorum.
You are the one who is claiming with no evidence that Gingrich was the new Torch-bearer. So as I said to lonevoice — show me a quote from Nancy Reagan (she’s still alive, so she could confirm if she wanted) that she actually meant to just give the torch to Gingrich.
Right now all you have is a quote from 1995 where she passed the torch to the entire Republican congress. Since you are claiming that she didn’t mean that, it’s really up to you to provide some evidence.
Of course, this entire argument is stupid. We should be discussing what Gingrich has been up to the last 5 years, not what someone said about him before he started his job as Majority Leader over 15 years ago, in another century.
My point was that of course Santorum wouldn’t be known by Reagan, because Santorum didn’t become a congressman until 1991, well after Reagan was gone from the scene. And I’m not insisting that Nancy Reagan was personally passing the torch to anybody, much less Rick Santorum.
Thank you for the confirmation of what I posted way back up the thread. Nancy didn’t pass the torch just to Newt, she passed it to ALL the Republican members of Congress. Santorum was one of those members, so Ronnie passed the torch to Rick Santorum.
I stay out of the “Gingrich” threads, but it’s hard when they turn into baseless personal attacks on Rick Santorum.
I don’t know — you are calling me a Newt-basher, but I have virtually avoided any thread that was about Gingrich.
You've made thirteen posts today, twelve of them on Gingrich threads, showing that you're less than honest, nevermind that you contradict yourself repeatedly, and claim not to have said what you actually said all within the span of a few posts on just this one thread.
Your sophistry is ridiculous.
I explained why I was in this “Gingrich” thread. And not once in this thread did I say anything negative about Newt Gingrich. I defended Santorum against an unrelated attack, and corrected misinformation about Nancy Reagan.
You can call it whatever you want — the fact is there is no evidence Nancy Reagan said Ronnie passed the torch just to Newt, and all the other arguments made — who had whose picture taken, who had Michael Reagan’s endorsement, who was “known” by Reagan” — provided any evidence to contradict the clear meaning of what Nancy Reagan actually said.
SO unless you have a quote from Nancy Reagan or her aides that in fact she meant to say Ronnie personally passed his legacy onto just Newt Gingrich, I’d say you have nothing more to add to that particular question.
Every claim I’ve made in this thread I backed up with a link — people want to misrepresent my argument, and I can’t stop them, but what I said is true, and is cited.
BTW, this is why I generally stay out of Newt threads — not because I can’t easily argue the points, but because it’s pointless to bother, even to defend Santorum against baseless attacks. People want to say what they want, they don’t want to be questioned, and they certainly don’t want to have a discussion.
And you can’t have any complicated argument with people who want to deny clear meaning to make stupid points they think are good “debate” points but would be laughed at in any REAL debate.
You’re ridiculous, a fact which speaks for itself just on this thread.
I’d like him to explain why the deuce he pushed this amendment, what was his rationale???
In 2002, Santorum supported an amendment that would have extended voting rights to prisoners who had finished their terms and no longer were on parole or probation. He was one of only three Republicans in the Senate to do so.
BTW, the amendment was criticized as an infringement on states’ rights, and it failed.
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.