Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 02/29/2012 3:21:10 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Lying is not going to rebut Newt Gingrich's compelling understanding of America's energy policy and huge energy reserves.
In a speech that the Gingrich campaign has begun broadcasting around the country, and which is posted at Newt.org, Gingrich presents a unique new vision for a booming American economy. I think you will find it pathbreaking. It is so compelling that it drew Obama into a transcontinental debate with the former Speaker, the first exchange that Obama has decisively lost since he appeared on the national stage.
Gingrich began the explanation of his vision like this:
"What if we had a program that enabled the American people to develop so much new energy that we were, in fact, no longer reliant on Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran. We didn't care what the Iranians did in the Strait of Hormuz because we were safe in national security terms.
What if that new energy program created well over a million new jobs, high-paying jobs, jobs that put Americans back to work and kept the money here at home that we had been sending overseas, giving us a dramatic improvement in our balance of payments, strengthening the dollar and giving us a chance to live much freer and more independently?
What if that very idea also meant that we'd also have dramatic increases in federal revenue… without a tax increase but that, in fact, the federal government would have literally an entire new stream of money?
And finally, what if that big new idea meant that you personally were better off because you are buying gasoline for $2.50 a gallon, not for $3.89 or $4 or what some people project by the summer could be could be $5 or more?..............."
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
True. Newt said Rick had a fairly open road being the conservative alternative.
""You will see things start to clarify if, as people expect, you end up with a Romney victory in Michigan. I think you'll see Santorum getting a very different look," Gingrich said. "He has had two weeks of being the alternative. The fact is, I think there are profound reasons that Rick lost the Senate race by the largest margin in Pennsylvania history in 2006 and I think it's very hard for him to carry that all the way to the general (election)." Source
Your post made me chuckle because all you have to do is change the names around and you get a replay of the Florida debacle for Newt.
Once again, Newt is spot on! I also think there are “profound reasons” Rick blew his huge advantage last night in Michigan:
1. His robocall asking for Democrat votes. That came off as a bit sneaky and underhanded. Even Rush couldn’t put that one over.
2. Calling the President a snob for saying all kids should go to college. He actually made Obama look like the champion of the poor and middle class!
3. Saying JFK’s speech made him want to throw up. THAT hyperbole was so over the top even Rick had to walk it back.
Gingrich exposed Obama's confusion regarding fracking, saying that:
"Obama lives in this fantasy world of government subsidies. He says, quote, "It was public research dollars that over the years helped develop the technologies that companies are right now using to extract oil and natural gas." Just to set the record straight, fracking began in Kansas in 1947 and it expands to Oklahoma in 1949. It's done in Canada in the 1950s. And George Mitchell and the private sector are regarded as the pioneers in the development of "fracking." This would be like suggesting that the Air Force invented the airplane and they don't know who these two Wright Brothers are because, after all, they were private sector guys who were just bicycle mechanics, and how could they have invented the airplane when actually it must have been the Air Force because everything that was good is done by the government. That is the Obama mindset."
Gingrich summarizes:
"Obama's is a very revealing speech. You have an intellectual left winger who lives in a fantasy world in which he very cleverly uses language to say things that aren't true that sound good because he knows that if he tells you what he really wants to do, you will defeat him in a landslide. One of our jobs, of course, is to make sure that the American people understand what he really wants to do. Our choice is between energy independence and never again bowing to a Saudi King and $2.50 gasoline and about $18 trillion in royalties over the next generation; enough you could literally pay off the national debt just with the royalties for the federal government from development with no tax increase, and at least a million new jobs. That is our side. Obama's side is a series of fantasies in which your tax money is thrown away on products that are not commercially feasible, while you pay higher and higher prices, and are coerced into smaller and smaller and smaller vehicles. These are the two futures we are going to campaign on this year."
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/29/obama-loses-his-first-debate/3
No one who's been paying attention will deny that Obama seriously lacks bandwidth. An Obama-Gingrich debate would present such a stark contrast the media would be hard pressed to spin it favorably for the Boy-King. Unless of course, realizing their candidates weakness they crafted a million possible responses to any questions the fawning media might throw at him to emphasize Obummer's "charm" and "charisma" in contrast to Newt's "angry white guy" persona.
In any event, it would be a lot of fun to watch.
Mods, can this post be removed. It is very insulting to those of us who respect Newt. Thanks for your time.
You have an excellent point! With one distinction: Rush and Mark have NEVER been wall-to-wall for Newt like they have been for Rick. You’ve got to grant me that.
dforest
That would be Post#22, mods by dforest.
Propaganda works. No question about it.
Newt has been drowned in negative propaganda while the GOP anointed one (Romney) has flourished with it by the media and establishment Republicans.
I have this “gut” feeling that Newt will rise again, not in the Republican party but as a third party candidate and possibly with Palin as his running mate.
Do I worry about a third party insuring the reelection of Obama. The answer is no and I do think Obama would win if a third party materialized. However, if we let the “good ole boys” in the Republican party have their way with us, it makes no difference which party is in power.
The very reason we find ourselves facing socialism/Marxism/communism/Fascist slavery is directly due to the “go along to get along,” timid and meek, self-serving establishment republicans. Compromise is their credo and surrender is their motto.
Establishment republicans pray at the alter of Political Correctness and not a single one would shed a drop of political blood to protect the Constitution or the ones who they are supposed to represent.
I know that this upcoming election is our last chance to thwart political slavery and with direction we are currently going with the GOP it is absolutely certain that Obama will win anyway and we will not have another chance in the future to save our country’s freedoms.
Look at the freedoms we have lost in only three years. Now the IRS is intimidating the Tea Party movement with their “jack booted” thuggery to incite fear among their ranks.
It’s Hitler all over again and the sheep willfully walk into the ovens.
Not me; for I will fight for my freedoms to the end and I know that the republican party cannot be fixed because the “fix” is in...always has been since Regan.
The only method I know is to support another party that supports me, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and protects our American way of life and heritage.
That would be a new conservative party.
—>>That would be Post#22, mods by dforest.
Please ignore/I wanted to refer to another post.
Yeah, I will grant you that.
There was nothing in that post that should be removed.
You sure are a thin skinned boy.
I find it upsetting when people speak insulting about Santorum all the time.
I do not ask the mods to remove their posts.
Mitt had to gamble in Michigan and not hit Santorum too hard because he and his PAC spent $2Million/day for 10 days hammering Newt in Florida. You can try to compare the two but it really doesn't pass the smell test.
I agree Newt’s arguments for energy et al are very compelling and actions based on them would produce good results.
However, I don’t see how this, as the title suggests, is a ‘debate’ with Obama in any conceivable interpretation. Morelike it was a debate something akin to “Fantasy Football Leagues.”
There won’t be any substantive debates between Newt and Obama. The locations, audience makeup, media exposure, moderator selection ALL will be tightly controlled. And, true to form, if Newt were even the GOP candidate, he would be forced into accepting a hamstrung debate with Obama because of his ego and because the GOP elites would force him. I seriously doubt there will be any more GOP debates where he can shine - they just won’t allow him to excel as with South Carolina.
As much as I hate to say this, Newt is being systematically minimized by the media, and by the GOP elite establishment.
The media is egging on the Santorum rise and diminishing Newt’s hold. Santorum is being discussed everywhere - even here where his detractors are responding by logically cutting apart his platform and goals when we should be deriding him and collecting laughing at the thought of him as a conservative.
Newt needs MONEY, he needs support here in Georgia to win big, big, big - but I’ve said here before he’s not as likely to do that as many people think. He’ll win, but I suspect not by much - I hope I am wrong.
He should be here every day, every minute, everywhere in Georgia explaining that his policies will fix the gas problem that Obama turned the $1.85/gallon gas price on his Inauguration Day into $4 and $5/gallon today and the next 6 months. He needs credible analysts to backup the new-start housing declines, the jobs declines, the phony high market/low volume marker, translate the nation debt and deficits into milk, eggs, and butter...etc.
Bump!
“If only people would wake up.”
For some reason, almost fifty percent of the population loves Progressives. Maybe they confuse the term “progressive” with someone who wants progress. Maybe they think of themselves as supreme intellectuals, as superior individuals or maybe they’re just as much scu*bags as hardcore Progressives themselves.
Just as Progressives hate oil, so will those who love Progressives hate oil and fossil fuels. Any pro energy policy will be considered by them to be a scam by the evil oil companies and all those evil Conservatives.
IMHO
Watch later.
There really is only one smell test here. It is the fact that Newt and Santorum have been ineffective at attacking Romney.
Romney is a liar of the first order and talks all conservative but just talks that way to win the election. His record is not that of a conservative in any way.
Somehow the voters haven’t gotten that yet.
Nobody will drop out until after Super Tuesday. If Romney gathers the momentum and wins the majority of those states, it will probably be over for Newt and Santorum.
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.