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

Skip to comments.

Gingrich keeps campaigning - and keeps drawing an audience
CBS News ^ | April 7, 2012 | Lindsey Boerma

Posted on 04/07/2012 4:39:33 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-134 last
To: Cincinatus' Wife

I can’t imagine that you don’t see it as grossly inefficient to spend trillions of dollars on a moon colony because somewhere along the way, some useful spinoff technology might trickle down to the private sector. Why don’t we just spend whatever it takes to colonize mars, or the moons of Saturn because we might get the next “Tang” or “zero gravity toilet” out of it. I’m sure the left thinks that their subsidy of every “Green project” out there will produce useful innovations as well.

We developed Tang and those aluminum space blankets from the Apollo program, but if that were the only benefit was it really worth the billions that those programs cost? Wouldn’t it be more efficient to just spend the money directly on developing the technology that we need, rather than spend a huge amount of money on a program in the hope that something useful is developed by accident.

And just because, I am of the opinion that a government that borrows almost 1/2 of every dollar it presently spends, shouldn’t put future generations even deeper in debt, does not mean I approve of the Obama administration throwing the same amount of money at their pet projects using the same arguments.


101 posted on 04/08/2012 4:12:35 AM PDT by NavVet ("You Lie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
He would kick Obama’s butt - I am sorry he has not caught fire. I live in Oklahoma, a state that seemed to draw little campaigning firepower, so I do not know what message Romney used to win so many states. It was down to Gingrich and Santorum in our house - my wife and I split the difference. I suspect that happened in a lot of places.

PS - I am always amused to see that "Obama" is still not in the FreeRepubic spell check dictionary!

Happy Easter, all.

102 posted on 04/08/2012 4:16:26 AM PDT by Puddleglum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf

“LISTEN to Newt.”

The problem with Newt is you can’t believe him. He may or may not believe what he says, and he may or may not do what he says. He also may “reach across the aisle” or sit on the couch with the latest lie.

With Newt, it matters not what he says, only what he does.

We’ll never know whether THIS time he’s good for his word - because he’s going nowhere politically.


103 posted on 04/08/2012 4:31:55 AM PDT by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

“UNLIKE Rick and Mitt, Newt Gingrich didn’t rest on his laurels complaining about the liberal political landscape of his state. Newt CHANGED the political landscape in GA (as he did in Washington), brought Democrats into the party, rallied people to get involved in politics — all by pushing conservatism. “

Newt THEN embraced global warming, the republican establishment, a few women, Fannie/Freddie.

This for me is a primary that requires the selection of the least undesirable candidate. Newt’s right down there at the bottom with Mitt - because like Mitt, he’s less honest than even one can accept from politicians.

I believe at this point, Newt’s sole focus is to get enough delegates pretending to be a conservative so he can leverage his delegates push Romney over the top for the promise of a plum job in a Romney administration. He’ll say it’s for the good of the country - but Newt’s about Newt, not about anything else.


104 posted on 04/08/2012 4:40:07 AM PDT by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer
"With Newt, Santorum, Romney, Paul, Perry etc., it matters not what he says, only what he does."

It fits any man ... every man.

No one can face ozero and stare down the mulatto bastard better than Newt .. and not only you, but the whole political world knows it.

Would you like to respond to that, Mr. Gingrich?

No ... but I will ...


and every viewer and listener not only sat up, but felt more than a spark of Reagan-like hope that we had found our Champion and we had already won.

105 posted on 04/08/2012 5:55:49 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: knarf

“It fits any man ... every man.”

You can take some men at their word. You can’t take Newt at his word - and you know it.


106 posted on 04/08/2012 6:06:49 AM PDT by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer
I want ozero not only beaten, but humiliated, put on guard and brought to trial.

Neither Romney nor Santorum can do that.

Newt can, with just the words he uses as he debates ozero.

On a national stage, unlike any ever before, Gingrich can embarass, humiliate and call for justice, by citing fact and data, against the usurper and evil trojan horse of the obama administration.

Newt has the balls and the ability to effectively deliver

107 posted on 04/08/2012 6:23:33 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: knarf

Good lord, he’s just a politician.

If Newt wanted to help the country, he’d bow out now, and help who ever the nominee is defeat obama.

You are over-the-top with your Newt sycophancy. You should be embarrassed.

Newt just wants to be politically relevant. He doesn’t care about anything else.


108 posted on 04/08/2012 6:42:24 AM PDT by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer
Sycophancy?

Good word.

Do you REALLY think Romney can out debate ozero?

Honestly, do you think Romney can deliver and counter the punches thrown at him (your health care is MY healthcare ,.,.) so effectively that any undecideds or teeterers will think, Yeah, that's MY guy !

Or Can Rick do that?

For the record, I think Santorum can out perform Romney against ozero.


I DO know Gingrich can .... and so do you.

109 posted on 04/08/2012 11:52:36 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: knarf

“I DO know Gingrich can .... and so do you. “

While this is likely to be true, certain press biases notwithstanding, the problem is that neither you, nor me, nor Gingrich has a prayer of winning the GOP nomination.


110 posted on 04/08/2012 1:02:54 PM PDT by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: NavVet
Since science is ever evolving...things that don't seem necessary or relevant today could very well be in the future. If you look back thru the years, there were inventions that seemed totally useless at the time that have become part of our every day lives.

There is private enterprise today that promotes “space travel” for those rich enough to afford it. There is a group of ex-Nasa scientists that are working on the possible construction of a moon colony..at their own expense. Private enterprise could absolutely play a part in future exploration. I believe that was Newt's point.

Just on a lark, I looked up inventions that resulted from the space program. You might want to take a look. The list was impressive and far too long to post here. BTW,Tang wasn't part of any NASA program. It was invented in the 1950’s by General Foods. (I thought I remembered Tang from my childhood, lol.)

I guess we should have stayed safely on the east coast and had no exploration west of the Mississippi. After all...what was there to be gained? :)

111 posted on 04/08/2012 1:31:11 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: NavVet
Actually, I don't wear “Newt blinders” at all.

I see his flaws as well as his strengths. I wonder if you do.

I do admire his intelligence and futuristic thinking. Does he have proven creds that prove his ability to get things done? Yes, he does. Could he out-debate The Won and make him look like the fool he is? Yes, he could. Could he be once again successful in turning things around. I think he has a good, or better, chance than most. But, I don't think he'll have the chance. Listening to him this morning, I'll be interested to see how much longer he stays in.

Given your run down of the current slate of candidates, you don't seem to happy with anyone. I can respect that.

But given the fact that we will more than likely have another Dole/McCain anvil hung around our necks in the person of Romney...why have do you care that some want better and aren't willing to throw in the towel yet? (If you give me that “He's splitting the vote and hurting Santorum jazz” my head will explode.)

Why not spend time on Myth...or better yet Obama?

112 posted on 04/08/2012 1:57:31 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: berdie

why have do= why do.


113 posted on 04/08/2012 2:03:42 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: NavVet
Newt has a Plan to return us to Solvency. It's there for all to see. Why don't you take a break from bashing the Newt supporters here and take the time to educate yourself.

www.Newt.org

114 posted on 04/08/2012 2:39:00 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (A day without Obama is like a day without a Tsunami.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: berdie

If Newt had gotten out before Michigan or Ohio, it might have made a difference in keeping the biggest RINO in GOP history off of the ticket. Now it hardly matters.


115 posted on 04/08/2012 7:55:34 PM PDT by NavVet ("You Lie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Kickass Conservative

I’m sure he does, but so did Obama. Both think they can increase spending by trillions on new government programs and still balance the budget and pay off the debt. (One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results.)


116 posted on 04/08/2012 7:57:15 PM PDT by NavVet ("You Lie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: berdie

1. Demonstrate that all those inventions wouldn’t have occurred anyway at much less cost without the space program.

2. Nobody needs Newt to make a private space company undertake a profit making venture. But no private company is going to build a colony on the moon, or ring the earth with space mirrors. That would be massive government funding plain and simple.

3. Lewis and Clark weren’t spending the government money that their expedition cost, in the hope that they would invent something useful. Likewise, we weren’t going to the moon for the purpose of producing spin off technology. Don’t get me wrong, spin off tech, when it happens is an added bonus. But only a fool, would build a space program for the express purpose of inspiring or producing some technology that might or might not have a civilian application. For example, one NASA spinn off is a fire hose nosel based on the design of a rocket exhaust nosel. However, it would have made NO sense to fund a rocket program for the purpose of producing a better water hose. You could have simply funded a couple of engineers at 1 trillionth of the cost to design a better waterhose in the first place. Also, look at spin off technology created in the private sector compaired to those created in government labs. Of the number of patents filed each year, the overwhelming majority are for creations that were not government funded. Who knows what great inventions we have missed out on, because the money diverted from the private sector wasn’t available to fund the R&D!


117 posted on 04/08/2012 9:15:04 PM PDT by NavVet ("You Lie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: NavVet
I asked you to please not make my head explode with that logic..or illogic, lol.

It didn't matter then and it doesn't matter now. Newt didn't hurt Rick. Romney did.If I add up the delegates that Santorum has (281), Gingrich has (135) and Paul has (51) it still doesn't equal Romney's total. Assuming that Gingrich votes would go to Santorum is just that..an assumption. And even if they had it wouldn't have helped if you add up the delegate count.

The only state that Rick might have won the delegate count in if Gingrich had not been involved in is Alaska. Look it up. Rick forfeited 9 delegates in Ohio by not qualifying in 3 districts. It had nothing to do with Gingrich. And Newt didn't campaign in Michigan. It was Rick's to win..or lose.

Yeah, Newt could have gotten out..but Rick could have gotten out as well after Florida. I personally want them both to stay in as long as possible to try and thwart Mitt.

Mitt being in front has to do with money and the backing of the GOP. Place your anger where it belongs.

118 posted on 04/08/2012 9:40:56 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Kickass Conservative; NavVet

I am so glad that you took some time to read Newt’s plan.

You did, didn’t you?

Comparing him to Obama is a bit of a stretch.


119 posted on 04/08/2012 9:55:15 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: berdie

Not true. Newt siphoned off enough votes in Michigan that could have given the state to Santorum. If Santorum had won Romney’s home state and a Northern Blue state at that, it would have caused a dramtic momentum shift.

Afterall, SC, Iowa and even Florida aren’t so important just because of the number of delegates at stake, they are important because wins there can create a snowball effect producing a feeling of inevitability that supresses the vote for the losers and energizes supporters of the winner.

Had Santorum pulled out Wins in Michigan or Ohio, which he may have done without Newt, it would have changed the dynamic completely.


120 posted on 04/08/2012 10:17:59 PM PDT by NavVet ("You Lie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: NavVet

1. You are evidently anti space program. I’m good with that..just say so. So I guess we should have never entered into the space program at all.

2. I don’t know, nor do you, what a group with mega bucks might be willing to do..just because they can. Why do you pick on one small portion of Newt’s ideas?

3. You picked one biproduct of the space program. Not the multitudes of useful products. Lewis and Clark had government funding for exploration...noone is asking for funding for further space exploration and this is a useless argument.

4. I have to work tomorrow. Good evening.


121 posted on 04/08/2012 10:20:17 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: NavVet

Dude/dudette...you need to look at the actual numbers and the facts. Add up the delegate count. Read it and weep. I do.

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts...we’d all have a Merry Christmas. (Dandy Don)

Good evening.


122 posted on 04/08/2012 10:27:08 PM PDT by berdie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: berdie

Actually, I have looked at Newt’s “Plan” mostly they are bumper sticker type statements, with a few specifics thrown in.

However, Newt’s website has so much “Spin” when trying to explain away his Nancy Pelosi commercial, NY-23, Newt’s past support for Amnesty etc. that it is hard to take him at his word. Likewise, Newt has a section of this plan that says he will undertake entitlement reform, but this is the same Newt that blasted Paul Ryan’s common sense medicade reform as right-wing social engineering.

They all sound conservative on their campaign websites, better to judge them on things they have said and done before they were running for President. Newt would be a far far better choice than Romney, but I find it hard to accept that we can’t do better than a serial adulterer who made millions giving “history lessons” to Freddie Mac, who has favored amnesty, supported amnesty and has a penchant for grand government solutions, instead of just shrinking government and getting it out of the way of the provate sector.


123 posted on 04/08/2012 10:31:57 PM PDT by NavVet ("You Lie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: berdie

Dude / Dudette,

You can’t seem to grasp that there is more to the process than the delegate count. How many delegates has Santorum lost because the media initially gave Iowa to Romney. How much momentum would Santorum have had if he had been reported as the winner that night instead of weeks later. Why do you think states fight over moving their primary dates. If the only thing that mattered was the number of delegates, then Iowa and New Hampshire wouldn’t be fighting like mad hornets to keep Florida and other states from moving up their dates and depriving them of their positon which allows them to shape the contest. Newt blocking Santorum in Michigan and Ohio could have a huge difference in Wisconsin for example.

Using your logic the Iowa contest is no more important than the last primary. Surely this level of ignorance can’t be unintentional.


124 posted on 04/08/2012 10:40:43 PM PDT by NavVet ("You Lie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: berdie

It’s morning where I am, so I will reply.

I am not “anti-space program” Thomas Sowell once said in response to a similar argument in favor of some liberal entitlement program that when he was a young man with a family, he did not purchase an expensive set of encyclopedias, even though it was a good and desirable thing, because when he only had finite resources to support his family, he had to make choices.

So the opposition to something like a permanant moon base at the moment, doesn’t mean I don’t think it is a good idea in the abstract, or that I wouldn’t like future generations to pursue it, but right now we need to get out of the fiscal hole the stateists have put us in, and we have to pass on the encyclopedias right now and revisit the issue when 1/2 of the money we are spending each month isn’t boworrowed money.

I know there are other useful spinn off’s from the space program, I picked one to illustrate the point. You don’t pay engineers to design a moon base and spend the money to build it with the goal that the trillion dollars of R&D may produce a better mouse trap. It would be more efficient to spend far less money and just focus on the mouse trap if you really need a better one. Spin off technology is a fringe benefit from the space program, but nobody, with the possible exception of you, is advocating that we should fund the space program with billions if not trillions of dollars in the hope that someone will develop turkey pot pie in a tube, or a hear resistant tile. That is a grossly inefficient way to develop these products. We only tout them because we would have spent the money anyway. Can you imagine the outrage, if someone introduced a bill containing the equivilent of the NASA budget for the purpose of developing these spin off technologies. I don’t know which is more absurd, the notion that our space program can be justified on the basis of spin off tech, or that anyond really believes Moon base Newt can be built with private funds.


125 posted on 04/08/2012 10:53:30 PM PDT by NavVet ("You Lie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: NavVet; berdie; knarf
...It would be more efficient to spend far less money and just focus on the mouse trap if you really need a better one.....

This is where that way of thinking loses the argument every time it's tried (and it's tried all the time).

Humans are not smart enough to know what we will discover or what is out there to discover -- but WE DO KNOW that by pushing the limits of our technology and science boundaries we DISCOVER new and useful things (we know from history), which entrepreneurs then embrace and develop and our lives become easier, richer and safer.

Entrepreneurs do not have the ability to finance large, unproven projects -- vibrant countries with educated workforces do. One half of one percent of the U.S. budget for something that produces positive returns and improves the human condition is a sad bit of coin to fixate on and bash.

126 posted on 04/09/2012 3:22:43 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Spot on.

Exploration and experimentation, and the invention/use of new technologies in that effort, is what opens the doors to entrepreneurs.

Government, in cooperation with private contractors such as we had in the space program, is the logical vehicle for that effort.

The discoveries thus made are adapted and used by exceptional America to benefit ALL.

They help drive the American...and the
world...economy.

The other area that does so is ENERGY.


127 posted on 04/09/2012 6:20:55 AM PDT by txrangerette ("HOLD TO THE TRUTH...SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR" - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: ltbigv
How you folks that practically worship Newt ever got the idea that the dumbed down general electorate would vote for such a man

Fret not noobie. We Newt suppporters are well aware that the dumbed down general electorate will not support Newt. You have made that abundantly clear...

128 posted on 04/09/2012 8:42:56 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ltbigv
How you folks that practically worship Newt ever got the idea that the dumbed down general electorate would vote for such a man

Fret not noobie. We Newt supporters are well aware that the dumbed down general electorate will not support Newt. You have made that abundantly clear...

129 posted on 04/09/2012 8:43:33 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Hotlanta Mike
If he intends to run again in 4 or 8 years for POTUS...

he better run for something else in between. His career is essentially over right now, unless he takes a statewide office in the next cycle. Otherwise, he will become no more than the next Harold Stassen.

130 posted on 04/09/2012 8:50:58 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette
....The discoveries thus made are adapted and used by exceptional America to benefit ALL.....

Unfortunately, we have a president, who along with his science adviser John P. Holdren, does not want America to advance or remain strong and free.

131 posted on 04/10/2012 12:25:37 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

They not only don’t believe in American Exceptionalism, they despise it (He he...means they know it’s REAL).


132 posted on 04/10/2012 5:34:49 AM PDT by txrangerette ("HOLD TO THE TRUTH...SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR" - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

So acknowledging your guy has zero chance, because he is just to big of a jerk, while still claiming the other guy’s chances are worse, is a sign of superior intelligence? And someone that notices the problem with that logic is dumbed down?


133 posted on 04/10/2012 8:09:02 AM PDT by ltbigv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette
They not only don’t believe in American Exceptionalism, they despise it (He he...means they know it’s REAL).

I like how you zero in on the bottom line txrangerette!

134 posted on 04/10/2012 11:05:39 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-134 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