Newt Gingrich Speech and Q&A at Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition

Tonight Newt Gingrich spoke at the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition and then answered a few questions from a panel. I’ve split the Speech from the Q&A and both are below.



Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

196 thoughts on “Newt Gingrich Speech and Q&A at Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition

  1. If he makes it to the NC primary, he has my vote.
    I wanted him to run last election, but his work with the American Solutions group was not complete. It’s efforts form the basis of his new Contract with America.
    His success hinges on his ability to deflect the personal attacks he will undoubtfully encounter…He has made personal mistakes like most of us have. Polictically, he will get things done.

  2. I feel the same way as others on here. Newt was last on my list mainly because I stereotyped him. Well for the past couple of months my opinion has become absolutely positive. He has great ideas. Presidential ideas. I haven’t seen him back down except on rare occasions. Since Cains fumbling of late and his incostistency I have put my hat in with Newt. I hope he catches on. Spread the word.

  3. Three months ago I wondered why Newt was even in the race. He was my sixth choice. But after watching the debates, even though I wasn’t for him, everytime I heard him speak I found myself saying “This guy should be President”. He compliments his opponents. He keeps the focus on defeating Obama. He has the best ideas and the experience to implement them. He is by far the best debater. I’d love to see him debate Obama. I can’t believe I’m saying this – I’m for Newt.

    1. I have been impressed with him since he was speaker of the house. I took note of what he had to say and his personal respect for President Reagan. Although, he doesn’t have that “Presidential” appearance, Newt’s frankness is refreshing and his intelligence is obvious. I think that Newt should just be himself and knock off the smile at the camera (which appears to be insincere and forced, which indicates disception) because it makes him look like the Pillsbury Dough Boy (Greta Interview)and have his teeth bonded and whitened for debating President Obama. I softened when Newt said something funny (frank) and I bristled with any adjectives (website)which are by nature “embellishments” and are unnecessary when speaking truthfully. Speaking for the Americans of the nation who have lost thier jobs, Collectively, we are looking for an experienced, intelligent proven leader and not a “pig in the poke”. This country can’t afford another “New Kid In Town”. I think that Newt will at some point modify his compliments of the other debaters, in effort not to appear soft or deceitful. One last suggestion, Will you guys please stop talking this nostalgia crap in your speeches. We all love America and are scared to death over it’s condition, however,we also realize that those days are at least a decade away at best. I challenge all citizens, and especially the ones who are not working to get involved in campaigning for not just a canidate but for ourselves.I truly hope he wins

  4. I like Gingrich. However not a fan of his stance on ethanol or global warming. Why don’t we let the free market decide if it wants ethanol?? Ethanol has been around since the beginning (the Model-T could run on ethanol) but its less efficient and currently more expensive. So as with green energy ideas let the market develop them more first to make the more efficient and then introduce them into the market. If they are just as good or better and cheaper than current methods then they will take off. If they aren’t well then the R&D sectors in those fields have some more work to do. However gov’t doesn’t need to be funding them.

    I like his ideas on the Supreme Court too. The federal courts have gotten too much power and believe they are the end all be all. They are supposed to abide by the Constitution as well. And there is no “interpretive” clause in the Constitution. It was written so all people could understand it, not just lawyers and professors (although most politicians don’t). So what it says is what it means. End of question. Its a shame that constitutional law isn’t taught by the Constitution and just other cases. I don’t know how that works exactly.

    I like Gingrich but Cain is still leading for me. I think Gingrich would destroy Obama or Biden in a debate which would be awesome to see.

  5. I can’t wait for Obama to respond about the debates. I’d like to see Newt treat the next Obama speech as if it were the tyrant’s opening statement in an un-moderated debate. Using a split screen, Newt would answer each point Obama makes and post the video. If obama can respond then let him.

    Newt should debate the tyrant every time the tyrant opens his mouth.

  6. “Dealing with dictators oversees without fearing reprisal.”

    None of the other candidates have spoken with this kind of conviction or without having to clarify it 24 hours later.

  7. I am with you, granny, 100 percent.

    While Herman Cain has charm and seems really interested in America’s problems, he hasn’t a clue what he’ll be up against as a world leader. This speech, by Cain was the last straw for me. After all the mis-spokes and the “this is what I meant’s…” that we’ve had to stomach while clenching our teeth, now he starts his speech with a Ronald Reagan quote that has been in an ad for the last week. The guy simply does not know what to do next.

    Am I the only one who sees this?

    This is a very healthy debate we are having here and Right Scoop is to be congratulated.

  8. Out of all of the candidates, SO FAR, my first choice is Cain, (for his honesty, integrity and life accomplishments) but I also think he is so inexperienced when it comes to the political machine, I think he’s going to need some significant help. Newt is the smartest, and experienced on the stage politically, but I don’t agree with his history on global warming, ethanol, etc. I don’t know if I’ll ever be able to forget him sitting on the loveseat with Pelosi in front of the WH when they were pushing the GW initiatives – ARGH.

    I’m frankly getting tired of having to “hold my nose” as I vote in every general election.

    OFF topic: I have a question for those that post here: Awhile back I saw a post on Breitbart from a rancher or a farmer that indicated that Monsanto controls to corn seeds, and it comes with a lot of restrictions. I guess somehow those that plant corn for food are restricted, and have to return any unused seed to the company, they can’t keep it or give it away. It’s a horrific contract they have to sign from what I understand. Do any of you have info on that? Is Monsanto controlling the seed in favor of the ethanol push rather than food? Just asking……

    1. I agree with you about Cain, and like you I think his inexperience hurts big time. I’m not sure about 9-9-9, but I think its irrelevant, because I dont think it will ever pass. Then what? Like you, I was disappointed with some events Newt attended in the past. However, over the past year Newt has testified in front of Congress challenging the Global Warming hoax. He now realizes the facts were doctored, and he’s never waivered from “drill, drill, drill”. He’s still conservative as ever. He’s not being divisive. He’s the only candidate who compliments his opponents and keeps the focus on defeating Obama. He is the most knowlegable and experienced at getting things done on a national level. Also, and very importantly, he is by far the best debater. This will be crucial in order to beat Obama. I love the fact he’s challenged Obama to 7 three hour debates.

  9. ESPECIALLY like his position on abolishing marxist courts. He’s got my vote on that alone – aren’t the rest of you sick of radical judges overturning the will of the People?

  10. Newt, I am waiting for the President Lincoln style debate, 7 of them over 3 hours long to take place..I want to see Obama crumble by your words!!!

  11. Experience? Yes. Ideas? Yes. Proven Record? Yes. Encompassing? Yes. Intelligent? Yes. Dedicated? Yes. Prepared? Yes. We need to not just say we support him, but tell others why. As a Christian Evangelical Conservative, I cannot find anything I disagree with. As a retired military CPO, I cannot but support him. It is time to share his views with as many as possible in order to get the national news(sic) to give him the coverage he needs to make the left cry big crocadile tears.

  12. This is one of the reason’s I love Right Scoop. Always up to date with the best info and videos. I never miss a day coming here.

  13. Your exactly right. It looks like our side thinks that a good talker with an appealing personality is all that’s need to lead the U.S. We need someone who will stand up for the U.S. in the world. Like Newt said fixing the economy is a no brainer repeal the crap holding everyone back and then get out of the way.
    Our bigger problem is how do we protect ourselves from the demonic Islamist threat and nuclear devastation. I’m sorry but I don’t feel Cain is up to that job.

  14. How in the WORLD could you see Herman Cain as a novice, “total” or otherwise?

    Obama is still a novice, after three years at the job.

    Every single candidate we have is qualified to be President. Every single one, and that includes Ron Paul. They all would be orders of magnitude better than Obama.

    If you are boiling Cain’s career down to “fast food,” you are very thin on substance.

  15. Newt is for an individual health mandate and got in bed with the global warming (human based) crowd.

    He can speak like a professor, however, he can’t be trusted to uphold Conservative ideals.

    1. So he’s not perfect. He’s definitely the smartest guy in the room, and I believe he has had his own ‘come to Jesus’ moment with the conservative base. Who else is his equal? Who else is pushing a return to Constitutional government?

      1. Not a Paulnut here but do you really want someone to answer that?? Paul is the biggest pusher for a return to a Constitutional Government. Not a complete fan of pauls foreign policy but I do like a lot of his domestic stances.

  16. Newt proves to be the first candidate to openly and strongly declare that government IS the problem. He is then the first to tie the solutions back to a basic interpretation of Constitutional intent.

    He may have some baggage, but this is progress. If Palin is part of this, it may actually be encouraging.

    1. You nailed it!

      If one can get me a bit of these: the Passion of Herman Cain, the Flat Tax of Rick Perry, the Family Values of Rick Santorum, the “Cut Down Government Size” of Ron Paul, the Plastic of Mitt Romney, the “I’m a Fighter-attitude” of Michele Bachmann, the “Good Physique” of Gary Johnson and lastly the “Substance-Related Issues” of Newt Gingrich – If I could get all this packaged in one person, that person would be Sarah Palin!!!! Plus the bonus that’s she is principled, deeply conservative, country loving, God-loving person with a servant heart! All the candidates have beautiful qualities but none come as stronger as Sarah Barracuda! Please reconsider, Sarah!!

      Sarah Palin – The Reluctant Candidate

      1. I have no dislike of Sarah Palin, but I find her incessant, disjointed, extemporaneous answers to questions of any nature difficult to pay attention to…she reminds me of a Chatty Cathy doll with the string pulled all the way out.

  17. That was an excellent speach. Not watched the two Ricks yet, but as it stands Newt wins it for me (though I still like Herman Cain).

  18. Would love to see those Lincoln/Douglas style debates between Newt and Obama. Even with one of his golden teleprompters, Obama wouldn’t get it done.

  19. Gingrich is by far the most intelligent person running.

    He would leave all the rest in the dust (which would no longer be regulated 🙂

    1. Newt ARTICULATES well. I’m not thinking we know who is the most intelligent person running. Cain’s math degrees have me impressed, but I’m sick of hearing how SMART anyone is. Heard too much of that talk about our oh so smart president.

  20. I very much like Newt’s solid plans for the changes we need right now. I like his all inclusive energy plan. Yes, even the ‘green’ parts because we need to be looking at that along with using what is available to us right now. “Drill, Baby, Drill” isnt just a slogan. It would create millions of jobs from day 1 and bring about much needed energy and economic security for all Americans.
    Doing away with the EPA, other depts in govt, and regulations that have been crippling American businesses and workers would be a good start to bringing and keeping jobs here.

    Newt has the knowledge and intellect that he can use from day 1 of his presidency to reverse what the present occupant of the WH has done without having to do much studying on where to start and what to do. Something that the other candidates don’t really have.

    Newt has not gotten involved in the squabbles that the others have because he knows that sticking to the issues with a real plan is what is important to us. He is smart enough to know that we need a solid adult leader who is well informed and well educated enough to make the sudden and relentless reforms in govt to turn back the Socialist/Marxist agenda that zerO has implemented that is taking this country down.

    Newt would squash zerO in any debates right from the very start. Something that any of the other candidates would have to work very hard at doing because of their lack of knowledge and because they just couldn’t pin zerO’s ears to the wall as effectively as Newt could.
    I think before the primaries start, we will see Newt rise to the top of the pack.
    These kinds of forums only help us see more clearly who the strongest candidate is. I would like to see more of this kind of format to have each candidate be able to present themselves and their ideas at.
    Thus far, it has been the Liberals who have been winning the GOP debates.

    1. Newt doesn’t have to flog the Declaration again to try to get new energy out of it. He doesn’t have to plagiarize that latest ad with a Ronald Reagan quote.He understands the Declaration and the Constitution.

      The founding documents are part of Newt in everything he says and thinks and feels. He has nothing on his mind other than the greatness of this nation. I believe that this man has more raw courage and character than the rest of the pack combined.

      He must back this man, but we must be patient and positive with the new conservatives we are meeting on RS who are just realizing what it is we are about to lose.

      Thank you, Right Scoop.

  21. I’d love to watch those seven 3-hour debates Newt spoke of. He’d wipe the floor with the current incumbant.

  22. Two thirds of the Federal labyrinth could be dismantled within 3 years by a President like Cain. That may not be sophisticated but it would be effective.

    Then he would not need a sales tax, 99 would be enough.

    CEOs do that stuff all the time.

  23. Newt: Get out here and see the people. Shake hands, work the rope line, do pancake breakfasts, meet and greet. Your speeches are teh awesome, but not enough people are exposed to them.
    Come to the town squares and tell people face to face why you should be the next President.

    1. He has been doing that, but the LSM and political pundits would rather have us be looking at Romney and, or the squabbles within the GOP and between the GOP candidates.
      It’s the Liberals/Socialists/Marxists/Progressives that are winning the GOP debates. The candidates need to figure out that they are being used and start sticking to the issues. They need to point their remarks at zerO, not at each other.
      Newt is doing a great job at pointing his remarks right at zerO and sticking to solutions to get our country back to being prosperous.

      You are right about the ‘retail politics’ part of Newt’s campaign. We need to see more of him out and about shaking hands and talking with people. I’m certain that he will be more visable as more money flows into his campaign for him to get out there. He has to fight the big money machine of “Crony Capitalism” as well as the LSM.
      It is great that we have alternative media sources, like “The Right Scoop” to get the Conservative point of view out to the public. This will make all the difference in the 2012 elections, as we didn’t have this to combat the LSM in the 2008 election and look at what we ended up with.

  24. Love Newt but just cant trust him with him droping out for know reason in 1999. And he can possibly just drop out when President

  25. Newt said 20% of our energy comes from “wind” !! That is B.S. I think he has spent too much time hanging out with Pelosi sitting on a bench if he believes

        1. Indeed. Iowa is in relatively good shape compared to California where their renewable energy mandates have driven the cost of electricity 50% higher than non – mandate states.

          We are forced to subsidize “green” energy projects with our taxes and then we are forced to pay for their operating losses with higher electricity rates.

          This is a great resource that shows for each state, just how high electricity rates have gone were renewable mandates have been passed, compared to states without mandates.

          This is a scam of historic proportions and is destroying our state economies and ability to compete globally.

      1. It could possibly make it up to near 20% on a perfect day, when every windmill is rotating, and not experiencing maintenance problems, and the grid is optimized to pull every ounce of power from the windmills.

        In practice, very, very doubtful.

        And the cost? Far more than it’s worth. It’s a scam.

    1. Your intuition is right.

      Measuring the contribution of wind power to the total this way is VERY DECEPTIVE. The explanation is a bit technical but what it boils down to is the fact that a 1000MW wind farm can only generate electicity about 20-30% of the time (this is called its capacity factor), where a coal, gas, or nuclear plant can generate electricity well over 60% of the time.

      So, say Iowa has generators capable of generating 5000MW at any given time and 1000MW were wind generators, 4000MW from conventional. Well the “green” energy pundits say that wind is 20% of Iowa’s total energy and 80% is conventional.

      But here are the real numbers. In any given day…

      The wind generators will produce 1000MW x 6hours = 6,000 MW.hrs of power.

      The conventional generators will produce 4000MW x 15 hours = 60,000 MW.hrs of power

      So, the wind generators that make up 20% of Iowa’s power capacity, generate less than 10% of its energy.

      What makes this all so bad is that the electricity from the wind generators, which are very expensive to build and maintain, costs up to 5 times more to produce, which is subsidized by the rate payers.

      So the Iowa ratepayers get a 10% increase in actual power capacity. If that 10% is added with coal or natural gas capacity, their rates do not go up. If that extra 10% is provided by wind, their rates go up 20% !!!


      1. Well done.

        I always tell folks that it costs more in 3-in-one oil to keep these things rotating, than they can ever pay back into the grid in electricity supply.

  26. I don’t know how to take this speech. Hated, hated, hated, his pandering to Iowa over the Ethanol subsidies. Hated his references to his terms as Speaker. That was a life time ago. I hate it when he mentions the present wife. I don’t even care that he’s had three wives but I hate the name Calista. Who names their kid Calista? All I see is Ally McBeal when he mentions Calista.

    I loved what he said about the courts but anyone who believes that’s possible is already salivating over Cain and his 999, er 909, plan. Maybe Cain and Newt can find their way to that parallel universe where the tax code gets thrown out and entire courts get eliminated. They can hire Ron Paul to do the paperwork.

  27. I’m pretty sure a ticket of Gingrich/Cain (in either order) is unconstitutional since they are both from the same state.

    I guess at one time that might have been a concern, but it’s an outdated rule now.

      1. Article IV if the Constitution, but I don’t recall which section. It speaks to how the electors of each state chose which candidate will be Pres and VP by the number of votes each got by the electors. This was back when the tally was then taken to Washington and read by the Senate. Seems at that time there wasn’t a ‘ticket, rather just candidates for Pres. The 2nd place candidate was chosen as VP, and this would make too much confusion if the electors had to choose from two candidates from their own state. Don’t quote this as a ‘source’, but it’s essentially close to accurate, I think.

        The XII Amendment addressed this topic but simplified the explanation for how it was done at the state level, far as I could see. Still made it not possible to have both candidates from the same state.

  28. Wow!! Can we elect Newt, president today please? I’m torn folks. Newt is more adept when it comes to actual substantive policy and debating. (He would tear Obama intellectually… well, any conservative on his/her game would tear Obama tbh lol) But Cain seems to have a charisma that resonates more and which covers for what he does not have in substance/political experience. And I think I prefer Gingrich’s radical amendment stance on abortion, and also the fact that he wants to use legislation rather than the courts to secure the rights of the unborn. Is it too late to make Gingrich the front-runner? How does Gingrich/Cain for 2012 sound guys?

    1. It sounds beautiful! I don’t like Cain for Pres. He has no experience and honestly, I’m already tired of listening to him. He never has anything new to say.

      I’m with Gingrich!

    1. Glad to see its not just me thinking like this. Real dilemma ain’t it? 999 or the Newt maestro? Darn it!

  29. i am torn between Cain and Newt but am leaning towards Newt i remember when the left destroyed him in the 90s it was the same thing they did to Sarah Palin the last 4 years…is he perfect??? No,but i terms of his plans and his knowledge on how to get it done i have to say i would vote for him in a new york minute….there is one differences between the 90s and now…and that is we know what the left is up to and their game plan and they no longer have a monopoly on the info we get…WE THE PEOPLE are awake and watching everything going on now and the lies and filth the left spews will not go unchallenged any longer and thanks to THE RIGHT SCOOP and other informative sites we will start to fight back and we will win….remember every journey has to start with that first step…and with out that your stuck were you are…..LETS GET-ER DONE….

  30. I could support newt if he did not have 20yrs of experience in helping to get democrat legislations pass.

    One thing I really like about Cain is the fact that when he was down in the polls he did not go negative and attack other candidates to get ahead. No, He did the opposite of what politians do. He came up with better positions, ideas that we can lach on to. Herman Cain I think is The Most Civil Presidentail Candidate We Ever Have!

  31. I could support newt if he did not have 20yrs of experience in helping to get democrat legislations pass.

    One thing I really like about Cain is the fact that when he was down in the polls he did not go negative and attack other candidates to get ahead. No, He did the opposite of what politians do. He came up with better positions, ideas that we can lach on to. Herman Cain I think is The Most Civil Presidentail Candidate We Ever Have!

    1. As Speaker, Newt realized that it is necessary to get SOMETHING passed before moving on to more controversial things. Get everyone used to the idea of passing legislation…together. Bipartisan cooperation is mandatory to moving the country ahead. If that means cooperating with Democrats on some things, so be it. That would seem to be better than getting nothing done?

  32. I find it interesting that some will accuse this man of cronyism and being the “establishment” simply because he has stayed involved and isn’t afraid to speak his mind. Newt has put up with a great deal of BS this Citizenry can and will dish when they learn someone is human, after all, and not above having missteps. With that said, Newt, better than ALL of them understands the history and pulls those painful lessons forward so as not to repeat them. He will have my vote for the Top Office in this land! Cain would serve well as the VP.

  33. It looks like Mr. Gingrich is becoming unleashed. He is starting to get his Irish UP.

    It is time we do the same.

    Even if someone is not “for” Mr. Gingrich, all true conservative would do well to go to and read the results of all of the research this American, his wife and others have done.


  34. This is what we have been waiting for….lay it out Newt. I made my decision last week to throw my vote and money at Gingrich. This only confirms that decision…and this was just a glimpse of the depth he offers. I can just picture a 3 hour debate with BO. But, BO will run…it is his nature, his character. He is not one I would want in my fox hole. Courage, integrity, dependability, accountability…these character traits are antithetical to Obama. When faced with hard decisions he waffles, I’ve lost count of the lies, his words never reflect his actions, and he is likely the most non-transparent, corrupt POTUS we have had. There may be one or two that could compare…history will tell.

    1. I have not seem them all. <= disclaimer.

      The speech and the Q & A with Newt that Right Scoop provided for us, is the most truly presidential event I have seen in a long, long time.


    1. Agreed. I’ve never heard dumb or gaff talk from Newt. He’s got my attention… and I’m not even American. Newt is the presidential sleeper cell… and he’s been put into action. Things are going to change and the Iowa speech is where it started.

      And a debate between Newt and Oshama… I can see it now… President Zero mounting the stage wiping his brow… only to run off the stage in tears like a little girl. Can’t wait!

      1. Yes. Newt would give One-bama a run for his money. I still can’t figure out how Romney holds on to so many votes. He still holds 25 to 30% in polls. The big question is:Who in the world wants to see Mitt Rino as POTUS??

        1. The Romney narrative holds simply because of spin in the MSM… even Canada’s SunMedia is pushing the Romney narrative… and it pi$$es me off no end… and Sun is totally awesome. They were finally forced to admit that Cain existed… now they will soon discover Newt as well.

          No… the establishment has always been about Romney… but the establishment is getting it’s ass kicked almost daily now… with the changes on the presidential debates podium.

          I’m gonna say it… but Newt’s speech hit it out of the ball park. Everything changes now.

        2. They love to point to that number as somehow being a leader, overall. Nobody is polling high enough to be a leader. That would take over 40% regularly. At this point, ALL of the candidates are rejected by a majority of those polled.

          1. True. Somebody made the point that Romeny is bumping up aginast the 30% ceiling just like he did in 2008. People don’t trust him. They don’t believe he’s a conservative and the brutal reality is that 20 to 30% of Evangelicals will not vote for a Mormon. But it’s not his religion that bothers me, it his progressivism.

            I still hold out hope for Perry because the weak spot in the One-bama monolith is JOBS and Perry can hit him hard on that.

            1. That’s why I don’t rely on the polls to reach a decision, considering that even the largest polling outfits, Gallup, Rasmussen, etc. only “poll” around 1000 people at most for their polls. Hardly an accurate measure of a nation of right about 308 million people.

            2. Same here. I don’t care if the front-runner is Bahá’í, as long as he or she puts the Constitution first.

              I’ll give Perry every chance to turn it around, but I’m tired of being disappointed by these folks.

  35. Mr. Cain has contributed to the presidential primary discourse in a very positive manner.

    A positive campaign run by a successful businessman showed the nation that it is possible for someone from outside the beltway and politics to run and win.

    The two positive campaigns run in this primary have been those of Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich. Of those two Newt is the most experienced.

    1. Dittos…

      After listening to both Cain and Gingrich, and especially after outlining above Newt’s talking points and transcribing only 6 minutes of the 15 minutes of Q&A, Gingrich has got my attention in a BIG way.

      As Cain said the other day, he wants to educate the American people about 9-9-9 so that we can understand it and support it. Many people have, except for the ankle biters, who definitely serve a useful purpose in the overall scheme of things political because they demand clarity.

      Well, Gingrich has been educating people for years about many things, and in a comprehensive sense, he is, as you wrote, the most experienced.

      So, let the educating continue.


  36. How in the WORLD can anyone want to have a total novice like Herman Cain in charge of our multi trillion dollar empire with thousands and thousands of moving parts, agencies, mandates, laws, and expect him to do anything significant without 900 briefing books and 2 years of training wheels , why do we want to replace incompetent with just as incompetent . You are wanting a foot DR to do open heart surgery . Running the US is not like selling fast foods . there is a world of difference .. the only two who have a clue, been there done that are Perry and Newt .. package them and save this nation . That is our only hope .. STOP the Insanity .. Ya have to have a “clue” about how gov’ment works . moving the chairs around on the sinking ship with clever jingles of 999 , no 999 and 333 and the no 999 and 909 and sweeteners . GOODNESS have we not been taught a cruel lesson . Experience matters in selecting the leader of the most powerful nation in the world and history . GOD SAVE the USA . with competence and a documented record of unmatched achievements . stop the petty silly childish gibberish and slogans . GOD save the USA because if we elect incompetent folks who have flashy jingles it is so over for us forever ..

  37. As great as Newt sounded, especially with all of his plans and list of EO’s, I never heard him say, in either video, that he was going to repeal Obamacare.

    His website includes a “Healthcare” plan that gets right into “Repeal and Replace,” which is better than nothing, I guess. But somehow Newt doesn’t seem to like telling us how awful it is having government involved in healthcare.

    I want repeal. Period. Besides the fact that there’s no place in the Constitution that empowers the Federal government to deal with healthcare, it’s just not the huge problem they keep telling us it is.

    People live longer and healthier now than ever before, including the poor. So just fix the economy, and then tackle healthcare-related problems–like an out-of-control FDA–as time allows. If we can get a swing back toward sanity in this country, the long list of agencies and bureaucracies that need to be eliminated or fixed can proceed apace.

    1. He will, he has a health plan already researched…a market based plan. I think Newt was very careful about what he chose to highlight in the EO’s he listed given where they were speaking. If you go to you can get an idea of what it is. As I’ve posted here before…Newt has been working on just such ideas since he created American Solutions in 07, I believe. He had to detach himself IOT run but still has the connections, teams, and research.

      1. Actually before that…. Newt had created the Center for Health Transformation at least a decade ago (I think)…. with the intent of lower cost, better care, more choices, etc..

      2. I pointed out that at his site, it’s all about “Repeal and Replace”. He’s getting way ahead of himself with the “Replace” BS.

        It is far too seductive to these beltway types to leave parts of existing law alone, and “tweak them”. That’s why I do not trust the “Replace” folks one bit.

        Obamacare has to be tossed out, with extreme determination that it never see the inside of a committee in any way, shape, or form.

        Once it’s safely gone, then we can start in on fixing smaller problems that put government in the way of good healthcare. Like getting rid of the FDA.

        1. What are you suggesting, if his site is all about ‘repeal and replace’? Are you satisfied with all the things he has said needed to be replaced? It is impossible to fully explain how something is to be accomplished in a sentence.
          I imagine he has a working plan for all his suggestions, but that most people would simply glaze over if he were to try and explain all the steps he envisions.
          I would suggest that you listen to more than one of his speeches to get a better idea of his thoughts, but I suspect you are not a big fan of his to begin with, for whatever your reasons.
          Newt has been working with the Cancer society and Alzheimer’s associations to better understand the needs of the next 20 years. From this sort of involvement that he has been doing since leaving Congress, he has formulated many of his ideas of what in needed now to better meet those future needs. Give him a chance to fill you in on his ideas before you write him off…in favor of someone better…like who? Your choice.

          1. Newt has been writing up plans for over 20 years. He has plans for plans that include coming up with plans. He’s all about plans. A lot of them sound damn fine.

            But he seems to be unable to stop himself from doing the John McCain act, cozying up to the left, in order to seem more “moderate.”

            I say he’s a brilliant policy guy, and is mostly conservative. But his record indicates he is not the kind of person we need at this critical time.

            He’ll cave when it will destroy us. He’s already shown that tendency. We can’t afford it now.

  38. I submitted my Day One Executive Order to Newt yesterday.

    Simply, “Repeal or Rescind Executive Order 10988”.

    This form letter was sent to me the same day in response to my suggestion:
    “Dear Citizen,

    Thank you for submitting your idea for an Executive Order to be signed on Day 1 of the Gingrich presidency.

    I have promised that my first action as president, immediately following the Inauguration, will be to sign an Executive Order to abolish all 39 of the White House Czars. The president does not have the constitutional authority to create bureaucrats that are not held accountable by Congress or the people.

    In the future, I will release a list of the Executive Orders I will sign on Day 1. Most of these orders will have come from citizens like you from across the country.

    I ask you to be “with” me, not just “for” me because it takes involved citizens to fundamentally change Washington, D.C. and I will need your help every step of the way for 8 years.

    If your idea is selected, we will contact you to be recognized for your idea on the final list when signed on Day 1.

    Thank you.

    Your friend,

    Newt Gingrich is the only candidate who has asked for our participation in the decision making process of a campaign.

    He clearly has the experience, knowledge and a workable plan for the foreign and domestic issues which confront us today.

    October has been an interesting and clarifying month for the presidential candidates who have offered their services to our country. I thank each and every one of them.

    If Newt becomes the recruit put forth by his party, I will cast my vote for his hire.

    1. Excellent…

      Although the response doesn’t reference Pres. Kennedy’s Executive Order 10988, hopefully Gingrich will talk about it soon.

      As far as votes go, he wouldn’t lose any votes from the federal employee union “dependents” anyway, since they would not vote for him as a block even if he said he would not repeal it.

      The federal employee union leadership is against him, and although some independents would vote for Gingrich, there would not be enough to make a difference.

      So, Newt SHOULD repeal EO #10988.


      1. Art, have you done any looking into Obama’s EO 13575 “White House Rural Council ”
        which sets up the organization by which UN Agenda 21 will be implemented in the Midwest…. the breadbasket of the world. If that is ‘interesting’, look into ICLEI (International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives), and how many cities and counties in Iowa have committed to implementing the principles (as ‘presented’, not as to final outcome which is not fully presented) Google either of these and you will be knee deep in articles.

        1. What’s goin’ on…

          When George Soros’ attorney a few months ago said to Glenn Beck’s attorney regarding Beck “exposing” Soros and his organizations and their behind the scenes activity “that ship has sailed,” I think he was talking about “many” ships sailing.

          Soros is definitely behind the global “Occupy” idiocy, supporting it with money and moral support.

          I think one of the ships is the UN Agenda 21 and Iowa’s “bread basket of the world” relevance.

          Food is money.

          Thanks for the reminder to stay focused and follow the money, uh, I mean, follow the food.

          That is where George Soros is lurking.


    2. I wrote to the Cain campaign three weeks ago asking for clarification on his 9-9-9 Plan and have not received a reply of any kind…not even a simple auto reply. Auto replies are very simple to setup so its omission is puzzling to me.

      Auto replies are just good basic business communications in the 21st century. No idea why a successful businessman overlooked this.

      1. Unfortunately Cain as well as some of the other candidates don’t pay attention to the internet or conservative web blogs and they get blind sided by the media. Newt doesn’t let them get ahead of him and he doesn’t go along with gotcha questions (usually based on lies). He also knows how to communicate with people on the web and has been using this valuable resource for many years. To many of candidates just don’t get it when it comes to communicating on the Web and think that just going out and giving speeches is all that’s required.

  39. 6 more minutes of Newt Gingrich in the 15 minute Q&A…

    At 5min. 20sec. to 11min. 40sec.

    Q –

    What would you specifically do to prevent abortion on demand and defend traditional marriage?

    A –

    I just released a fairly lengthy paper which you can find at which takes up item 9 in the proposed 21st Century Contract, and it outlines the framework for bringing balance back to the judiciary.

    Most of our major crises in our culture are driven by radical judges who violate the American constitution, violate American history, and are doing things that are fundamentally destructive, and for forty years Conservatives have said, “well, I will appoint better judges.”

    After the 2002 Ninth Circuit Court decision that one nation under God and the Pledge of Allegiance was unconstitutional, I got really intrigued.

    I wrote a book called “Rediscovering God In America,” Calista and I made a movie about it. We then wrote a series of other books, everyone of which has chapters on the judiciary. I taught a short course at the University of Georgia Law School. And the paper we just released represents nine years of thinking about this.

    The courts are third.

    Read the Constitution.

    First comes the legislative branch, which is supposed to be closest to the people.

    Second comes the executive branch, to execute the law passed by the legislative branch.

    Third, and least important of the three, is the judiciary.

    The Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton says the judiciary will never pick a fight with the two elected branches because it would inevitably lose it.

    The Warren Court in 1958 asserts outrageously that the Supreme Court is supreme over the other two branches.

    Now, it’s always been a Supreme Court within the judicial branch, but we were told that Montisques theory of balance meant each of the three branches balance the other two.

    Jefferson, when asked about judical supremacy said “That is an absurdity. It would be an oligarcy.” (applause)

    Lincold in his first inaugural says of the Dred Scott decision by the Supreme Court, and you could argue the Supreme Court’s bad decision led directly to the Civil War, and slavery was everywhere in the country and you couldn’t do anything about it.

    And Lincold says in his first inaugural, to believe that nine people could dictate to the entire nation the meaning of the constitution would be the end of our liberties. (applause)

    Now, there are four practical consequences of this.

    Consequece number one is presidents on occasion ignore the court.

    Jackson thought the United States Bank was unconstitutional. He was told the Supreme Court that it was constitutional, he said that’s fine. In the judicial branch they can believe that. In the executive branch I believe this. We both swear to uphold the Constitution. We’re co-equals in interpreting it. And he promptly ignored them.

    And that’s doable.

    Franklin Delano Roosevelt, upon capturing fourteen German saboteurs, explained they would be tried and they would be executed. And he would not accept a writ of habeas corpus from the Supreme Court, and he sent his Attorney General over to say, don’t issue it. I’m the Commander In Chier, we’re in the middle of a war.

    And they didn’t.

    As President, I would instruct the National Security apparatus to ignore the three most recent Supreme Court decisions on terrorism and I would say, those are null and void and have no binding effect on the United States, and as Commander In Chief I will not tolerate a Federal judge risking the safety of the United States with some misguided interpretation. (applause)

    The second thing you can do is, the Congress can clearly use its power to define rights of appeal.

    The Congress could have said, for example, and if we’d been clever, we probably would have written into the Defense of Marriage Act that it was not appealable. This has been done before. It was done by Jefferson in the Judical Reform Act of 1802.

    The third option that you have, and one which Robbie George of Princton has been studying and which I’m intrigued with, is to take the 14th Amendment, which says that Congress shall define personhood, and pass a law that says, personhood in the United States is defined as beginning at conception (applause) and go straight at the Court.

    The last thing you can do is a bit stronger.

    In 1802 Jefferson, and I remind folks, Jefferson’s Secretary of State was James Madison, so you have to assume Jefferson and Madison had some knowledge of the Constitution. (laughter)

    In 1802 they passed the Judicial Reform Act of 1802 which abolished eighteen out of thirty-five Federal judges. Over half of all the Federal judges. They’re not impeached, they’re abolished. Courts gone, no salary, go home, it’s over. (applause)

    Now, I am not as bold as Jefferson.

    I would, I mean this very seriously, Judge Beary in San Antonio on June first issued a decree that not only could students not pray at their graduation, they couldn’t use the word benediction, they couldn’t use the word invocation, they couldn’t use the word God, they couldn’t use the word prayer, they couldn’t ask the audience to stand, and if they violated his order, he would arrest and imprison the Superintendent.

    Judge Beary’s court should be abolished now. (applause)

    We do not have to tolerate radical, anti-American judges rewriting the American Constitution, and pretending that we are helpless. And, candidly, once we have abolished his court, we should serve notice to the Ninth Circuit that they are on sufferance, and if they decide to continue being radical they will become unemployed. (applause)


    1. “The third option that you have, and one which Robbie George of Princeton has been studying and which I’m intrigued with, is to take the 14th Amendment, which says that Congress shall define personhood, and pass a law that says, personhood in the United States is defined as beginning at conception (applause) and go straight at the Court.”

      This is the strongest attack. If you notice neither side of the abortion battle has had the courage to even ask, let alone try and answer this. I always ask people this whe aboirtion comes up. The pro-abortion types stumble.

      I hope Newt keeps focus on this one.

      1. Logical – Sensible…

        Yes, great point, and “at what point in time” does “time” begin for the child?

        It’s a play on words, of course, time and life, but it provokes thought, and maybe that’s why they stumble.

        Feelings about life and time are subject to the shifting sand when there is not a thoughtful presupposition, that is, a logical and sensible foundation.

        I’ve been reading Newt’s site, recently, and, wow, he is definitely a thoughtful person.

        Here is more about Supreme Court supremacy –

        You can leave a message there and ask him to focus on it.

        The response is a form letter response, but it says that they will respond, if not personally, it will be considered, because they want constant feedback, as FishyGov shows below in his submission about repeal of President Kennedy’s 1962 Executive Order #10988.


        1. I will.

          Human beings are protected inside the womb starting at the moment of conception, from poorly tested pharmaceuticals and medical malpractice

          Human beings who become victims of violent attack while inside the womb starting at the moment of conception, will have their murderous attackers prosecuted and punished under the law.

          They have rights under that Constitution from the moment of conception.

          1. But, thanks to Roe v Wade, those human beings in the womb don’t yet have the right to life. It’s as if they’re there simply as a pawn in a lawsuit or to give prosecutors another charge to file against an assault or murder.

          2. Yes Yes Yes…

            Rick Santorum would agree.

            Conception rules… it’s a baby… protect it.

            I posted the talking points by Rick Santorum and his comments about his partial birth abortion battles in the Senate and the death of his 2 hour old son.

            He is definitely sincere about protecting life… from God’s perspective.

            He didn’t say this explicitly, but he intimated that, of course, the economy and taxes matter, but hey, if the living want to kill the new tax payer in the womb, who cares about taxes.

            The ultimate battle is for life, not death… and taxes (as in the movie with Brad Pitt who portrays death on holiday in “Meet Joe Black”).


  40. He sure keeps his eyes on substance! He brings perspective to everything! It sounded like scrap it all and start anew! I totally, totally love the idea of defunding Planned Parenthood and invest in adoption agencies!!

  41. Newt has “still waters are deep waters” intellectual substance…

    Right on Newt Gingrich

    -class warfare
    -bureaucratic socialism
    -radical judges
    -Americans “treated as subjects rather than citizens”
    -repudiate an 80 year drift to the left
    -colleges and universities
    -our bureaucracies
    -elected politicians
    -loss of 3rd Iraq war is “defeat” for America
    -America has lost influence in Middle East
    -fundamentally rethink policy for the entire region
    -Iran is dangerous with 1 bomb
    -Pakistan is dangerous with over 100 nuclear weapons
    -economic recover is not difficult
    -economic recovery will begin late in the night that Obama is defeated (… applause)
    -2012 Christmas could be a “good-by” Obama Christmas
    -a slogan, “do you want a great Christmas, vote against Obama”
    -contrast between Obama the food-stamp President vs. the paycheck President
    -fire Bernanke in first 30 days
    -audit Federal Reserve
    -21st Century Contract With America
    -1st Executive Order – eliminate all White House czars by 4pm inauguration day
    -2nd Executive Order – reinstate Ronald Reagan’s Mexico City policy that “no US money will be spent for abortion anywhere in the world”
    -3rd Executive Order – reinstate GWBush’s Conscience Policy -medical community can not be compelled to perform any activity against their religious beliefs
    -4th Executive Order – direct State Department to open the US Embassy in Jerusalem and recognize the sovereignty of the State of Israel
    -Environmental Solutions Agency to replace the EPA
    -defund Planned Parenthood immediately
    -promote adoption services as alternative to abortion
    -shrink government in Washington, grow citizenship back home
    -will challenge Obama to 7 Lincoln/Douglas style debate 3 hours each
    -time keeper and no moderator
    -Newt says he can
    “represent American exceptionalism,
    free enterprise,
    private property rights and
    the Constitution

    better than he [Obama] can represent
    class warfare,
    bureaucratic socialism,
    weakness in foreign policy and
    total confusion in the economy”

    Right on Newt.


    1. I was very surprised hear that we have never had an embassy in Israel. That just blows me away! Our greatest ally in the middle east and we don’t have a diplomatic embassy on their soil.

      Just shows to go you, never assume anything!

      1. We do have Tel Aviv I think. However, I did not know it was closed as Newt seemed to suggest. That would certainly be news worthy, especially if it was closed by BO. That’s a definite google search.

        1. You are correct the US Embassy to Israel is located in Tel Aviv. The US mission to Israel was established under Truman in 1948-49. Congress in 1995 attempted to force relocation of the US Mission to Jerusalem, but it has been resisted by our current President and the previous two Presidents on the grounds that the Jerusalem Embassy Act overstepped Congress’ Constitutional Authority, which it does, as matters of State fall under the purview of the Executive Branch.

    2. Thanks for the re-cap…. he has the brains but also some baggage…
      it’s just that his pluses right now are outweighing his minuses.

      Man he was good… I have to repeat it … stellar!

  42. Best candidate. Most Intelligent. Most informed. No one can debate with Newt because he is on the ball, great knowledge, and can explain it in a way people can understand. He will make America Prouder, Stronger, and Bettter!


  43. I was at this event tonight and Newt, hands down, was the best. They were all good in their own ways and they all have so much to offer. But, Newt is just on another level all together. He would wipe the floor with Obama in a debate. I am now officially a Newt supporter. I had been undecided before tonight.

  44. Finally a candidate who will be honest about the seriousness of situation in the U.S. and some solutions.
    Getting rid of Obama will be an automatic Increase in jobs. Merry Christmas!
    We need a real adult as president. Newt is looking good here.

    1. I agree. I did not think I would support him, but after tonight, I am now supporting him. By the way, of all the candidates tonight, only Newt and Santorum (who spoke last) stayed till the end. Newt talked with people all the way till the end. The other candidates left right after their speeches (again, except for Santorum and Newt).

      1. I wouldn’t hold this against the others…they have almost every second spoken for in these national campaigns. Many are doing interviews as soon as they step from behind the podium. I know what you mean, but in this case I think they should all be given some grace here.

  45. Newt always kicks it up a notch…….no one can touch him intellectually, historically, legislatively, or on foreign policy.

    1. “legislatively” wrong! Newt has 20 yrs been endorsing Rhinos and democrats policy. OH, I CAN NOT WAIT for all of u to really get to know Newt and all the baggage this genius been toting around! I Can Not Wait!

    1. Nice article! I also caught that bit about ragging on oil subsidies, and supporting Big Corn. Yeah, it’s Iowa, but come on. He didn’t have to claim we get 20% of electricity from wind. I have a hard time believing that.

      I like his statements about czars and his other executive orders, and also his points about fighting the supreme court. Those need to be used by the next President.

      Newt would make an excellent Attorney General.

      1. He’s talking about 20% from wind in Iowa. Newt does impress me… and he would make a good VP for Cain. His experience and stiff neck smarts is absolutely needed.

        1. Well, maybe 20% now. Before the damn things rust out. They always do.

          I agree with VirusX about him being difficult to trust. He needs to be employed in a capacity where he can’t do any damage. That’s kind of why I like him for Attorney General.

      2. The problem I have with him, though, is so deep, I wouldn’t want him working in any capacity for me. His faults (and I’m not saying any of the others are faultless) are just too significant. His associations with Dede the white supremacist and his destructive belief in global warming are too much and too dangerous to allow him to be any sort of public servant, anymore. As for AG, he’s uneducated. He has no education in law, just like Hillary Clinton is uneducated and ignorant, when it comes to her position as Secretary of State, considering she’s nothing but an ill-tempered lawyer (and fellow white supremacist, considering she’s the proud recipient of the Margaret Sanger, too). I attacked Obama, relentlessly, on being a racist, and I will not tolerate a RINO racist, just because they put an “R” behind his name when he’s on TV.

        1. You might be right. But I don’t think one needs education in law school to understand law. Law school is for connections, and to learn how to bow and scrape before those who have standing in the courts. The degree and bar “certificate” are just a pass to do things they prefer not to let the rest of us do, even though we are legally entitled.

          I can tell from your writing ability that you can read legal crap as well as the highest paid lawyers. (That’s how Lincoln became a lawyer. He “read law” with another practicing attorney.) So based on my low opinion of law school, in general, I’d say Newt could be AG.

          But I get your point about him being difficult to trust.

          Can a leopard truly change its spots?

  46. I haven’t watched it, but this message is for TRScoop. What’s your direct link to your video? I like to post it on my FB wall so that I can watch it via my RoKu device. 🙂
    I’ll post my comments once I’m done watching. But I’m sure it must great – Newt knows his stuff very well.

    1. Ethanol is a huge problem for me too. NEVER did understand why we would EVER take food off of the world’s table and put in the gas tank. Bushy was for more ethanol in a big way and called for an unachievable production goal of it.

      Calculations by experts stated there wasn’t enough undeveloped land in the U.S. to grow the amount of corn needed for Bush’s production goal.

      Problems with ethanol and its production abound.

      This one issue will not deter my support for Newt.

      No candidate is going to fit all of our qualifications. I keep saying this, we are hiring an employee. If you have a business and need to make a hire are you going to hold out for the perfect employee or will you settle for the best qualified applicant?

      1. I understand you concern, there are benefits too, but I get you. My problem was that it drove up the price of a dietary staple and that seemed to offset any environmental or national security concern. I think if we could develop an inedible hybrid species for ethanol…all my concerns would be addressed. But again, I get your point.

      2. If that’s the only issue I to can live with it. You can bet on one thing if Newt is the nominee and debates Obama, we’re going to see a tearful, whining Obama yelling for Michelle to protect him. ha ha ha

      3. Yes, I have a problem with ethanol subsidies as well. It does drive up the costs of food which includes anything and everything that uses corn as feed or as an ingredient. We have other sources of energy that can be developed. I’ve never understood why the “waste products” of the livestock industry haven’t aggressively been developed as an energy source. Cow poop makes good methane. 😉

      1. All of the candidates are “good.”

        Compared to the SCOAMFOTUS, all of the candidates are damn good.

        This isn’t about “good.”

        This country is nearly past all repair. A president that’s even 1/3 statist is not going to help us stop the fall. Newt has definite statist tendencies. I would only choose him if it became obvious the others can’t sustain any momentum.

        Newt will get a bounce, but then all the baggage will be brought out, dragging him back down.

      1. yes, i would like to see that too! I think a Cain/Gingrich administration would do wonders for the economy and energy policy in the United States!

        1. I like both Cain and Gingrich, but they cant be on the ticket together because they’re both from Georgia.


      1. I can’t trust Newt with much real power. That last debate where he admitted to proposing a health care mandate of his own shows that he is a “compromise” kind of guy. We don’t need to reach middle ground, we need to gain ground in the other direction.

    2. Sorry but Cain can’t hold a candle to Newt in any aspect of governing or ideas for doing so. In fact I don’t see any comparison whatsoever. I’m not putting Cain down by saying that but it’s just the truth.

      1. I don’t think Cain is as knowledgeable either (on politics) so Newt would be his perfect counterpart, without leaving any real power for him to potentially abuse.

        1. Newt Gingrich was the principal author and proponent of the 1994 Contract with America. His efforts secured the Republican takeover of the House for the first time in over 40 years. When he obtained power as the Speaker he passed Welfore Reform and balanced the budget, two parts of the Contract with America. If you remember, Clinton called it the “Contract on America”. In the end, though, even though he campained against them, Clinton signed those reforms. Obviously, Newt knows how to handle power and get things done.

      1. Rubio, and Jindal too, do not quite pass muster for Pres or Veep because they are not ‘natural born ‘ citizens… the parents of neither of the two were US citizens at the time of either one’s birth. But, they’re not alone, although no one is willing to take an official look at the ‘other one.’

    1. I like Newt’s Comprehensive American energy policy. He is in favor of all forms of domestic energy production including fossil fuels, bio fuels, wind, solar, and nuclear. We need a comprehensive approach that is market driven and delivers cost effective energy to fuel our economy. I think investing royalties from oil, natural gas and coal production into research and development of affordable bio fuels and other renewable energy production methods is a good investment. Energy independence will make our nation more secure. I remember the massively effective initiative that President Kennedy proposed to go to the moon. NASA achieved that goal and the return on that investment has been substantial. Our nation can do it now, candidate Gingrich is committed to abundant American energy production.

        1. I’m OK with oil and gas being last. However, I respectfully disagree with you. Fossil fuels are abundant and can be tapped to meet our immediate needs. Need I remind you Newt coined the phrase “drill here drill now”. What we need as a country is an energy policy that leads us to energy independence. I think bio fuels, hydro (including river current and wave energy), and solar along with wind power are very desirable goals to reach this objective. Let’s not forget that hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe. I’m not sure what your objection is to achieving energy independence. We should enable an “all of the above” approach and let the free market work. I am in favor of a serious commitment to research and development of affordable alternative energy production. I am a conservative first and want to see America prosper and stop sending billions of dollars out of country to fuel our economy. Americans need the jobs that will be created to supply our own needs.

          1. I’m not sure how you get to decide whether I’m for energy independence or not. Are you in charge of what we think?

            Wind and Solar are fine for local, immediate applications, like a weather radio, or as backup power to an irrigation pump. Their lack of effect on our power needs means they have nothing to do with energy policy other than pure, puerile political posturing. So yes, making it seem like your are interested in wind, solar, and ethanol-from-corn, as a Presidential candidate, makes you sound like you would therefore also be for other, Big Government bullshit, just like John McCain was in 2008. How did that work out?

            Just let the energy developers do what they do best, and keep governmental programs, run by some central bureaucracy, out of it entirely.

    2. I like Newt’s Comprehensive American energy policy. He is in favor of all forms of domestic energy production including fossil fuels, bio fuels, wind, solar, and nuclear. We need a comprehensive approach that is market driven and delivers cost effective energy to fuel our economy. I think investing royalties from oil, natural gas and coal production into research and development of affordable bio fuels and other renewable energy production methods is a good investment. Energy independence will make our nation more secure. I remember the massively effective initiative that President Kennedy proposed to go to the moon. NASA achieved that goal and the return on that investment has been substantial. Our nation can do it now, candidate Gingrich is committed to abundant American energy production.

      1. This is why we have to vote Conservatives in at every level of govt. We need to be supporting Conservatives from dog catcher at our local level all the way to the top at the federal level of elected positions.

        We need to clean out all Liberals/Socialists/Marxists/Progressivs at every level of government.
        This is a war that we can win even if it takes a couple of election cycles to get it done. Then, we stand guard at the door to make sure that no Liberal/Socialist/Marxist/Progressive EVER gets elected EVER!

        We need to get Conservative Educators back into the classrooms of America so that we don’t end up with more lost children camping out in our cities as useful idiots.

        1. Exactly right – in fact if anyone has to pick one place to start, it is at our local/country school boards. They are festering sores on the integrity and the future of our Nation.

            1. That’s one department that serves no actual need. The EPA does have chemical spill and illegal dumping to justify their existence at least a little bit. Same with Interior and AG. They could all be combined or something, but at least they can point to specific jobs they do.

              But schools need the federal government as much as Lindsay Lohan needs another rave to attend.

      1. I have never seen a more decisive and off the top thinker in my life. He is without a doubt one of the five smartest people in the world, and I mean that. He never looked down once, he never stopped with his points because he got lost, and his rhetoric is very decisive, no two ways about it. I could run through a wall for this guy. I don’t care about his baggage. He’s by far and away the best out there to defeat Obama. You put this beast up against Barack Obama on national tv and you have an absolute annihilation. I would never doubt a guy like this. Great speech, hope it gains traction.

        1. Well said. Newt spends his life thinking about this country and how to right the ship. He seeks out other great thinkers and they brainstorm for solutions. He is an unconventional thinker and doer [like Sarah Palin]. He understands how the system works, how it SHOULD work according to our Declaration of Independence and Constitution, and understands practical yet efficient ways to get what needs to be done accomplished within our system. He is not the ‘elite establishment’, yet is able to work with it. He is a consensus-builder. He admits mistakes and learns from them for better solutions. He thinking and intelligence is very broad and deep that is open to new information and ideas. His principles remain solidly Constitution based. He is not intimidated by anyone or the media and the 166,000 smear ads they have run on him. I think he is exactly what this country needs to correct the course and undo the devestation. Someone called him the Root and Branch candidate; someone who could rip out the damage root and branch. Fitting. Hubby and I have honed in on him since Sarah is out. We will be voting for Newt in the Primary and hopefully General.

        2. I agree with you 100 percent and I think you are absolutely right: This is the guy to debate Obama.

Comments are closed.