Newt Gingrich: Americans Deserve a Real Debate

Human Events.Com ^ | 2/20/2007 | Newt Gingrich

[Sen Jack S. Fogbound]

Americans Deserve a Real Debate

Joan Jackson, Cooper Union and You

Today, I want to introduce you to another extraordinary American.

Joan Jackson lives in Northport, Mich., in Leelanau County near Traverse City. She became an active Republican during the Eisenhower Administration. She worked with the Draft Goldwater movement in 1963, and helped Reagan in 1976 and 1980. She's also a friend of mine. But what makes her extraordinary isn't what she has done for me, or for her fellow Republicans in Michigan. What makes her exceptional is what she has done to break out of the partisan warfare that defines our politics and what she's done to include others who share her desire for real change.

Joan Jackson says she's "on the tail of a comet." I would say she is a comet. Her courage, her initiative and her commitment to something bigger than politics as usual have the potential to transform the way we govern ourselves.

America needs more citizen activists like Joan Jackson. And now you have the opportunity to join her. Keep reading to find out how.

'Come to Cooper Union'

As I've mentioned to you before here in "Winning the Future," former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo and I are doing something different on February 28 in New York City. We're meeting at Cooper Union, the site of Abraham Lincoln's most famous pre-presidential speech, to do something about the lack of debate in our presidential debates.

On February 28 at Cooper Union, Gov. Cuomo and I will have a 90-minute, unrestricted, unrehearsed dialogue about the major challenges confronting America today.

We will also issue a challenge to the men and women running for President: Come to Cooper Union and participate in the Lincoln Dialogue Series.

Toss out the rule book, put aside the negative, partisan attacks, and come debate the issues.

Today's Presidential Debates: 32 Pages of Ground Rules

We're going to Cooper Union for a very specific reason: To remind our fellow Americans of a time when campaign debates were real debates, not a series of poll-tested, consultant-written, 30-second sound bites.

Here's how far we've come since that time:

In the 1996 campaign, the rules for the presidential debates were a full 11 pages of dos and don'ts for the candidates. But the consultants who control today's campaigns were just getting started.

By 2004, the debate rules had ballooned to 32 pages, including one rule that ordered the moderator to stop any candidate who dared to depart from the script to refer to someone in the audience.

In addition, the candidates were ordered to "submit to the staff of the [Debate] Commission prior to the debate all such paper and any pens or pencils with which a candidate may wish to take notes during the debate."

Pen and pencils. Talk about the vital stuff of democracy!

Presidential debates are supposed to be an opportunity for Americans to get to know their choices for the leader of our great nation. But how can you get to know someone through 32 pages of rules restricting their speech?

We don't have presidential debates today, we have kabuki theatre: Maximally choreographed, minimally informative performance art by the various candidates.

Watch the Cooper Union Event Live at the Northport Community Arts Center

So what does this have to do with Joan Jackson? And what does it have to do with you?

When Joan Jackson heard that Mario Cuomo and I were going to debate at Cooper Union, her first instinct wasn't to hope that I would use the opportunity to score partisan political points against Gov. Cuomo. It wasn't even to come to Cooper Union and support me.

Joan Jackson's first instinct was to figure out how she could bring our debate to others in her community.

So she went to work. She met with the superintendent of her local public school and told him about the debate between me and Mario Cuomo. He told Joan that she could use the auditorium in the Northport Community Arts Center that is attached to the public school and extend an invitation to the whole county to view the event on their big screen. In 24 hours, she did just that. She contacted the local Republican and Democratic Party leadership and local elected officials and invited them to come. She's writing a news release for the local paper. She stood up at a community meeting and told her neighbors about the debate. The school superintendent even offered to serve cookies and punch.

What You Can Do to Get Involved

Joan Jackson is an extraordinary American, but she would be the first to tell you that she isn't unique. She's simply looking for something more meaningful and more productive than our current, negative, partisan campaign culture. And she is doing something about it.

From talking to you and reading your e-mail to me, I know that members of the Winning the Future community share this desire for meaningful, substantive dialogue. We want solutions, not sound bites.

For those of you who are looking to be more than passive spectators in a stale, empty political play, look no further than Joan Jackson. Contact your local school or community center and ask them to carry our February 28 debate live. We will broadcast the event live and on-demand via web cast on www.AmericanSolutions.com.

Then tell your friends, reach out to both Democrats and Republicans. Alert the local paper. Got a blog? Host this YouTube message from me advertising the webcast, and include a link to AmericanSolutions.com, where your readers can sign up for an email reminder.

So come on, toss out the rulebook of politics as usual. Bring the history and the dialogue of Cooper Union to your own community. And be a modern American citizen leader like Joan Jackson.

For more information, just go to Newt.org or AmericanSolutions.com. I hope you'll join us on February 28.
Your friend,

Newt Gingrich

P.S. - In case you missed it, I wanted to let you know the latest in the fight to promote English as the language of American success and cultural unity. The mayor of Nashville, Tenn., has vetoed a local measure that would have required all government documents to be in English, except where required by federal law to "protect or promote public health, safety or welfare." The mayor said he was afraid the city would be sued if he allowed the bill, which was passed by a vote of 23-14, to become law. Speaking as someone who last week in "Winning the Future" called for the federal government to print all its documents in English, I agree with what Councilman Eric Crafton, the sponsor of the bill, told the AP when he was informed of the mayor's fears: "It's almost ridiculous to the point of being absurd for the mayor to say, 'Well, I'm afraid that somebody might sue us because we want to conduct our business in English.' To me it's a lack of courage and a lack of leadership."

P.P.S. - As I mentioned on Fox News Sunday this weekend, the agreement reached between the United States and North Korea last week only rewards the bad behavior of the North Korean dictatorship. The signal it sends to other dictatorships pursuing nuclear weapons like Iran is to ignore the Americans, ignore the threat of sanctions, get your nuclear weapons, and then cut a deal later, because in the end, the democracies are going to cave. You can read my analysis here.

Mr. Gingrich is the former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and author of "Winning the Future" (published by Regnery, a HUMAN EVENTS sister company). Click here to get his free Winning the Future e-mail newsletter.

Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions
Copyright © 2007 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved.

[Sen Jack S. Fogbound]

The debate should be very interesting!

[2ndDivisionVet]

See my new tagline...

[tpaine]

Bump for Newt...

[BUSHdude2000]

Newt gave a speech recently about 2008 and conservative principles. If you didn't hear or see this speech, check it out here. If every American watched any 10 minutes of this great speech, Newt would win in a landslide.

http://www.newt.org/multimedia/default.asp?mi=394

Also be sure to visit http://www.DraftNewt.org

[TheLion]

"The debate should be very interesting!"

Indeed!

[Ouderkirk]

Newt Gingrich/John Bolton 2008

I like it!

[Marine Inspector]

bttt

[oceanview]

he could get into the race anytime he wanted to.

[GBA]

One of the things I liked about Reagan was his way of articulating his conservative beliefs. I already believed the same things for the same reasons, so hearing him say them was an enjoyable, yet familiar revelation. He reinforced what I knew with my heart and my soul.

Newt Gingrich did the same thing for me. I would find his history lectures on cable and was transfixed by the story of my country and the edification of the beliefs I hold dear. He, like Reagan, spoke easily about what were my greatest personal convictions as he told the story of our great nation and its founding and guiding principles. His lectures, like Reagan's speeches, strengthened my beliefs.

It was said that Clinton had the same effect on liberals and I don't doubt it. I remember the convention where he won the candidacy. He said all the things that a good liberal would want to hear and what many Americans of all stripes wanted to hear...at least, those who were more gullible. I never believed that Clinton actually believed what he was saying. Not like Reagan did. And not like Newt did, either.

We conservatives (and all) Americans are at a critical time. Reagan is truly gone. His legacy lives on, but has been tarnished or perhaps even damaged by the pretenders who seek to attach themselves to it. We do need a debate and Newt Gingrich is one of the few who can touch those of us who most need to hear our history and conservatism's message. Let the debates begin!

[MACVSOG68]

Newt represents the soul of the Republican Party. He is the intellectual maestro with a combined knowledge of history, political science, and economics that far surpasses every candidate we will be looking at. His Contract for America now updated for the 21st Century is even more indicative of his understanding of true conservatism.

Having said all of that, he is completely unelectable under any known set of circumstances, and I believe firmly that he understands this. But he belongs in the center of the debate, to provide perspective and guide the debate for those few candidates who truly do have some chance in 2008. He has a tremendous amount to offer the Party and I look forward to seeing more of him as the year progresses.

[Sen Jack S. Fogbound]

Even if Newt should decide he cannot be elected President, he should be a vice president, or an advisor to the President, he would be as powerful as he needs to be.

America needs Newt to help guide this country in the right direction. If fact, it would help Bush tremondously if he would take Newt on board and help him!

[narby]

Note that in Newt's P.S. he talked about the importance of English. But I haven't heard him talk about border fences, or draconian crackdowns against millions of people.

Newt's got his priorities right. He knows that the melting pot worked once, and can again. While draconian police state operations won't be tolerated by the people.

He's too smart to be president, but I wish he was.

[B Knotts]

Newt '08 PING

FReepmail me to get on/off the Newt '08 Ping List

A Voice for Freedom: Newt Gingrich

[M-cubed]

he talked about the importance of English. <<

after looking at his signature...I'm thinking he wouldn't do well in Mrs. Jenkins old penmanship class....

[MACVSOG68]

Agree on both points.

[westmichman]

action ping

[jwparkerjr]

Oh yes, be still my pounding heart. Maybe we could add Ollie North as Sec. of Defense, just for good measure!

[RetiredArmy]

Bolton would be a kick @$$ sec of state or defense.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=253#253

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=268#268

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=270#

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=304#

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=333#333

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=383#

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=385#385

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=594#594

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=724#

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=827#827

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=899#899
good one

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=932#932

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=1043#1043

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=1227#1227

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

NEW YORK -- The four Democrats competing in next week's mayoral primary found themselves trying to explain in a debate seen live on NBC4 and WNBC.com . . .

. . . The hour-long debate did not allow for lengthy answers. The candidates were asked about education, affordable housing, terrorism, crime, race relations, gay marriage, unemployment and disaster preparedness and in most cases had just 30 seconds to respond . . .

You see, that is just the trouble. They have, understandably enough, four candidates to winnow down to one nominee - and they have no principled way to choose among them, since the one who polls the worst could in principle be the one who is the second choice of the all the voters in the primary. So what do they do? They run a "first past the pole" race with a runoff against "second past the pole" if the winner doesn't get 40% of the vote.

And how do they inform the public on the candidates and the issues? They broadcast a brief live, competitive joint TV debate press conference among the whole lot of them.

Let's just suppose that what they actually wanted to do was inform the public enough to get a good candidate for mayor. What would they do? IMHO they should:

• conduct actual debates, without the presence of any "moderator" other than a chess timer to allocate equal time to the microphone of each participant in each debate.

• Conduct the debates on radio, so that
  • the facts and logic of the debaters are more important than their hairline or waistline, and
  • cost considerations do not limit the number and duration of the debates unduly

• allow candidates to use notes and/or laptop computers in the debates.

• strictly limit the number of participants in each debate - preferably to two.

• conduct enough debates to vet each candidate against each other candidate

• make each debate long enough that the no candidate can hide their actual agenda

IMHO that process would seperate the wheat from the chaff - candidates who aren't ready for prime time would probably realize it by the time they got their clock cleaned by three different people in three seperate three-hour radio debates.

I thintk that method of debating in the general election would enable Republicans to blow Democrats away - Democrats depend so heavily on being protected by journalists (see Hillary Clinton, poster child).

Democrats Debate, Asked 'Why Is Bloomberg Popular?' (NY) WNBC Television ^ | 9/8/2005 | Puppage

My #19 links all my discussions of the issue of presidential debates; the above sample is from http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/523109/posts?page=899#899