Still pushing AlGore’s global warming disciple, huh? Laughable.
Hmmm. Gingrich debated Al Gore, and won.
Newt recognized that in a political system based on the Hegelian Dialectic, if the opposing side offers no antithesis, then there is no synthesis, and the original thesis passes as is. The best way to head off the Left's destructive "green" policies is to present an alternative to it. Simply saying "no" isn't going to sway those who believe something needs to be done. Newt is aiming at engaging those people in thinking about economically neutral alternatives.
It is a two-prong defense. Yes, we disspell the Global Warming™ myth where ever we can, but we also need to attack the progressives' "solutions" at the same time, point out how they are economically destructive, how they are actually aimed at free enterprise, not the environment, and present ideas that would solve what the progressives claim to be the problem, without damaging the economy.
What Newt has succeeding in doing through this approach is to expose the progressives' true agenda of wealth and market access redistribution, by giving them the opportunity to embrace economically neutral alternatives, which they systematically reject.
When people on the side of free markets refuse to engage the Left's proposed "green solutions", then the Left gets to control the dialogue completely. Instead, we need to talk about it, and turn the discussion from one about simply "we need to do something" to one that looks more critically at just what that "something" the Left is proposing.
Newt is playing Chess, while people like you are playing Checkers.
Newt is playing Chess, while people like you are playing Checkers.Yeah, that's a helluva chess move backing Scozzafava over Hoffman. But I forgot, it was Hoffman (according to you) who was in the wrong.
And its people like YOU that create, nurture and ultimately vote for RINOs.