It's a little old, but I thought Newt's explanation should be posted.
1 posted on
11/16/2008 3:05:25 PM PST by
neverdem
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-59 next last
To: neverdem
It's not the “being part of the debate” that bothers me...it's being on the same side “in the debate” as the Marxists that does......
To: neverdem
Gingrich Explains Why He Did Global Warming Ad With PelosiThis ad is the reason Gingrich should never run for President. He is not true to Conservative values. I won't vote for him.
3 posted on
11/16/2008 3:09:13 PM PST by
Dustbunny
(Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged. The Gipper)
To: neverdem
4 posted on
11/16/2008 3:09:13 PM PST by
sionnsar
(Iran Azadi|5yst3m 0wn3d-it's N0t Y0ur5 (SONY)|http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com/|RCongressIn2Years)
To: neverdem
To: neverdem
Why don’t the conservatives formulate an energy policy based upon the facts not speculation by environmental anarchists? I stand in awe as we let the other take center stage on all the issues putting us in the response mode.
6 posted on
11/16/2008 3:10:45 PM PST by
Citizen Tom Paine
(Swift as the wind; Calmly majestic as a forest; Steady as the mountains.)
To: neverdem
Newt's explanation is akin to explaining away THIS photo:
7 posted on
11/16/2008 3:12:28 PM PST by
AC-130 Gunship
(Odinga-Hussein 0bama: Ushering in a new Reich of hell of thru "diversity" and Marxism.)
To: neverdem
Anyone doing an ad with Pelosi can have no explanation that would satisfy me — no Conservative should give that leftist any credibility.
8 posted on
11/16/2008 3:12:29 PM PST by
PhiKapMom
( BOOMER SOONER LetsGetThisRight.com RED STATE Oklahoma Republican)
To: neverdem
Well, that explanation makes sense, but you’d never guess that’s what he believes by watching that ad. That ad makes him look like he’s just another politician trying to be everything to everybody. He’d be better off finding another way to express his concerns over the environment. IMO
Dear Newt: mission NOT accomplished.
To: neverdem
With my Real Estate Pac, the leaders at state level endorsed a democratic governor. We conservatives were hopping mad, I talked to one of the Republican trustees and he said, "It's Better to be at the table than on the menu".
Newt seems to be saying the same thing.
To: neverdem
Didn’t he “debate” Bore on this and agree with everything Bore said?
11 posted on
11/16/2008 3:13:07 PM PST by
Las Vegas Ron
(((The hell with buckling the seat belts - Load the guns!)))
To: neverdem
BS. Jaw-jaw has gotten us where we are-are. It gives their premises the aura of legitimacy.
13 posted on
11/16/2008 3:14:05 PM PST by
metesky
(My retirement fund is holding steady @ $.05 a can.)
To: neverdem
15 posted on
11/16/2008 3:16:05 PM PST by
Osage Orange
(Victims that fight back live longer.....................)
To: neverdem
Just asking...is “green conservatism” related to or comparable to “compassionate conservatism?” I thought by now that conservatives had learned to be suspicous of anyone who feels the need to add some modifier to conservatism to make it more acceptable to lefties.
16 posted on
11/16/2008 3:16:25 PM PST by
penowa
To: neverdem
I don't think that we have conclusive proof of global warming. And I don't think we have conclusive proof that humans are at the center of it. Fuzzy thinking.
17 posted on
11/16/2008 3:17:04 PM PST by
RightWhale
(Exxon Suxx)
To: neverdem
18 posted on
11/16/2008 3:18:42 PM PST by
razorback-bert
(Save the planet...it is the only known one with beer!)
To: neverdem
But Newt, you caved on the key debate i.e. whether or not global warming is occurring and what is the cause.....you bought into anthropogenic global warming when the evidence indicates that global warming is caused by natural forces. This is not conservatism it is simply moonbattery. And profiting off the sale of a solution(s) to a non-existent problem is simply wrong and is on par with selling band instruments and uniforms to parents to keep their kid from playing pool. Snake oil snake oil snake oil. You should be ashamed of yourself Newt for doing the idiotic ad with comrade Nancy and even more ashamed of yourself for this ridiculous explanation.
To: neverdem
I don’t disagree with what newt said but it doesn’t explain doing ads WITH the dems. Why not separate ads showing the contrast.
How about conservatives stating they are for reducing pollutants harmful to humans and stating that CO2 is not one if them as technology improvements allow it? These idiots are focusing on the wrong compounds and wanting to waste precious resources reducing CO2 which nature loves.
To: neverdem
Don’t plan on reading it, there is not enough wild turkey made to get me drunk enough to make a commercial with that Nancy. So newt had a brain stroke, I hope he gets well and does ok in his remaining retirement years.
21 posted on
11/16/2008 3:20:25 PM PST by
org.whodat
(Conservatives don't vote for Bailouts! Republicans do!)
To: neverdem
I don’t think it was a debate Newt.
22 posted on
11/16/2008 3:21:10 PM PST by
rjones42
To: neverdem
Good idea, Newt...but the wrong approach. Doing ANYTHING with Pelosi is a slap in the face to a conservative simply because what she stands for is anathema to conservative principles. If you want to get your message out, doing it with Pelosi is the wrong way to do it because virtually everyone will see it a tacit approval of Pelosi’s message. I rarely disagree with you, Newt, but this time you're wrong.
23 posted on
11/16/2008 3:22:05 PM PST by
econjack
(Some people are as dumb as soup.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-59 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson