Newt’s Resurrection?

National Review ^ | 10/2 | Robert Costa

[MNJohnnie]

Newt's the best choice, if you want to lose.

He the only candidate in the race the Democrats could plausibly spin as a DC Insider.

Be stupid for the GOP, in this current political environment, to allow the Dems to frame this as a race between 0 and the “do nothing” old boy DC Establishment

[Servant of the Cross]

I believe in conversions. I believe in second chances. God knows I have and will continue to need them.

[Matchett-PI]

Thanks for the valuable input. Newt needs to address the objections you make.

[faucetman]

“Of the two, Cain's 9-9-9 is the better plan”

Absolutely NOT!

The “FAIR TAX” is the ONLY and BEST solution out there. Been out there for 15 years or more. Not some campaign gimmick.

“What is the FairTax plan?
The FairTax plan is a comprehensive proposal that replaces all federal income and payroll based taxes with an integrated approach including a progressive national retail sales tax, a prebate to ensure no American pays federal taxes on spending up to the poverty level, dollar-for-dollar federal revenue neutrality, and, through companion legislation, the repeal of the 16th Amendment.

The FairTax Act (HR 25, S 13) is nonpartisan legislation. It abolishes all federal personal and corporate income taxes, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, and self-employment taxes and replaces them with one simple, visible, federal retail sales tax administered primarily by existing state sales tax authorities.

The FairTax taxes us only on what we choose to spend on new goods or services, not on what we earn. The FairTax is a fair, efficient, transparent, and intelligent solution to the frustration and inequity of our current tax system.”

The FairTax:

“Enables workers to keep their entire paychecks
Enables retirees to keep their entire pensions
Refunds in advance the tax on purchases of basic necessities
Allows American products to compete fairly
Brings transparency and accountability to tax policy
Ensures Social Security and Medicare funding
Closes all loopholes and brings fairness to taxation
Abolishes the IRS”

Educate yourselves

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer

J. Murry Bowden

Director

“The FairTax is appealing for both economic and political reasons. A simple consumption oriented tax (on goods and services above a subsidence level) is a simple and fair approach to taxation. The FairTax empowers each citizen to control the taxes he or she pays by controlling consumption.”

“The FairTax will unite our country by removing one of the most divisive political weapons created – class warfare. Unfortunately, the progressive income tax creates a class structure among taxpayers. The debate regarding the segregations of classes of taxpayers is divisive. We need big ideas to unite our country and move us forward together. The FairTax is a big idea – and a good one”

[faucetman]

Since this is a “Newt” thread, I should say that Newt does NOT now support the FAIR TAX. He’s not right all the time as we know. He could be persuaded to support it. I doubt he would veto it if passed by Congress.

[Lady Lucky]

No one who has made some of Newt's bone-headed statements and mistakes in judgment should be trusted with power.

I have heard "bone-headed statements" from every one of the GOP candidates, during this early stage of the campaign. Every one, that is, except Newt Gingrich.

[Politicalmom]

9-9-9 is designed to be a bridge to the Fair Tax.

[Matchett-PI]

Thanks for your comments.

As far as environmental policy goes, All Newt (or any other professing “conservative”) has to do is stand behind (advocate) what I posted here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2796683/posts?page=12#12

IE:

Individuals, Liberty and the Environment The American Conservation Ethic
http://www.maninnature.com/ASC/NWI1.html

I. People are the most important resource.

All environmental policy should be based on the idea that people are the most important resource. The inherent value of each individual is greater than the inherent value of any other resource. Accordingly, the foremost measure of quality of our environment is human health, safety and well-being. A policy cannot be good for the environment if it is bad for people. The best judge of what is or is not desirable is the affected individual.

Human intellect and accumulated knowledge are the only means by which the environment can be willfully improved or modified. Environmental policies should inspire people to be good stewards. Within the framework of equity and liability individuals carry out deeds that create incremental benefits in the quality or quantity of a resource or improve some aspect of the environment. Cumulatively these deeds result in progress and provide direct and indirect environmental benefits to society.

II. Renewable natural resources are resilient and dynamic and respond positively to wise management.

Renewable natural resources ­ trees, plants, soil, air, water, fish and wildlife and collections thereof ­ wetlands, deserts, forests and prairies are the resources we are dependent upon for food, clothing, medicine, shelter and to meet innumerable other human needs. Human life depends upon their use and conservation. Such resources are continually regenerated through growth, reproduction or other naturally occurring processes which cleanse, cycle or otherwise create them anew. While all living organisms and activities produce byproducts, nature has a profound ability to carry, recycle, recover and cleanse. These characteristics make it possible for us to wisely use renewable resources now while ensuring they are conserved for future generations. As Teddy Roosevelt, a founding father of conservation, recognized: “A Nation treats its resources well if it turns them over to the next generation improved and not impaired in value.”

III. The most promising new opportunities for environmental improvements lie in extending the protection of private property and unleashing the creative powers of the free market.

Ownership inspires stewardship. Private property stewards have the incentive to enhance their resources and the incentive to protect them. Polluting another’s property is to trespass or to cause injury. Polluters, not those most vulnerable in the political process, should pay for damages done to others. Good stewardship is the wise use or conservation of nature’s bounty, based on our needs. With some exception, where property rights are absent, we must seek to extend them. If this proves elusive, we must seek to bring the forces of the market to bear to the greatest extent possible. There is a direct and positive relationship between modern market economies and a clean, healthy and safe environment. There is also a direct and positive relationship between the complexity of a situation and the need for freedom. Markets reward efficiency, which is environmentally good, while minimizing the harm done by unwise actions. In the market, successes are spread by example, and since costs are not subsidized but are borne privately, unwise actions are on a smaller scale and of a shorter duration. As a result, such actions are on a smaller scale and of a shorter duration. We must work to decouple conservation policies from regulation or government ownership. In aggregate, markets not mandates, most accurately reflect what people value and therefore choose for their environment.

IV. Our efforts to reduce, control and remediate pollution should achieve real environmental benefits.

The term pollution is applied to a vast array of substances and conditions that vary greatly in their effect on man. It is used to describe fatal threats to human health, as well as to describe physically harmless conditions that fall short of someone’s aesthetic ideal. Pollutants occur naturally or can be a by-product of technology. Their origin does not determine their degree of threat. Most carcinogens, for example, occur naturally but do not engender popular fear to the same degree that man-made carcinogens do. Microbiological pollutants, bacteria and viruses, though natural, are by far the most injurious form of pollution. Technology and its byproducts must be respected but not feared. Science is an invaluable tool for rationally weighing risks to human health or assessing and measuring other environmental impacts. Health and well-being are our primary environmental measures. Science also provides a means of considering the costs and benefits of actions designed to reduce, control and remediate pollution or other environmental impacts so that we may have a cleaner, healthier and safer environment.

V. The Learning Curve is Green.

As we accumulate additional knowledge we learn how to get more output from less input. The more scientific, technical and artistic knowledge we have, the more efficient we are in meeting our needs. As we gain knowledge, we are able to conserve by substituting information for other resources. We get more miles per gallon, more board-feet per acre of timber, a higher agricultural yield per cultivated acre, more GNP per unit of energy. Technological advancement confers environmental benefits. Progress made it possible for the American farmer of today to feed and clothe a population more than two and a half times the size of the one we had in 1910 and triple exports over the same time frame while lowering the total acreage in production from 325 million to 297 million acres. That is 28 million acres less, an area larger than the state of Louisiana that is now available for other uses such as wildlife habitat. American agriculture has demonstrated that as an unintended consequence of seeking efficiencies, there are environmental benefits. As Warren Brookes used to put it simply , “The learning curve is green.” This phenomenon has a tremendous positive effect on our environment and progress along the learning curve is best advanced by the relentless competition in the market to find the best or wisest use of a resource.

VI. Management of natural resources should be conducted on a site and situation specific basis.

Resource management should allow for variation of conditions from location to location and time to time. A site and situation specific approach takes advantage of the fact that those closest to a resource are best able to manage it. Such practices allow us to set priorities and break problems down into manageable units. Natural resource managers, on site and familiar with the situation, whether tending to the backyard garden or the back forty pasture, are best able to determine what to do, how to do it and when to do it. They are able to adapt management strategies to account for feedback and changes. A site and situation specific management scheme fits the particulars as no government mandate or standard can. Additionally, a site and situation specific approach is more consistent with policies carried out at lesser political levels. The closer the management of natural resources is to the affected parties, the more likely it is to reflect their needs and desires. The more centralized management is, the more likely it is to be arbitrary, ineffectual or even counterproductive. A site and situation specific approach avoids the institutional power and ideological concerns that dominate politicized central planning.

VII. Science should be employed as a tool to guide public policy.

Societal decisions rely upon science but ultimately are the product of ethics, beliefs, consensus and many other processes outside the domain of science. Understanding science for what it is and is not is central to developing intelligent environmental polices. Science is the product of the scientific method, the process of asking questions and finding answers in an objective manner. It is a powerful tool for understanding our environment and measuring the consequences of various courses of action. Through science we can assess risks, as well as weigh costs against benefits. While science cannot be substituted for public policy, public policy on scientific subjects should reflect scientific knowledge. A law is a determination to force compliance with a code of conduct. Laws go beyond that which can be established with scientific certainty. Laws are based upon normative values and beliefs and are a commitment to use force. Commitments to use the force of law should be made with great caution and demand a high degree of scientific certainty. To do otherwise is likely to result in environmental laws based upon scientific opinions rather than scientific facts. Such laws are likely to be wasteful, disruptive or even counterproductive, as scientific opinions change profoundly and often at a faster pace than public policy. The notion behind the Hippocratic oath ­ first do no harm ­ should govern the enactment of public policy.

VIII. Environmental policies which emanate from liberty are the most successful.

Our chosen environment is liberty, and liberty is the central organizing principle of America. To be consistent with our most cherished principle, our environmental policies must be consistent with liberty. Restricting liberty not only denies Americans their chosen environment, but also constrains environmental progress.

Liberty has powerful environmental benefits. Freedom unleashes forces most needed to make our environment cleaner, healthier and safer for the future. It fosters scientific inquiry, technological innovation, entrepreneurship, rapid information exchange, accuracy and flexibility. Free people work to improve the environment, and liberty is the energy behind environmental progress.

More: Principles of the American Conservation Ethic http://www.maninnature.com/ASC/NWI1.html

<>

The above is also referenced by Heritage here:

Effects of Environmental Policy on Private Property Rights
http://www.heritage.org/Press/Environmental-Policy.cfm

[MNJohnnie]

Cain’s 9-9-9 is the 1st step moving to the Fair Tax. The Flat Tax plan hijacks the pressure to reform the tax code by side tracking it into a cosemetic fix to the existing code.

You aren’t going to get the Fair Tax in one bite.

[sodpoodle]

Dittos here!

Notice how the media and the GOP establishment are not touting *it’s Newt’s turn*? He is more knowlegeable on national issues than Romney or Perry. He ‘governed’ Congress successfully and even made Clinton look good.

He would be such an asset as VP - for those who want to use his brains and qualifications - but would not support him as POTUS.

I believe Newt is motivated by what is best for America and not ego driven.....same with Herman Cain.

[taildragger]

I would love to see a Cain-Gingrich ticket ... in any order.

Yes... He would add the insider knowledge to a Cain administration much like Cheney knew how and where to get things done w/ GWB, although the forces of history threw them a curve ball on 9/11.

A concept introduced to me by a conservative friend in 2004 was that Kerry was "The acceptable Dean" (as in Howard). With that said, does Gingrich become the "Acceptable Cain"? certainly more credence than Romney as a Conservative when he is not having one of his ADD thinking way to far out of the box days.

[Westbrook]

> He has already said that was a mistake. At least he can
> admit it.

Has he rejected global warming?

Yeah, anybody can regret being on a loveseat with the hideous collectivist-totalitarian-elitist-statist-hypocrite Nancy Pelosi, BUT DOES NEWT REJECT THE PREMISE OF ANTHROPOMORPHIC GLOBAL WARMING?

If not, he will just be another commie-lite shill “reaching across the aisles”.

No better in the end than Romney.

Just more eloquent and better at appealing to the conservative base, while stabbing them in the back.

NO SALE!!

[JaguarXKE]

On Tuesdays and Fridays after 5.

I have major issues with Newt, but one thing is undeniable: he would mop the floor with Bamby in a debate.

[Paradox]

After all the wrangling so far, Newt is my guy. I can handle his imperfections, he is the smartest by far, the best spoken, and I like that.

[MadelineZapeezda]

It would be stupid on your part to not vote....we need people to vote the Senate in and keep the House. I beg of you not to say you won’t vote

[geologist]

Newt is brilliant. He is an excellent communicator. He feigns being a conservative, he votes and promotes liberal legislation, he seems to respect Christianity and is a recent convert to Catholicism, (I read on FR).

He says one thing and then votes the opposite. He has been operating under the cloak of being conservative and his true action is liberal. He is not to be trusted. He is an internationalist. Check his record. He is friends with The Clinton's friends being mostly ‘one world order communists’

BEWARE! America can not afford to have another communist in the White House. Do not drink the kool aid!

[Iron Munro]

I have heard "bone-headed statements" from every one of the GOP candidates, during this early stage of the campaign. Every one, that is, except Newt Gingrich.

I notice you limit the time period to "this early stage of the campaign".

Yes, Newt has looked and sounded impressive during the debates - like the old 1994 Newt.
If he was consistently like that he would be the best choice by far.

But of course, I was refering to Newt's boneheaded statements and actions now and then over the last 10 years or so BEFORE "this early stage of the campaign".

Gingrich Feels the Heat for Appearing in Global Warming Ad With Pelosi

"We don't always see eye to eye, do we Newt?" Pelosi says in the ad.

"No, but we do agree our country must take action to address climate change," Gingrich responds.

[Iron Munro]

Yeah, anybody can regret being on a loveseat with the hideous collectivist-totalitarian-elitist-statist-hypocrite Nancy Pelosi, BUT DOES NEWT REJECT THE PREMISE OF ANTHROPOMORPHIC GLOBAL WARMING?

When a kid gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar he always repents and says "I'm sorry".

But what he really means is that he's sorry he got caught.
He's not sorry he was out of line when he tried to take a cookie - as soon as no one is looking he will do it again.

[econjack]

I just spent time going through some of his bills (e.g., see: http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=8256&can_id=26821) and it appears that he is conservative on spending and taxes. What are you basing your harsh words on?

[RainMan]

Me too.

Newt is my guy by process of elimination.

Sarah decided not to run
Mittens is Obama wearing a WASP suit but practicing as a Mormon.
Perry lost me at hola! amigo
Bachman is running to be Mittens VP candidate
Cain - I dont want another president with no experience in actually practicing politics.
Santorum lost me when he acted like a guest on Crossfire.
Ron Paul ... only if he stepped down and put his son in his place.
I think that is everyone that is running, if not ... they are not a candidate anyway.