New Gingrich book on climate change likely coming after the election

latimes.com ^ | Dec. 8, 2011 | Neela Banerjee

[Free ThinkerNY]

At a time when the Republican presidential candidates are swiftly backing away from past moderate environmental positions, Newt Gingrich may be the only one with a book pending on the topic.

Gingrich and Terry L. Maple have something of a sequel in the works to their 2007 book, "A Contract with The Earth," tentatively titled "Environmental Entrepreneurs."

The duo’s first book called on policymakers and businesspeople on the right to show they had better ideas for protecting the environment and creating jobs than government did. The new book is a collection of essays by various businesspeople and scientists to be edited and stitched together by Gingrich and, mostly, Maple, a former chief executive of the Palm Beach Zoo.

The author of a chapter on climate change is Katharine Hayhoe, an atmospheric scientist at Texas Tech whose work focuses on assessing the impact of climate change and communicating it to broader audiences, including those traditionally dubious of global warming, like Christian colleges.

The book “requires a good opening chapter that lays out the facts on global climate change, but I would like this chapter to be framed with optimism, not gloom and doom,” Maple said in an email to Hayhoe in October 2007. “All that is needed from you is to provide a sense of what needs to happen. What is the window of opportunity and what does the science tell us about our chances for remediation?”

Like most climatologists, Hayhoe accepts the broad scientific consensus that the climate is changing and that humanity’s combustion of fossil fuels is the main reason for it.

[LittleSpotBlog]

This follow-up book has been under contract for a long time. The original book, Contract with the Earth, was a huge flop for the publisher, although I suspect that it’s seen some more recent sales with Newt’s surge in the polls.

Make no mistake: Newt is all about Newt. He does what’s in his own interest. Shifts with the tides and winds and all that. If he wins the nomination, I don’t know what I’ll do.

[sand88]

Too bad we can’t flush them both and start anew.

We desperately need that. AGW is nothing but an evil vehicle used by the Marxist to destroy Capitalism.

Any one who can't see that AGW is Marxism wrapped in green, they are NOT fit to hold office.

AGW is pure evil and Newt has NEVER called the Climate change movement a fraud.

I challenge anyone to provide quotes from Newt that definitely show that he acknowledges the fraud of man-made global warming.

They can't be found because such a "crisis" as AGW fits the ego of someone who wants "big solutions" to big problems.

I pray everyday for a miracle -- that a real Conservative can rise and win the nomination.

[Cobra64]

That’s an outright dishonest lie.

If Gingrich is getting 45% in the polls to Romney’s 23% in a place like FL, it shows Romney is not getting any traction and NEVER will. Replace Gingrich with Bachmann/Santorum and one of those two would win. Why would Gingrich voters go to Romney, unless they were unprincipled to begin with.

But because you have an agenda, you don’t want the cycle of Anti-Romney’s to continue because it hurts your guy.

Bachmann/Santorum can win. If the Tea Party voter or conservative activist would just remember their principles, take a look at the Electoral Map and see that 2012 is advantage to the GOP, we could win this thing in a blowout.

If Gingrich goes down, Bachmann or Santorum should move up.

First of all, a "dishonest lie" is a double negative meaning it is the truth. If perhaps you meant to call me a liar, that is disingenuous to make a statement to someone who is expressing an opinion. Would you call me a liar to my face?

Second, you don't know what my "agenda" is.

Third, you do not know who my "guy" is. Initially it was Palin (who bowed out) then it was Bachmann to whom I've made campaign contributions until she shot herself in the foot with unfounded, and wild accusations (like you) and she continues to violate the Reagan 11th Commandment and has become nasty.

Finally, you have no clue as to whom I have a propensity to support in the primaries.

.

[LyinLibs]

I heard that after the election, Newt will become a cannibal and eat babies.

We better not vote for him.

[Victoria Delsoul]

This article, coupled with another one written by Ann Coulter reveals Gingrich as a liberal dressed in conservative clothes. His derision of the Paul Ryan Plan, which he called “right wing social engineering” demonstrated his contempt for conservatives. Gingrich has also called the Tea Party "the militant faction of the Republican Party.” In the special election for NY-23, he undermined the conservative Tea Party candidate Doug Hoffman and gave his full support to the RINO Scozzafava - more evidence that Newt is not a genuine conservative.

His pro-amnesty stance, his pro-global warming comments, his suggestion of replacing Obamacare “with something else” as he calls it, (probably with his own 'Newtcare' - another big government program) aren't the types of things I can get excited about in a GOP candidate.

However, the Republican electorate seems to be craving for a debater in chief, without much regard to what he actually says, as long as he sounds good, is glib and speaks fast, especially if he knows the subjects enough to keep on talking nonstop.

He will probably be the GOP nominee. I don’t think he’ll defeat Obama once the media pounds on him day and night, exposing his baggage.

But even if he wins the election, he can do it without my vote. I will not vote for another liberal wolf wearing conservative sheep clothing, because I won’t be playing the game of: “Oh, I didn’t know. I believed in him and he has disappointed me,” because he hasn’t and he won’t. He doesn’t fool me.

[re_nortex]

The Los Angeles Times is simply not a credible source. They're simply another lamestream media house organ for anti-American Marxists. The LAT has the sole goal of attacking Constitutional Conservatives and Christians. And the same goes for their despicable parent overlord, the Tribune Company.

The newspaper even uses weasel words about the alleged book: "Newt Gingrich may be the only one with a book pending on the topic."

This sort of phrasing is a chief trait of the dinosaur media along with the ever-popular, "...source say...". Innuendo and outright lies. The lamestream, drive-by media are [sic] the enemy.

[sagar]

“By the time Gingrich is through, Gore will look like an oil refinery owner.”

HILARIOUS! Thank you for the laugh!

[Windflier]

Bachmann/Santorum can win. If the Tea Party voter or conservative activist would just remember their principles, take a look at the Electoral Map and see that 2012 is advantage to the GOP, we could win this thing in a blowout.

With the right candidate, we could crush the Democrats into mortar to rebuild our broken republic, but may I remind you that neither Bachmann or Santorum are polling anywhere near as well as Romney is?

It's disheartening, but that tells you all you need to know about what the voters think of them.

What's missing in this race is a leader who's got the 'whole package'. For my money, that leader is Sarah Palin, but she's taken a pass on the race (for now).

[Windflier]

I see Palin in the race more every day.

Don't we wish. It's just heart-dropping that in this time (of all times), the best we can put forward from our stable, are two RINO/establishment insiders.

This is exactly how we lost in 2008 and 1996. One more loss like that, and it's over. We'll have to turn over the table and re-start the whole game.

[Windflier]

I can’t belive how the LA Times can pull the strings on so many people here on Free Republic. Just amazing what people fall for.

I take it by your comment that you're accusing the L.A. Times of lying. Are they? Did they just make this up to make Newt look bad to the voters? Do have proof that they fabricated this story?

Or, do you just not like that unsavory vetting thing?

[marsh2]

This is precisely why I won’t vote for Gingrich. California embraced all the Global Climate Change rhetoric with AB 32 and SB 375. Now we have the strategic growth council spreading “sustainable development” through every state agency.

We have: the California Essential Habitat Connectivity Project: A Strategy for Conserving a Connected California (DFG); the California Interregional Blueprint (CalTrans) and sustainable communities; California’s Climate Adaptation Water Strategy (DWR) using Integrated Regional Water Management Planning; Climate Change, Landuse and Infrastructure (CNRA); Carbon trading (ARB); Health in all policies (SGC)

There are new concepts like ecosystem services, public goods impact fees, social license, polluter pays, and the precautionary principle - all set up to undermine the integrity of private property ownership. The gobal agenda permeates all of California and strangles it is useless socialistic regulations all in the name of Climate Change.

No, I won’t be voting for a globalist like Newt.

[cripplecreek]

For the Republicans, I think they need to draw the line in WI

I think they can write a lot of us off for good if they want to treat us like disposable pawns after the fights we've won for them over the past year. Wisconsin may get the headlines but we've actually done far more in Michigan and I'm pretty damn tired of being a disposable vote.

[floridarunner01]

Actually no. Because if you look at the poll numbers, Romney’s numbers have remained essentially unchanged. He’s always in the mid-20s. That suggests his supporters don’t like anyone else in the field.

Also, Republicans in D.C. don’t like Newt at all and are still pulling for Romney to win. If Newt was truly the establishment-favored candidate...they would have all jumped on his bandwagon. Instead, they are all staying on Romney.

[cripplecreek]

I’m getting tired of conservatives who simply blame the media without even thinking about it. The media can be blamed for plenty of things but that doesn’t excuse intellectual laziness from us. We’re starting to sound like the left blaming Bush as a conditioned response.

While I’m on the subject of conditioned response, I’m also sick of this crap about the establishment trying to destroy Gingrich. Just this morning Karl Rove was saying that Romney should probably drop out early if he doesn’t win any early states. Last week it was Ed Rollins saying that Romney’s flip flops were hurting him. As for Michele Bachmann not going after Romney, also a line of crap. Just because the media doesn’t mention it, doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. Just yesterday there were a whole string of slaps at Romney from her campaign posted on twitter and facebook.

If conservatives truly do want to save the country, they better cowboy up and recognize voting for a progressive republican won’t do anything more than help shift the country further leftward. A little moral courage goes a long way.

[maggief]

“Also, Republicans in D.C. don’t like Newt at all and are still pulling for Romney to win. If Newt was truly the establishment-favored candidate...they would have all jumped on his bandwagon. Instead, they are all staying on Romney.”

Yeah, and in 2007 Mitt considered Newt for a running mate. In 2009, Newt team with Mitt, Juan, McConnell, Boehner, Cantor et al, to remake the GOP, etc., etc.

Newt’s mission is to neuter the Tea Party, IMO, and he’s well on his way ...

[cripplecreek]

I’ve encouraged my Tea Party congressman to endorse Bachmann and I made sure to remind him that she came to Michigan to help him raise funds.

[Windflier]

I’m getting tired of conservatives who simply blame the media without even thinking about it. The media can be blamed for plenty of things but that doesn’t excuse intellectual laziness from us.

That was sort of my response at seeing the comment I responded to. It's a mindset of blind allegiance, that admits no facts or truth. It's scary to observe it in a so-called conservative.

[cripplecreek]

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear."

-Thomas Jefferson

The quote is actually part of a wider narrative by Jefferson about any kind of blind allegiance.

[goldstategop]

I said I would never vote for an Open Borders Republican. I also can’t vote for Newt Gingrich because he believes in the climate change scam.

I’d like to vote for a conservative Republican candidate. Unfortunately, one isn’t in sight.

[floridarunner01]

Just because Mitt considered Newt for a running mate doesnt really say anything to me. McCain picked Palin for a running mate. Does that mean I can assume Palin and McCain are politically the same?