Will Newt Gingrich's 2012 Presidential Candidacy Achieve a Lunar Base?

  • Topic: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Astronuc
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
Sign up Log in
109 replies · 18K views
mheslep said:
Castro? The criminal lunatic took time out from sending thugs out to pummel women to make a statement? Criticism from him is a plus for Gingrich and the GOP.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day and even a nasty lunatic like Castro can stumble on the truth some of the time.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Angry Citizen said:
They have no way of growing food ...

Actually this is not true. They will need supplies shipped to them in order to grow food though.

They can and do grow food in Antarctica, and they can in space, or on the moon as well.

The South Pole Growth Chamber, which was also designed and fabricated by Sadler Machine Co., provides fresh food to the U.S. South Pole Station in Antarctica, which is physically cut off from the outside world for six to eight months each year.

http://www.space.com/9353-lunar-greenhouse-grow-food-future-moon-colonies.html
 
Given energy, to sustain itself and provide propulsion what a moon colony needs is water, hence LCROSS.
 
Here is Gingrich's CPAC speech, I haven't been able to watch it yet, so I don't have anything to add to the discussion, just thought some may be interested in it.
 
mheslep said:
Given energy, to sustain itself and provide propulsion what a moon colony needs is water, hence LCROSS.

"Moon colony?" Have you any idea of the vast percentage of the U.S. budge that would require right now? Have you any idea of just how far out of favor space exploration has gone in the last few years, largely as a result of research scientists who keep saying "more! more!" while people here in America are living in squalor and starvation?
 
jreelawg said:
Actually this is not true. They will need supplies shipped to them in order to grow food though.

They can and do grow food in Antarctica, and they can in space, or on the moon as well.

Aye! That we can!

It's not as straightforward as some believe, though.
 
daveb said:
I think the main reason JFK wanted us to get to the moon was the prestige it would give us over the Soviet Union, as part of the cold war. Now, we have no such competitive impetus. I agree, it was good for science and for inspiring people, which was an added benefit, but I don't think that was the primary reason for going.

So what do you think was the primary reason for going?

In my mind, it was to use the situation at hand to induce (aka lead) a great revolution with respect to rocket science.
 
DoggerDan said:
"Moon colony?" Have you any idea of the vast percentage of the U.S. budge that would require right now? Have you any idea of just how far out of favor space exploration has gone in the last few years, largely as a result of research scientists who keep saying "more! more!"
Yes, but why do you feel the need to address that to me?
while people here in America are living in squalor and starvation?
That's misinformation. People are not starving in the US for lack of resources.
 
Ya can ?? put a gun rack in a Volt.!

Yee Haa ! lol

perhaps Volt underestimated the market/marketing sales requirements in the design phase?

it's quiet ... almost stealth like ... optional gun rack on request.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cottage industry! Gluing up PVC gun-racks for compact cars. I have lots of guns. I see no need to have a gun-rack in my pickup, though. Just another incentive for a smash-and-grab moron.
 
You're still here? It's over. Go home. Go. I'm surprised this thread hasn't been locked. Here is a Gingrich quote from last night taken way out of context.

N. Gingrich said:
Santorum won't be as popular the following morning.
Well, he didn't mean it like that, but imagine waking up in the morning with some floozy that looked so good last night when you were drunk. And it turns out to be your wife. Thanks for that insight Newt.
 
1. Sarah Palin endorsed Newt Tuesday night on Neil Cavuto's election coverage. There are still at least as many people who love and respect her as those that loath and despise her.

2. Sheldon Adelson has recently pledged another ten million to Newt's super-pac.

3. George Soros doesn't see much difference between Romney and Obama and clueless Rick Santorum revealed his true political skills when he publicly bashed JFK. If the Republicans nominate one of these guys, they deserve the four more years that they are going to get.

Newt might just rise from the dead (a third time). The next month should tell the tale.

Skippy
 
skippy1729 said:
...

3. George Soros doesn't see ...
How is what Soros' sees or does not see possibly relevant to Gingrich's campaign?
 
It appears that Newt is stealing votes from Santorum. It's doubtful that Newt has a chance, so is he staying into guarantee Romney wins? Who do you think Newt will back when he has to quit?

Now Santorum is hoping that Gingrich will abandon the race, despite the former House Speaker’s plan to stay in it. Santorum’s Super PAC – the Red, White and Blue Fund – said today that “with Gingrich exiting the race it would be a true head-to-head race and conservatives would be able to make a choice between a consistent conservative in Rick Santorum or Mitt Romney. For instance, with Gingrich out of the race Santorum would have won both Ohio and Michigan. Newt has become a hindrance to a conservative alternative.”

Unfortunately for Santorum, Gingrich said today he’s not going anywhere except on to Alabama and Mississippi, two of the next states to vote.

“If I thought he was a slam dunk to beat Romney and to beat Obama I would really consider getting out,” Gingrich said of Santorum on The Bill Bennett Show. “I don’t.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/super-tuesday-results-point-to-drawn-out-primary/
 
Evo said:
It appears that Newt is stealing votes from Santorum. It's doubtful that Newt has a chance, so is he staying into guarantee Romney wins? Who do you think Newt will back when he has to quit?
I can't figure out what Newt is doing. Maybe it's hubris and he really thinks he could win it, but some of his advisers should point out to him the problem with women voters. My sisters and nieces are revolted at the thought of having Callista in the WH as FLOTUS. Not a scientific survey, but they are politically aware, and they don't pull any punches when we discuss politics.
 
turbo said:
I can't figure out what Newt is doing. Maybe it's hubris and he really thinks he could win it, but some of his advisers should point out to him the problem with women voters. My sisters and nieces are revolted at the thought of having Callista in the WH as FLOTUS. Not a scientific survey, but they are politically aware, and they don't pull any punches when we discuss politics.

I think it's pretty simple. The "anybody but Romney" votes total more than Romney. I think Santorum is a good person, but he's stepped in "it" several times with his comments about women in the military, birth control, etc. I'm not a woman, however, my conservative wife doesn't think too much of his comments about women’s issues. IMO Santorum could beat Romney if Newt and Paul dropped, but he'd get killed in the general election. I think Newt would beat Romney if Santorum and Paul dropped out. I think the headline yesterday that referred to the Romney "eh" nominee had it about right. I don't know anyone excited about him, and I mean no one I know. I think Gingrich is banking on Santorum continuing to step in it and he would rise to the occasion. Unfortunately, Gingrich, IMO has the most inept campaign management team in the world. Not getting on ballots, missing deadlines, not having caucus states organized, etc. It’s almost like he doesn’t want to win. If Gingrich had someone like Karl Rove running his campaign, this would be over, IMO.

Hands down, I think Gingrich would clean Obama’s clock in debates, especially the Lincoln Douglass style debate he did with Cain. Prompters don’t help the person that doesn’t have command of the facts. I personally feel strongly about getting back to the country our founding fathers envisioned.
 
ThinkToday said:
If Gingrich had someone like Karl Rove running his campaign, this would be over, IMO.
The problem is built in apparently: that "I will be the nominee" ego won't allow the discipline that a professional campaign manager would bring.
 
Hands down, I think Gingrich would clean Obama’s clock in debates, especially the Lincoln Douglass style debate he did with Cain. Prompters don’t help the person that doesn’t have command of the facts.

I don't know where this idea that Obama is somehow a dullard without a teleprompter comes from. He generally seems to be intelligent and articulate.

Also, I think Newt comes across as an opportunist who says what he thinks you want to hear. After all, he was once an advocate for cap and trade, and for a healthcare reform bill very similar to what passed under Obama. What has changed that has moved these policies from Newt's big ideas to socialism, other then a democrat centralist is now advocating them? Romney has the same problem- backing his healthcare plan back when it was considered republican centrist.
 
turbo said:
I can't figure out what Newt is doing.
I think it's pretty straightforward. If Newt, Santorum and Paul stay in the race till the end, Romney likely won't have the majority he'll need to ride into the Convention as the inevitable nominee. At that point, anything is possible (albeit with strongly varying degrees of likelihood). Why would Gingrich take off his hat now, when he can leave it on till the end, and maybe, just maybe, pull a rabbit out of it at the Convention?
 
ParticleGrl said:
I don't know where this idea that Obama is somehow a dullard without a teleprompter comes from. He generally seems to be intelligent and articulate.

Also, I think Newt comes across as an opportunist who says what he thinks you want to hear. After all, he was once an advocate for cap and trade, and for a healthcare reform bill very similar to what passed under Obama. What has changed that has moved these policies from Newt's big ideas to socialism, other then a democrat centralist is now advocating them? Romney has the same problem- backing his healthcare plan back when it was considered republican centrist.

He explains his positions here: http://www.newt.org/answers/

Anyone that has read any of his written works will see he has is anything but "big ideas to socialism". His recent book American Exceptionalism (not a Newt term, btw)provides a solid look at the way he thinks. Having just finished it, it can be summed up as a return to the founding fathers idea of how the Constitution was intended to work, and from that many other things fall into place on their own. Contrary to assumptions that "American Exceptionalism" means we/he think we're better than everyone else, it really has to do with reflections throughout our history on why others thought the American experience was in many ways exceptional, starting with the founding of the country. There were things in the book I had forgotten, some I had to look up to be sure, and new things I never knew. I forgot just how amazing our history really has been.

The next thing on my reading list is The Original Constitution: What it Really Said and Meant , which I found through the 10th Amendment Center and is supposed track the evolution of the Constitution, discussions at the Convention with actual written records, and meanings of the terms at the time they were written. The thoughtfulness and forethought of the founding fathers really is amazing.

Now, I almost fell out of my chair when you wrote “a democrat centralist is now advocating them”. Who are you talking about? Surely, no one in a power position.

As much as I don’t care for Romney, at least he has a defense. RomneyCare was a choice of the people of MA at the State level, meaning they citizens could vote it in or out at will. ObamaCare would require almost a Herculean effort to get out of the Federal governments control. This is especially true when there is little likelihood Republicans would ever be able to get past a filibuster in the Senate to get it to a President.

As far as Romney being a “republican centrist”, who the heck knows? I think he says what he needs to say for the audience in front of him. Hence, I don’t trust him.
 
Now, I almost fell out of my chair when you wrote “a democrat centralist is now advocating them”. Who are you talking about? Surely, no one in a power position.

Most of Obama's major policy proposals were championed by republicans in the 90s (his healthcare bill looks a lot like what Newt proposed to counter Clinton). If that's not ruling as a centrist, I don't know what is.

And Newt's website is just telling people what they want to hear now. Look at his discussion cap and trade- it never discusses why his position has changed. He supported cap and trade in the 90s, he supported cap and trade in 2007 under Bush, BUT now its bad. He proposed a healthcare bill very much like Obamacare in the 90s, now that's bad. He has pulled away from most of the policies he used to support, and never discusses why. Almost all of the legislation Newt championed as speaker would be considered "socialist" by today's republican party.
 
Last edited:
Id like to see short list of Obama proposals that have been championed by repubs. Start with $800b stimulous.
 
Id like to see short list of Obama proposals that have been championed by repubs. Start with $800b stimulous.

Bush sold his tax cuts as economic stimulus (which is why they weren't permanent), price tag of over 1 trillion. He also enacted the more targeted TARP stimulus to prop banks up and began a bailout of GM.

The health care bill Obama designed was full of ideas proposed by right-of-center health care experts. Here is Stuart Butler of the Heritage Foundation in 2003 http://www.heritage.org/research/testimony/laying-the-groundwork-for-universal-health-care-coverage Of course, we shouldn't forget that the ideas in the federal bill that passed were lifted from Romney's.

Cap and trade was pushed for and originally signed into law (clean air act) by H.W. Bush, and was the standard Republican approach to pollution regulation for at least a decade. The platforms produced by McCain pushed for cap and trade, it was a common point with Obama's platform. Here is Gingrich http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front..._source=ExactTarget&utm_campaign=pressRelease as recently as 2007 supporting the idea.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ParticleGrl said:
... I think Newt comes across as an opportunist who says what he thinks you want to hear. ...
That's how he comes across to me. Not that that differentiates him from any other political candidate.
 
ParticleGrl said:
Bush sold his tax cuts as economic stimulus (which is why they weren't permanent), price tag of over 1 trillion. He also enacted the more targeted TARP stimulus to prop banks up and began a bailout of GM.

The health care bill Obama designed was full of ideas proposed by right-of-center health care experts. Here is Stuart Butler of the Heritage Foundation in 2003 http://www.heritage.org/research/testimony/laying-the-groundwork-for-universal-health-care-coverage Of course, we shouldn't forget that the ideas in the federal bill that passed were lifted from Romney's.

Cap and trade was pushed for and originally signed into law (clean air act) by H.W. Bush, and was the standard Republican approach to pollution regulation for at least a decade. The platforms produced by McCain pushed for cap and trade, it was a common point with Obama's platform. Here is Gingrich http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front..._source=ExactTarget&utm_campaign=pressRelease as recently as 2007 supporting the idea.

By way of demonstrating "major policy proposals were championed by Republicans in the 90s" Bush's income tax cuts are said to be same as the Recovery Act spending in 2009?

Cap and trade programs used for SO2 emissions from power plants, for which the cost of scrubbing technology is well understood, is the same as a 1400 page cap and trade bill on CO2 emissions across the entire US economy with innumerable cut outs and waivers to special interests?

The healthcare comparisons also neglect the aspect of federalism, a key difference between Republicans and Democrats: what is often appropriate and legal for states is not so for the federal government.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ParticleGrl said:
The health care bill Obama designed was full of ideas proposed by right-of-center health care experts. Here is Stuart Butler of the Heritage Foundation in 2003 http://www.heritage.org/research/testimony/laying-the-groundwork-for-universal-health-care-coverage
Full of ideas? Such as?

Stuart Butler said:
Is the individual mandate at the heart of "ObamaCare" a conservative idea? Is it constitutional? And was it invented at The Heritage Foundation? In a word, no.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinio...individual-mandate-reform-heritage/52951140/1So I'm back at TARP, and only TARP, as an idea shared at all widely by both parties, and even then by no means equally. Recall that the 1st pass at TARP failed because of a lack of Republican support.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are you saying the individual mandate was never embraced by Republicans?