Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Who does he bully?
Please say this isn't about him and his wife 20 years ago.
He's a coward because he wants the audience to be able to respond? If he was a coward, you'd think he'd be worried about that.
The cowards are the liberal mob, who want to prevent people from participating in the debates by showing their support.
He's a coward because he'd rather win on red meat thrown to the audience, than actually discussing the issues.
If he had good character, there would be lies circulating about him like there were about Sarah Palin, and a concerted attack meant to bankrupt and humiliate him and his family.
I'm grateful they found something real to attach to.
If he had good character, there would be lies circulating about him like there were about Sarah Palin, and a concerted attack meant to bankrupt and humiliate him and his family.
I'm grateful they found something real to attach to.
That's why the left and the media are so keen to have Gingrich up against Obama. He's easier to take down.
If he had good character, there would be lies circulating about him like there were about Sarah Palin, and a concerted attack meant to bankrupt and humiliate him and his family.
I'm grateful they found something real to attach to.
That's why the left and the media are so keen to have Gingrich up against Obama. He's easier to take down.
If he had good character, there would be lies circulating about him like there were about Sarah Palin, and a concerted attack meant to bankrupt and humiliate him and his family.
I'm grateful they found something real to attach to.
That's why the left and the media are so keen to have Gingrich up against Obama. He's easier to take down.
^^^^
The drool is dripping down their chins.
He's a coward because he doesn't want to answer questions. He just wants to attack the press and have a rabid mob cheering him on.He's a coward because he wants the audience to be able to respond? If he was a coward, you'd think he'd be worried about that.
The cowards are the liberal mob, who want to prevent people from participating in the debates by showing their support.
Lol...he's so smart, I think he's a shoo-in...not saying I love him, he's not a good conservative, but I think he's figured out how to manage the people and the press:
"
Mr. Gingrich, a former House speaker, on Tuesday morning threatened not participate in any future debates with audiences that have been instructed to be silent. That was the case on Monday, when Brian Williams of NBC News asked the audience of about 500 people who assembled for a debate in Tampa to hold their applause until the commercial breaks."
Hold their applause...a nice way to effectively *silence* the appearance of support for an un-fave of the lib mob...
Gingrich Threatens to Skip Debates if Audiences Can't Participate - NYTimes.com
If he had good character, there would be lies circulating about him like there were about Sarah Palin, and a concerted attack meant to bankrupt and humiliate him and his family.
I'm grateful they found something real to attach to.
That's why the left and the media are so keen to have Gingrich up against Obama. He's easier to take down.
what lies were told about sarah?
and saying she wasn't very smart wasn't a lie.
If he had good character, there would be lies circulating about him like there were about Sarah Palin, and a concerted attack meant to bankrupt and humiliate him and his family.
I'm grateful they found something real to attach to.
That's why the left and the media are so keen to have Gingrich up against Obama. He's easier to take down.
^^^^
The drool is dripping down their chins.
The NBC moderators asked questions about putting a man on MARS--then they went to sugar--it was absolutely RIDICULOUS.
Speaker Gingrich, would you put more tax dollars into the space race and commit to putting an American on Mars, instead of relying on the private sector?
Newt Gingrich
Well, the two are not incompatible. For example, most of the great breakthroughs in aviation in the '20s and '30s were as a result of prizes. Lindbergh flew to Paris for a $25,000 prize. I would like to see vastly more of the money spent encouraging the private sector into very aggressive experimentation. And I'd like a leaner NASA.
I don't think building a bigger bureaucracy and having a greater number of people sit in rooms and talk gets you there. But if we had a series of goals that we were prepared to offer prizes for, there's every reason to believe you have a lot of folks in this country and around the world who would put up an amazing amount of money and would make the space coast literally hum with activity because they'd be drawn to achieve these prizes.
Going back to the moon permanently, getting to Mars as rapidly as possible, building a series of space stations and developing commercial space, there are a whole series of things you can do that could be dynamic that are more than just better government bureaucracy. They're fundamentally leapfrogging into a world where you're incentivizing people who are visionaries and people in the private sector to invest very large amounts of money in finding very romantic and exciting futures.
I think a GSE for space exploration ought to be seriously considered I'm convinced that if NASA were a GSE, we probably would be on Mars today.
Certainly there is a lot of debate today about the housing GSEs, but I think it is telling that there is strong bipartisan support for maintaining the GSE model in housing. There is not much support for the idea of removing the GSE charters from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. And I think it's clear why. The housing GSEs have made an important contribution to homeownership and the housing finance system. We have a much more liquid and stable housing finance system than we would have without the GSEs. And making homeownership more accessible and affordable is a policy goal I believe conservatives should embrace. Millions of people have entered the middle class through building wealth in their homes, and there is a lot of evidence that homeownership contributes to stable families and communities. These are results I think conservatives should embrace and want to extend as widely as possible. So while we need to improve the regulation of the GSEs, I would be very cautious about fundamentally changing their role or the model itself.