• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Newt "Moon Unit" Gingrich

misterman said:
Like caring for the poor and disabled and elderly and homeless? Ensuring that working people have a path to economic progress instead of falling behind the richest 1%? Stuff like that?

Nah, building houses on the Moon!
Click to expand...

This brings to mind a new gem from Mitt "Foot-in-Mouth" Romney: "I’m not concerned about the very poor."
 
AdamT said:
This brings to mind a new gem from Mitt "Foot-in-Mouth" Romney: "I’m not concerned about the very poor."
Click to expand...

LOL Didn't see that. He thinks they're okay because they have an "ample safety net" - which he likely wants to get rid of.
 
misterman said:
LOL Didn't see that. He thinks they're okay because they have an "ample safety net" - which he likely wants to get rid of.
Click to expand...

He followed that statement by saying that he is not concerned with the very rich. They are doing just fine. Make sure, when taking snippets of what people say, that you include everything necessary to keep the snippet in context.
 
kamikaze483 said:
He followed that statement by saying that he is not concerned with the very rich. They are doing just fine. Make sure, when taking snippets of what people say, that you include everything necessary to keep the snippet in context.
Click to expand...

How they hell does that matter?
 
misterman said:
How they hell does that matter?
Click to expand...

the very poor are very few, and there are existing programs to help them....
those programs won't go away.
the programs that NEED to go away are those that subsidize stupidity, laziness, and expectations of being cared for without any effort on your own.
Those "poor" who have cell phones, cable TV, and even cars, are NOT POOR....
 
kamikaze483 said:
He followed that statement by saying that he is not concerned with the very rich. They are doing just fine. Make sure, when taking snippets of what people say, that you include everything necessary to keep the snippet in context.
Click to expand...

Right, I didn't intend to say that he made a policy blunder -- it was just another stupid choice of words that will undoubtedly be picked up by opposition super PACs down the road.

[Cue ominous music] Deep Voiced Announcer: "Mitt Romney says that corporations are people, banks are good people, he likes firing people, and he doesn't care about the very poor."
 
UtahBill said:
the programs that NEED to go away are those that subsidize stupidity, laziness, and expectations of being cared for without any effort on your own.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about poor people now or Congress?
 
UtahBill said:
the very poor are very few, and there are existing programs to help them....
those programs won't go away.
Click to expand...

:lol: Sure they won't. The Republicans aren't constantly attacking them.
 
AdamT said:
Right, I didn't intend to say that he made a policy blunder -- it was just another stupid choice of words that will undoubtedly be picked up by opposition super PACs down the road.

[Cue ominous music] Deep Voiced Announcer: "Mitt Romney says that corporations are people, banks are good people, he likes firing people, and he doesn't care about the very poor."
Click to expand...

Unfortunately you are probably right. The commercials and the liberal media would probably phrase it that way. Though it is dishonest and unethical. Par for the course. Intelligent people would research and know that the statement was misleading and biased. But the commercial wouldn't be geared for intelligent people.

It is such a shame that things have to be dummed down and distorted in order for a politician to be re elected.
 
kamikaze483 said:
It is such a shame that things have to be dummed down and distorted in order for a politician to be re elected.
Click to expand...

Yes we have never seen the right do anything dishonest like tell people "Gore said he invented the internet", "Obama is a socialist/marxist/Muslim", "Obama wants to destroy America". The right is so honest :roll:
 
kamikaze483 said:
Unfortunately you are probably right. The commercials and the liberal media would probably phrase it that way. Though it is dishonest and unethical. Par for the course. Intelligent people would research and know that the statement was misleading and biased. But the commercial wouldn't be geared for intelligent people.

It is such a shame that things have to be dummed down and distorted in order for a politician to be re elected.
Click to expand...

So far those sorts of commercials have been put out primarily by conservative super PACs. I guess they know their audience. ;)
 
misterman said:
Like caring for the poor and disabled and elderly and homeless? Ensuring that working people have a path to economic progress instead of falling behind the richest 1%? Stuff like that?

Nah, building houses on the Moon!
Click to expand...

No one considers "social programs" to be a true measure of national greatness. Because social programs don't benefit everyone. they are not singular, focused efforts that EVERY American can be proud of .
 
Dayton3 said:
No one considers "social programs" to be a true measure of national greatness. Because social programs don't benefit everyone. they are not singular, focused efforts that EVERY American can be proud of .
Click to expand...

I disagree completely. A great nation is one that doesn't ignore it's poor and disadvantaged. I'm not saying all social programs are the answer to that, but overall, valuing every person and giving everyone a chance is what make us great.

Nobody considers houses on the Moon to be a true measure of national greatness, I'm pretty sure of that.
 
misterman said:
I disagree completely. A great nation is one that doesn't ignore it's poor and disadvantaged. I'm not saying all social programs are the answer to that, but overall, valuing every person and giving everyone a chance is what make us great.

Nobody considers houses on the Moon to be a true measure of national greatness, I'm pretty sure of that.
Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Impressive the way you sneeringly dismiss a lunar base by referring to it as "house on the moon".
 
Dayton3 said:
No one considers "social programs" to be a true measure of national greatness. Because social programs don't benefit everyone. they are not singular, focused efforts that EVERY American can be proud of .
Click to expand...
Newt "Moon Unit" Gingrich

Newt is just looking for a place to relocate his ex-wives!

A nation is only as strong as the commitment of its citizens to support it. When a nation turns its collective back on a significant segment of the population, it deprives itself of the potential leaders, teachers, doctors, nurses, entrepeneurs, etc that every nation requires.

It costs far less to provide "social programs" for this group than to "warehouse" millions of Americans in the prison system.

One should also remember that by 2050 the majority of American citizens will be from visible minorities (Hispanic, Black Oriental) - no political party interested in its long term survival should be going out of its way to alienate these groups.
 
Last edited:
jgarden47 said:
Newt "Moon Unit" Gingrich

Newt is just looking for a place to relocate his ex-wives!
Click to expand...

Newt Gingrich was a big supporter of the space program back when he had only been divorced once.

He and Marianne (wife #2) are pictured meeting with Dr. Robert Zubrin in "The Case for Mars".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom