The Destruction of “Moonbat” Newt Gingrich


As I write this, Mark Levin is on a serious rampage on his show about the state of the Republican primary, and how there is a full court press to literally destroy Newt Gingrich.

“Don’t count me among them,” he says.

Mark is right.

If Romney, or any other candidate, wants my vote, they will have to convince me to vote for them, not against someone else. But what’s worse, is that Romney has no place calling anyone out for being a non-conservative.

Quotes from Romney:

Oct. 25, 1994, Mitt Romney, trying to distance himself from conservatives so he could run against Ted Kennedy: “I was an independent during Reagan/Bush. ”

He also said during that race he would “never waver” on a woman’s right to choose, and he made that decision because of watching his mother work for woman’s rights in the 1970′s, and that someone he “met” had a botched abortion, and so it made him realize that abortion must be legal. Hmmm…sounds suspiciously like how he became pro-life. He met someone, or witnessed some case….why is one more compelling than the other? The person he met is more compelling than his mother?

Then in 2002, Romney says he’s a “progressive moderate” Republican. That’s HIM saying that, on video. Six years later, the man is trying to win the Republican nomination for president.

The reason I bring up these quotes from Romney, is that he is the one trying to convince us that Gingrich really wasn’t a Reagan advocate. Why should I listen to him, someone who tried repeatedly to distance himself from conservatives?

Further, as Levin said, Gingrich did more to further the conservative movement during that time and into the 1990′s than almost anyone except Reagan. When Gingrich was fighting Democrats, Romney was distancing himself from conservatives. This is not to say Gingrich isn’t wishy washy. He’s not my first choice, but I won’t sit by while he gets destroyed ala Palin by our own party.

Last, and perhaps most important because I am an expert on one line of attack from the Romneyites, let’s talk about the moon base. 

I’ve reported for Gannett on events near Kennedy Space Center for the last 6 years, and my military experience includes a background with NASA and Air Force space launches.  I’ve written two books about the history of the space program, and I’ve met or interviewed dozens of astronauts.

Now Romney is taking a line of attack that having a goal of a moon base is somehow crazy. How far some of these blog commenters and advocates of Romney have fallen.

Yes, you can disagree and argue on if spending money on a moon base is a good idea or even viable with our debt, but calling someone crazy for wanting to see us there is just a personal, political attack. 

I am one of those “crazy” people who knows for a fact that not only is a moon base possible, its feasible financially. Not just to “inspire” the next generation, although that is a nice side effect, but because it’s a national defense issue.

Trust me, it is not science fiction to think of China on the moon in two decades, with some kind of weapon aimed directly at us or our satellites, or using that to further their space technology far beyond what we can dream of now. It is vitally important we don’t let that happen.

How do we pay for it? Well first, there will be a NASA budget. That is the first issue. Moving money in that budget away from “muslim outreach” and toward a new goal is a good thing. But beyond that, there are many ways to partner with private companies and have much of the cost taken care of.

Again, this isn’t science fiction. Eventually, the moon could be mined for a type of non-polluting nuclear fuel. It is in great abundance all over the moon’s surface, and could change our energy problems forever. This can all be done within our life time, and with a president leading on the issue, it could be done in a couple decades. 

Can you imagine having an almost limitless nuclear fuel that is non-polluting? Would that be valuable to a private company? Would it be in the interest of the United States to forever get rid of our dependence on oil? Would it be in our interest to prevent China or even Russia or Japan from getting there before us? What if they get there, start mining it, and we don’t even have the capability to get to the moon?

We can get back to the moon, cut taxes, cut the debt, reduce unemployment, grow our economy, and chew gum at the same time. We’re the United States of America! It’s not crazy to strive for all these things, it’s visionary.

Gingrich might have sat on a couch with Nancy Pelosi, but he’s more conservative than Romney, and he’s definitely not crazy.

 

 

 

 

 



RSS feed

9 Comments Leave a comment

If NoBama can give $529 million

maddawg (Diary) Thursday, January 26th at 7:26PM EST (link)

to build a car in Finland, we can surely build a base on the moon. Maybe when that base is built, we can deport the “undocumented workers” there :-)

maddawg
“No man in the wrong can stand up against a fellow that’s in the right an keeps on a-comin.” -creed of Texas Ranger Captain W. J. McDonald

 

The problem with the Moon...

rhampton (Diary) Thursday, January 26th at 9:56PM EST (link)

…is that it will require big government and big spending, even if private companies are involved. Already NASA’s 2013 budget ($16.5 billion) is 7.8% ($1.3 billion) less than 2012, and funding for the James Webb telescope has been on life support for months. The SLS rocket, which NASA would use to get to the Moon, won’t have its first test flight until 2017, and its first manned flight until 2021.

Now consider that since 1991 when NASA received 1.0% of the federal budget, its funding has declined (as a percentage) almost every year, and by 2013 it will fall at or below 0.5%. In contrast, the NASA budget in 1962 was 1.2%, peaked in 1966 at 4.4%, before descending to 2.4% with the Moon landing in 1969.

To fulfill Newt’s grand vision, I suspect we would need to average a NASA budget equivalent to 2.0% of the current federal budget for every year of his hypothetical two term presidency. That’s 4 times present funding levels – and if Newt wants to make drastic budget cuts, then the actual percentage of the budget would be much higher.

In short, unless Newt can first provide a detailed fiscal plan to fund his dream while reducing the federal budget that can pass the skeptics of the Congress and the Tea Party, the moon will belong to the Chinese for at least the next generation (provided they can avoid a severe economic reversal in the months/years ahead).

I disagree

xJesterx (Diary) Sunday, January 29th at 1:16PM EST (link)

Sorry, but I just disagree with you.

You are like many who take the government’s income as a zero sum game. If I spend one dollar here, I have to cut one dollar here or raise taxes there.

I assume this is what you mean by saying it will take more “big government”.

The current NASA budget is WAISTED. I mean seriously, truely, being thrown away. I have a lot of insider knowledge on this. With someone who wants to shake up things, the entire budget could be redirected.

Second, and most importantly, we will have the money to do this when our economy comes back. Someone with a Reagan type vision who is willing to cut taxes in the face of people saying, “that will ‘cost’ the oovernment too much” will get the economy pumping.

We don’t have to be a country in decline, and a philosophy that thinks we need huge budget increases to get to the moon just doesn’t understand what is currently going on there. (No offense, but it’s a fact. We do NOT need huge budget increases to do this, besides, like I said, it’s not a zero sum game).

Some specifics, please

rhampton (Diary) Monday, January 30th at 9:41PM EST (link)

This is the projected NASA budget FY 2013 (from Feb. 2011), which would be the first year for President Gingrich’s first term. Where would you reallocate resources and how much more would be needed to start a Lunar Colony program?

————————–
5,017 Sciences
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
…1,821 Earth Science
…1,429 Planetary Science
…..758 Astrophysics
…..632 Heliophysics
…..375 James Webb Telescope
————————–
569 Aeronautics
————————–
1,024 Space Technology
————————–
3,949 Exploration
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
…2,810 Human Ex. Capabilities
…..850 Commercial Spaceflight
…..289 Exp. R&D
————————–
4,347 Space Operations
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
……80 Space Shuttle
…2,960 International Space Station
…1,307 Space & Flight Support
————————–
138 Education
————————–
3,192 Cross-Agency Support
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
…2,403 Center Management & Operations
…..789 Agency Management & Operations
————————–
450 Construction & Environmental Compliance & Restoration
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
…..389 Construction of Facilities
…… 66 Enviromnental Compliance & Restoration
————————–
38 Inspector General
================
18,724 TOTAL

And how much would a heavy lift rocket system cost? How many would you need? How much would it cost to construct a colony? How much would it cost to operate? Would it be able to generate part/all of its intensive resource requirements (air, food, energy, etc.)?

My best guess is that it’s at least a $50 billion a year project all by itself, and that it couldn’t even be started in earnest until Newt’s second term.

 
 
 

Blue moon of Kentucky keep on shinin' . . .

redmymind (Diary) Thursday, January 26th at 10:05PM EST (link)

I like the moon base idea, if for no other reason

avgjo (Diary) Friday, January 27th at 1:24AM EST (link)

than the fact such big ideas run counter to the current sentiment that America is in decline. There are so many good assumptions in Gingrich’s idea, my spirit is warmed. Among them, a great economy, a truly educated populace and a sense of purpose for our country to assert our dominance worldwide once again.

I wish tonight, when they were knocking him for his idea, Gingrich had replied, ‘its a shame my friends on this stage seem to have accepted the narrative that America’s best days are behind her and her decline is now in place….’. He wasn’t at his best tonight, but I love his big thinking. That’s what has characterized our country and it is all but gone, especially among so-called ‘conservatives’.

Ceterum autem censeo, Obamaecuram esse delendam.

It’s the morality, stupid.

 

Mark Levin

Archer (Diary) Friday, January 27th at 2:24AM EST (link)

I was very appreciative of Mark Levin, as someone who doesn’t support Gingrich to get the republican nomination, showing the willingness to step forward to defend Gingrich against this organized smear campaign from the republican establishment and for calling out the Republicans who are doing the smearing.

Lord knows Gingrich isn’t a perfect person, much less a perfect candidate. But pretending he was against Reagan, didn’t organize the few conservatives in the House republican caucus against the moderate/liberal republican leaders, didn’t spend hundreds of hours on c-span defending Reagan, and whatever else has been part of the smear campaign is lunatic.

As much as I am grateful to Levin for the defense of the truth in this smear campaign, I’m irritated at the personalities at Fox News for promoting it. I mean their guest commentators like Rove and Ingram are Romney supporters but Greg Gutfeld is on shows with supposed real journalists who don’t bother to insert truth when Greg supports the smear by saying Gingrich wasn’t really there and wasn’t an important part of what happened during the Reagan years.

I never thought I’d see the day when National Review is printing smears against economic conservatives and supposedly conservative commentators are promoting storylines which are obviously not true to anyone who has been a conservative political junkie (and not an amnesiac) or anyone who has an internet connection and can google “Conservative Opportunity Society”.

My political inbox is archerbowman2012 at hotmail dot com

If there is to be a late entrant, draft Levin!

SoFiMil (Diary) Friday, January 27th at 6:15AM EST (link)

..

www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com

 
 

Romney would support a moon base . . .

redmymind (Diary) Friday, January 27th at 3:11AM EST (link)

if he felt it would be the popular thing to do. That’s as “deep” as ole weather-vane Mitt gets. Ironic how he tried to pin Newt with saying just what folks wanted to hear in each state. Mitt is a despicable hypocrite who would say or do anything to get elected. Now, I don’t know much about moon bases or space exploration, but I sure as hell wouldn’t want the Chinese or the Russians to beat us to the punch!