Newt Gingrich

Gingrich: Say, that gold standard looks like a pretty good idea

Published January 19, 2012 | By dditton

Could Newt Gingrich steal some of Ron Paul’s thunder to generate enough support to beat Mitt Romney in South Carolina? It might be difficult to swing Paul voters to another Republican candidate, even in the general election, but it looks like Gingrich plans to give it a try. Daniel Halper at The Weekly Standard reports on Gingrich’s decision to raise the issue of a return to “hard money” and the gold standard:

“We need to get our house in order. And we need to vaccinate ourselves against foreign contagion. The correct answer to the Euro is not to spend more American money propping up the Germans who prop up Southern Europe. The correct answer is to figure how we seal our banks off; how we make sure we protect ourselves and then say to the Europeans: you have a problem and you need to solve it.

“Part of our approach ought to be to reestablish something Ronald Reagan did in 1981 and that is to have a Commission on Gold to look at the whole concept of how do we get back to hard money.

Read the rest at Hot Air.

Comment on "Gingrich: Say, that gold standard looks like a pretty good idea" in the Forum

Posted in National Issues |

Tagged gold standard, Newt Gingrich

CNN Debate Draws Attention to EMP Threat

Published December 3, 2011 | By dditton

From The Heritage Foundation:

Talk of an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack at the Republican National Security Debate, hosted on CNN by The Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute, sparked CNN to interview Heritage’s James Carafano last week to discuss the devastating impacts of an EMP. Unfortunately, the United States remains unprotected from the effects of an EMP.

As the video explains, an EMP is a high-intensity burst of electromagnetic energy caused by a rapid acceleration of charged particles. An EMP can disrupt all electronic devices within its zone of impact by burning circuits and immobilizing electronic components and systems. It addition, the EMP would flow through the electricity transmission network, damaging power distribution centers and lines.

Experts have identified that detonating a singular nuclear weapon at a high altitude would create an EMP large enough to envelop the entire continental United States. The nuclear weapon could be delivered by a long-range ballistic missile from Iran, China, Russia, or North Korea. Even a short-range nuclear-tipped missile launched off U.S. shorelines in international waters could cause a devastating EMP effect to a region.

Terrorists could also detonate a non-nuclear or improvised EMP device that would have the same disastrous effects on a localized scale. Though it would need to be detonated close to the target, this type of device could be made from readily available or manufactured materials and is easy to hide and maneuver. This makes it all the more worrisome that our critical infrastructure is not protected.

Read the rest at The Heritage Foundation.

Comment on "CNN Debate Draws Attention to EMP Threat" in the Forum

Posted in National Issues |

Tagged EMP, Newt Gingrich

Newt: Tea-Party Candidate?

Published November 27, 2011 | By dditton

From National Review:

In the growing ranks of candidates who have soared to the top of the polls as the not–Mitt Romney contender, long-time Washington insider Newt Gingrich appears at first glance to be one of the least likely tea-party crusaders yet. As Mark Meckler, co-founder and national coordinator of Tea Party Patriots, puts it, “He’s not a great not-Romney candidate, because he has flipflopped on a lot of the major issues.”

Chris Chocola, president of the fiscally conservative Club for Growth, describes Gingrich’s record as a mix of “hiccups” and impressive accomplishments. “Newt Gingrich is an advocate of limited government and free-market solutions, except when he’s not,” Chocola says. “He has overall a very good record, but he has some blemishes. He was a big advocate of [Medicare] Part D. He flirted with climate change when he appeared in a commercial with Nancy Pelosi.”

Read the rest at National Review.

Comment on "Newt: Tea-Party Candidate?" in the Forum

Posted in National Issues |

Tagged Newt Gingrich

Team Ryan Responds to Newt

Published May 15, 2011 | By dditton

From National Review:

Conor Sweeney, Rep. Paul Ryan’s spokesman, tells National Review Online that he is not worried about Newt Gingrich’s comments on Meet the Press. Ryan’s budget, he says, “remains the only serious proposal put forward on either end on Pennsylvania Avenue that saves Medicare.”

“The solutions offered by Chairman Ryan and advanced by House Republicans make no changes to Medicare for those in and near retirement, while offering a strengthened, personalized program that future generations can count on when they retire,” Sweeney says. “Far from claims of radicalism, the gradual, common-sense Medicare reforms ensure that no senior will be forced to reorganize their lives because of government’s mistakes. The most ‘radical’ course of action on Medicare is continue to cling to the unsustainable status quo.”

“Serious leaders,” he adds, without naming names, “owe seniors specific solutions to avert Medicare’s looming collapse.”

Posted in National Issues |

Tagged Medicare, Newt Gingrich, Paul Ryan, POTUS 2012

Newt Tacks Left, Slams Ryan’s Medicare Plan

Published May 15, 2011 | By dditton

From National Review:

Newt Gingrich’s appearance on “Meet the Press” today could leave some wondering which party’s nomination he is running for. The former speaker had some harsh words for Paul Ryan’s (and by extension, nearly every House Republican’s) plan to reform Medicare, calling it “radical.”

“I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering,” he said when asked about Ryan’s plan to transition to a “premium support” model for Medicare. “I don’t think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for a free society to operate.”

As far as an alternative, Gingrich trotted out the same appeal employed by Obama/Reid/Pelosi — for a “national conversation” on how to “improve” Medicare, and promised to eliminate ‘waste, fraud and abuse,’ etc.

“I think what you want to have is a system where people voluntarily migrate to better outcomes, better solutions, better options,” Gingrich said. Ryan’s plan was simply “too big a jump.”

He even went so far as to compare it the Obama health-care plan.”I’m against Obamacare, which is imposing radical change, and I would be against a conservative imposing radical change.”

In another surprising move, Gingrich also reiterated his previous support for a “variation of the individual mandate” for health care. “I believe all of us — and this is going to be a big debate — I believe all of us have a responsibility to help pay for health care,” he said, insisting there is “a way to do it that make most libertarians relatively happy.”

“It’s a system that allows people to have a range of choices that are designed by the economy,” he said. “I don’t think having a free rider system in [health care] is any more appropriate than having a free rider system in any other part of the economy.”

Posted in National Issues |

Tagged Newt Gingrich, POTUS 2012

Newt Gingrich’s Rapidly Self-Limiting Campaign Defends the Individual Mandate

Published May 15, 2011 | By dditton

From RedState:

Newt Gingrich appeared on Meet the Press this morning and said two things that won’t exactly endear him to the Tea Party crowd or the reform minded movement sweeping the GOP.

First, he endorsed the individual mandate and said he would not bash Mitt Romney over the individual mandate.

Second, he went after Paul Ryan’s proposal to reform Medicare. Your mileage may vary on Ryan’s plan, but he is both offering up one and using the free market, individual choice approach favored by conservatives.

Newt was not happy with the approach.

Gingrich is already going to have to overcome the apprehensiveness of evangelicals and women in the primary. To also have to overcome the free marketers’ concerns may prove problematic.

I’m still struggling to figure out what Newt’s natural constituency is. He seems to want to be the ideas guy, but that really amounts to being a conservative technocrat. If Daniels enters and Mitt is there too, it is a crowded field for the technocrats to fight over.

Time will tell. The transcript of the related remarks is below the fold.

Endorsing individual mandate:

GINGRICH: well, i agree that all of us have a responsibility to help pay for health care. and i think there are ways to do it that make most libertarians relatively happy. i have said consistently we ought to have some requirement that you either have health insurance or you post a bond, or in some way, you indicate you’re going to be held accountable.

GREGORY: but that is the individual mandate, is it not?

GINGRICH: it’s a variation on it.

GREGORY: so you won’t use that issue against Mitt Romney?

GINGRICH: no

Calls Ryan plan “right wing social engineering”:

GREGORY: what about entitle snaents the trust fund is going to be depleted by 2024, five years earlier than predicted. do you think republicans ought to buck the public opposition and really move forward to completely change medicare, turn it into a voucher program where you give seniors some premium support so that they can go out and buy private insurance?

GINGRICH: i don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering. i don’t think imposing radical change from the right or the left is a very good way for free society to operate. i think we need a national conversation to get to a better medicare system with more choices for seniors, but there are specific things you can do. at the center for health transformation, which i helped found, which published a book called “stop paying the crooks.” we thought that was a clear enough, simple enough idea, even for washington. we, between medicare and medicaid, we pay between $70 billion and $120 billion a year to crooks. and ibm has agreed to help solve it, american express has agreed to help solve it, visa has agreed to help solve it. you can’t get anybody in this town to look at it. that’s almost a trillion dollars over a decade. so, there are things you can do to improve medicare –

GREGORY: but not what paul ryan is suggesting, completely change medicare?

GINGRICH: i think that is too big a jump. i think you want to have a system where people voluntarily migrate to better outcomes, better solutions, better options, not one where you suddenly impose upon the — i’m against obama care, which is imposing radical change, and i would be against a conservative imposing radical change.