About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Post 0

Sunday, January 9, 2005 - 10:52amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/09/gingrich.ap/index.html

I first heard Dr. Gingrich speak when I was a delegate to the 1991 White House Conference on Libraries and Information Services.  He is a principled advocate of Americanism.  As a professional historian, Dr. Gingrich understands American culture and the American political tradition. 
 
In 1992, I sent a contribution to GOPAC and received several audio tapes of Gingrich's dinner and fund raiser speeches.  Does he think it is shameful that welfare recipients sell food stamps for money to buy liquor and cigarettes?  No, he says, because these are Americans and you cannot give an American a negotiable instrument and then expect them not to negotiate it for what they want.  Is that not against the law?  Gingrich points out that most Americans see the posted speed limit as a "benchmark of opportunity."  Welfare reform, he says, has to rest on volunteerism, individual incentives and individual rewards.  With a touch of humor, Gingrich said that the fastest way to make an environmentalist out of a Republican is to put a toxic waste site next to a golf course. 
 
See www.newt.org for more information about this outstanding individual and why he represents the best values of the Republican Party.
 
** Before his election to Congress, he taught History and Environmental Studies at West Georgia College for eight years.  
** Newt is the longest-serving teacher of the Joint War Fighting course for Major Generals.  He also teaches officers from all five services as a Distinguished Visiting Scholar and Professor at the National Defense University.
 
 


Post 1

Sunday, January 9, 2005 - 12:52pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Michael: I thoroughly agree with you about the qualities of Newt Gingrich. I have tapes of his college lecture series, "Renewing American Civilization" that I taped from PBS in 1996. They were truly inspiring, accentuating the spirit that made America great.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/newtcollege.html

The ten topics that will be (i.e. were) covered in the course lectures are:
I. Understanding American Civilization
II. Personal Strength
III. Entrepreneurial Free Enterprise
IV. The Spirit of Invention and Discovery
V. Quality and Deming's Profound Knowledge
Vl. Applying American History
VII. Application #1: Economic Growth
VIII. Application #2: Health and Wellness
IX. Application #3: Inner Cities
X. Citizenship for the 21st Century


As I recall, he spoke nothing about a Christian tradition in these lectures but he is certainly talking up a storm about it these days. It seems that the Republicans have seized upon making religion the basis of their party's future success.

Again, as I recall, he was censured for the series because they were deemed to be part of financing a political campaign and not declared as such.

Sam


Post 2

Sunday, January 9, 2005 - 5:59pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Newt Gingrich is a career politician. He is talking up a storm about Christianity right now because it is politically expedient to do so. As President-Dictator of the American Imperium, Gingrich would likely prove to be worse than George W. Bush, because he is more intelligent and has more personal drive. Even if Bush actually does not restart the military draft, Gingrich surely would.

But I'm not going to lose any sleep over this issue. I predict that, in the 2008 Presidential Beauty Contest, the Democratic wing of the Imperial Police State Party will run Hilary Clinton, and the Republican wing will run John McCain. It will be such a divisive election campaign it will make the 2004 contest look polite by comparison.

It will also lay the foundations for some states to seriously consider secession, which I regard as being a good first step. All empires fall, this one will be no exception.

Ron Tobin
Philosophers Guild


Post 3

Sunday, January 9, 2005 - 8:20pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Ronald,

You wrote: “It will also lay the foundations for some states to seriously consider secession, which I regard as being a good first step.”

A first step to... another civil war with hundreds of thousands dead? Or will it be millions, this time? That you would suggest this over Hillary is inexplicable, until I read this: “All empires fall, this one will be no exception.” You WANT civil war and the destruction of The United States of America.

Jon


Post 4

Sunday, January 9, 2005 - 8:42pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jon, why do you think that secession would necessarily lead to a civil war? If the US government were to attempt to prevent secession by force wouldn't that be proof of its illegitimacy?

Post 5

Sunday, January 9, 2005 - 8:52pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Rick,

We’ll have to wait for Mexifornia for attempt a split to find out if I am right, or you.

Secession is illegitimate, (be it perpetrated by my neighborhood, my state or my region) not its forceful reversal. Splitting because you don’t like Hillary is no better than because you don’t like Abe—and the results will be the same. But maybe you are right…maybe history teaches us nothing and we will just have to wait and see what the outcome will be next time.

Jon

(Edited by Jon Letendre on 1/09, 10:33pm)
(Edited by Jon Letendre on 1/09, 10:40pm)


Post 6

Sunday, January 9, 2005 - 9:40pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Michael,
I've always found Newt to be interesting.  Thanks for the post.
Sam,
I found transcripts of the lecture series you mentioned here:
http://terrenceberres.com/ginren00.html

Found the "benchmark of opportunity" quote in lecture one.  Very funny.  Thanks!


Post 7

Monday, January 10, 2005 - 6:10amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Secession is illegitimate, (be it perpetrated by my neighborhood, my state or my region) not its forceful reversal. Splitting because you don’t like Hillary is no better than because you don’t like Abe—and the results will be the same.


What about splitting because you don't like King George?

Post 8

Monday, January 10, 2005 - 7:39amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jon writes:
Secession is illegitimate
Why? That looks to me like a quite arbitrary assertion. The US was set up as a voluntary union of independent States. When that union is no longer voluntary it is illegitimate. Up until the time of the War of Northern Aggression secession was widely understood to be a legitimate option. There was even the suggestion that northern states should be the ones to secede.

Post 9

Monday, January 10, 2005 - 7:41amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Splitting from King George is a great thing. There’s no comparison between freeing yourself from a king and “freeing” yourself so you can continue to own slaves, or “freeing” yourself from Newt or Hillary, or intentionally splitting up and destroying the greatest country on earth and mankind’s last great hope.

Jon


Post 10

Monday, January 10, 2005 - 8:02amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Perhaps we can learn something from the history of Texas - it is the only state that joined the union by the choice of its people and not by US annexation. It was first part of Mexico, then an independent Republic of Texas, only to be accepted into the union. The Texans didn't really care who was on the throne - as long as they had the freedom to live the life that they wanted. Obviously they believed that joining US was the best thing. I certainly believe so. 

(As an adopted Texan, I am shuddering to think Texas as part of Mexico or another obscure American country.) 


Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.