ARGville

Chewing politics and current events one bite-size chunk at a time
Opinions about current events, politics, religion, pop culture, and society.
And the occasional comment on soccer, the world's game.

 

Bookmark this page | Tag to del.icio.us | Add to Technorati Favorites


Our discussion forum is open for business. Come say hello. 



Sunday, November 11, 2007

 

I don't trust Newt

global warmingBy VictorM:

I had to take a double take, scratch my eyes, check the calendar to make sure this was not April 1, and I'm still skeptical. My first reaction after reading this interview with Newt Gingrich was: "what does he have up his sleeve?"

Now, for some answers from the evil man himself:

Do you think that we should preserve the environment primarily for economic reasons or moral ones?

First of all, I don't think that you preserve the environment. The environment is constantly changing, constantly evolving. But I think that you want to nurture the environment and protect the environment from undue damage largely for moral reasons. It's part of our quality of life, and part of our relationship to a larger world. We ourselves are diminished when the environment is diminished.

Who do you think is to blame for these problems?

The human race. We have been very, very successful at using resources to make our lives longer, healthier, wealthier, and with greater choices. One of the side effects has been that we've had a bigger and bigger impact on the environment as we've grown more and more capable, particularly in manufacturing and agriculture...

Do you think that it's been a mistake for conservatives to pooh-pooh environmental concerns as so much woolly tree-hugging?

Yes. Absolutely. It's been a very significant mistake for conservatives to not recognize that Americans are overwhelmingly committed to the environment as a value. We need an environmental policy which is proactive and provides leadership both in America and around the world.

Since you're speaking to a liberal audience, why do you think that liberals should be bipartisan on an issue they've basically owned?

They can own the issue forever and get nothing done. Or they can reach out and decide to have a bipartisan discussion and get something done. It's up to them to decide. Because it's very unlikely that we're going to solve the environment on a purely partisan basis.

It is obvious to me that Newt has decided to cut some losses. He knows that the conservative position is a total loser on this issue, so he's trying to salvage some of their disgusting agenda. His position is designed to pull the global warming issue more to the middle. His ideas and suggestions denote a shift from where conservatives have been on this issue, which is a step in the right direction, but falls far short of what we need to do.

Frankly, we should tell him to go shove his "concern" up is selfish and greedy ass.


Comments:
FUCK FUCK FUCK

Sorry. Newt brings out the worst in me. The man is insufferable!
 
Newt's inermittent sanity and/or intelligence has created a buffon image hard to take seriously.
 
Newt's inermittent sanity and/or intelligence has created a buffon image hard to take seriously.
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



You are not on our Home Page.
Click here to return to ARGville's Home Page

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

 

Site Map
Home Page
Discussion Forum
Relationship Advice
Humor


Blogroll
(will open new window)


Blogroll Me!

Big, Bad Monsters






Contact Us | Resource Links

Online Shopping Deals URL.biz - Relationships
A Designated SinglesStop.com