Sunday, November 20, 2011

Newt Gingrich "Answering the Attacks" on global warming, cap and trade

Newt Gingrich is going to new lengths to quash criticism by climate skeptics. A new page on seeks to “Answer the Attacks” on the former House Speaker, including his apparent flip-flop on the issues of global warming and cap and trade.

According to the new webpage:

Newt does not believe there is a settled scientific conclusion about whether industrial development has dramatically contributed to a warming of the atmosphere.   
Newt absolutely opposes “cap and trade” as well as any system of taxing carbon emissions. He testified before Congress against it in 2009 and led a grassroots effort while the Chairman of American Solutions to block its passage in the House and Senate. 
Newt believes that cap and trade would kill hundreds of thousands of American jobs, cause electricity and fuel prices to skyrocket, and make America poorer.  In contrast, Gingrich believes the best way to protect the environment is through markets, incentives, and entrepreneurs, who quite often are deploying innovative new technologies.
As for the question of whether industrial development has dramatically contributed to a warming of the atmosphere, Newt has noted there is no settled scientific conclusion.  Many scientists believe it is the case.  Others do not.  But this unsettled scientific question has nothing to do with the best approach to protecting our environment, which is always markets, incentives, and entrepreneurs creating better and more efficient products and services.

In “Answering the Attacks”, Newt Gingrich also makes a half hearted attempt to explain his 2007 television ad with Nancy Pelosi, which was sponsored by Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection:

Q: So why did Newt do the ad with Nancy Pelosi in 2007 calling for action to address climate change?
Newt does not believe there is a settled scientific conclusion about whether industrial development has dramatically contributed to a warming of the atmosphere.
Through his entire career, Newt has supported pro-market, pro-entrepreneur, innovative solutions to our environmental challenges, which he believes are superior to the liberal pro-bureaucracy, pro-tax, pro-regulation approach to the environment. 
Newt believes that conservatives cannot be absent from the conversation about the environment and instead that conservatives must offer and explain why conservative solutions are better. Unfortunately, the attempt to get that message out through the ad with Nancy Pelosi failed.  On November 8, 2011, Newt told FOX News’ Bret Baier that doing that commercial with Pelosi was “probably the dumbest single thing I’ve ever done”.
Newt will continue to oppose the Democrats’ destructive cap-and-trade and carbon tax proposals, continue to support expanded domestic oil and gas drilling, and continue to fight for a fundamental replacement of the job-killing Environmental Protection Agency with an Environmental Solutions Agency.

Photo by Gage Skidmore


  1. Who is the guy with the newspaper on your sidebar? Is that a second photo of Newt?

  2. That would be Buddy Roemer, the Republican presidential candidate running on a platform of campaign finance reform:

  3. Thanks! Don't forget Gary Johnson and Bachmann...

  4. You should include Newt's comments from the December 4th Huckabee debate.

    On Huckabee's debate forum - Oklahoma AG went on to ask Gingrich - *"Was it "dumb" because it was bad politics or "dumb" because it was bad policy?"*.

    Gingrich responded, - "Well first of all what I said there, I think was ACCURATE! I was trying to make a case about a conservative environmentalism".
    "It was largely dumb because frankly, she became so radioactive, that it was impossible for any conservative to be in the same set, and not have everybody go "that's crazy" and so they never heard the message."

    So ABOUT HIS ANSWER, basically, he is saying it was only dumb because Nancy Pelosi's negatives overshadowed the message! What was "ACCURATE"? ....and what was the "message" that we're all "missing" because of Nancy Pelosi being on the set?

    Here's the gist of what Newt said during the commercial. -
    "We do agree our country must take action to address climate change" (so it is clear that he is still buying into the scam of global warming)......He went on to say - "If enough of us DEMAND ACTION FROM OUR LEADERS, we can spark the innovation we need" (So he wants us to "demand" from our Government what actions exactly?)

    Go to to find out what THEIR commercial was promoting. ....and remember that Gingrich didn't disagree with the message!

    "We Can Solve It" changed it name to "The Climate Reality Project", a group STILL DIRECTED BY GORE!
    The group states on its website it seeks to oppose “manmade climate change.”
    Just like We Can Solve It, Gore’s Reality Project is partnered with Earth, which promotes climate change legislation. It boasts how it helped create the environment for the passage of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act and many other environmental laws.

    The group’s mission statement read, “The goal is to build a movement that creates the political will to solve the climate crisis — in part through repowering America with 100 percent of its electricity from clean energy sources within 10 years.”
    The list of actions from We Can Solve It’s website in 2008 included: “Signing the petition for A GLOBAL TREATY on climate change. Urging the press to ask about global warming. Asking lenders to consider climate impact when funding new coal plants.”

    Also, In a video interview with Human Events magazine IN MAY 2010!!!, the former speaker not only defended his commercial with Pelosi, but he said he would do it again even after the 2009 e-mail hacking scandal raised serious questions about the science behind so-called global warming.
    “If they offer the chance to, then sure,” Gingrich replied, when asked if he would film the commercial another time despite the climate science controversy.
    “I would do a commercial with Al Gore,” he further stated!

    Again this was a VIDEO interview. You an watch it on youtube. (I did)