And I hope the GOP listens to what he says.

That ain’t Newt.

I’ve heard Newt say, for instance, that in order to lessen foreign oil dependence we need to pursue domestic drilling and oil shale extraction, nuke, the cost-effective enviro-PC alternatives, conservation, etc. In that case, one of solutions is standing in favor of domestic drilling –he doesn’t have to bring a map to the debate with the layout for the new pipeline on it. Newt shouldn’t have to compose a 750 word essay on why nuke power is good for us. He only need point out that France gets upwards of 70% of her daily electricity from nukes and we’ve come a long way from safeless days of NH-TMI days under Prez Carter.

I think the Newt “big thinking” is more about redirection or refocusing of the debate than on the gritty little details and he does provide solutions. Unless you’re an office holder, gritty details ain’t your province anymore but that doesn’t mean you don’t promote solutions. Newt redirects the debate toward solid solutions -as exampled above.

I’m glad that Newt is still trying to redirect or refocus the debate toward good public policy and good solutions. Do we hear anything like that from Jim Wright? DennyHastert? TomFoley? BobDole? TrentLott? BillFrist? HowardBaker? TomDaschle? RobertByrd? GeorgeMitchell?

Moran writes: Newt “…never concerns himself with solutions…”? It’s my experience that people who argue what the problems are usually have the solutions and answers awaiting in the other hand. Newt’s no different speaking about politics or policy; the solutions are usually just a soundbite away.

Nah…

Regards,
Peter H.

Bright as he is, he has a bag of jumbled instincts which he reaches into at odd moments and chooses something labeled “stoopid.”