The Valley Patriot was invited to sit
with Former Speaker of the House and
presidential candidate Newt Gingrich.
Valley Patriot President Tom Duggan, Tea
Party Columnist Christine Morabito and
College student Justess Bowles sat with
Speaker Gingrich and picked his brain for
more than a half hour on November 11th, a
week prior to his announcement of his
policy on immigration and border
enforcement.
Christine Morabito: In
your 21st Century contract with America,
(very similar to the one in 1994 that
successfully decreased unemployment,
creating jobs), you call for citizen
involvement. How do you see that
manifesting itself?
Gingrich: Well, there
are three layers of citizen involvement
and, in this sense, the contract is much
more complicated than in 1994. There is
still a Legislative section, but unlike
94, the current contract also
has a day one section of
executive orders. The current contract is
for the presidency, not the speakership.
It also has a training program for new
presidential appointees, so that they are
really, truly change agents. And finally,
it has a citizen component. The citizen
component has 3 layers.
I always tell people, I dont ask
them to be for me, I ask them to be with
me. Because, if they are for me, they are
going to vote and say sure, I hope
Newt fixes it. Thats
impossible, I cant fix it by
myself.
So, the first layer is, I want people to
be actively engaged.
The second layer is building an
interactive system, so that the people
can give us feedback for eight solid
years. We dont know how to do this
yet, but we are talking about Google,
Facebook, YouTube and all of these
different techniques. If you do things on
this scale, the way we want to do them,
or the way you want to do them, we are
going to make mistakes but we are going
to learn new things, or there will be new
technologies emerging to help us.
The more we can build a genuine citizen
information system the better. Its
really two ways. This is what makes it
hard. We know how to send signals out. I
have one million three hundred thousand
people on Twitter. So, I can tweet and its
not hard. But what if 1,300,000 people
write me ?
So, we dont
really know today how to structure the
information flow so that its 2-way.
But I want it to be genuine. I also want
it to be multi-way so that, as you are
doing with the Valley Patriot, if people
decide they want to get together for a
local project, then people in that area
can get together virtually on the
internet and have the equivalent of an
old fashioned town hall meeting. So,
these are the things we are exploring.
The third layer is, I think very, very
powerful, and profound. If you are going
to take Washington bureaucracy and
enforce the 10th Amendment and shrink the
Washington bureaucracy, you have to grow
citizenship to fill the vacuum. So, for
example, a key part of our education
reform is simple: Parents have to get
involved again.
The reason the PTA is in decline as an
ineffective force, and the reason why
parents gave up, is that we have
bureaucratized the schools. So parents
are told that their opinion doesnt
matter; We actually dont want
you here.
All you have to go back to is recognizing
that the number one characteristic of
children who learn is that they have
relatives who care. In my case, it was my
grandmother who decided that I would be
her student. She taught me how to read by
the time I was 4, so I entered school
with a huge net advantage. So, its
re-growing citizenship as the 3rd part of
the movement.
Duggan: I want to talk
about the border for a minute. We had a
congressional candidate in Nikki Tsongass
district, (Sam Meas) a Republican who
talked about an idea that I felt was just
fascinating and I wanted you to address,
if you could. He said that if we took the
illegal aliens and we tracked the
expenses for healthcare, education or
whatever, and we also tracked what
countries that they were coming from, we
should do is bill the home country for
the services that we are providing for
their citizens. And if they dont
want to pay for the expenses that we are
spending for their citizens, we should
take it out of the foreign aid that we
give to them. I was just wondering if you
could address that, if you thought that
was a good idea or if you thought that
was something possible?
Gingrich: Well, it is an
interesting idea. But I think it misses
the underlying point. The Gingrich
administration, and this is in the 21st
century contract with America, will have
a commitment to have complete control of
the border by January 1, 2014.
Were in the process of drafting a
bill now, which would in essence, suspend
all regulations and all Federal Law that
would inhibit you from completing [a wall
on the border]. So, now we would have
none of the environmental impact studies,
none of the things that make it hard to
do. No the national park cant
be touched, because its an
absurdity. How are you going to control
the border if you are going to say No,
the Big Ben National Park is going to be
an unpatrolled area?
So, youve got to decide if you are
going to control the whole border. I
believe we can control the border by
January 1, 2014. I think we can also
establish a guest worker program, and
establish English as the official
language of government. I think we can
with a guest worker program, which I
would outsource to American Express, Visa
or MasterCard, because they have the
technology to run without fraud; the
Federal Government doesnt.
Duggan: What about the
expenses? What we are spending for those
who are here; Citizens of other
governments, citizens of other countries?
They show up in our Emergency Rooms, we
are providing for their education, how do
we recoup for those losses?
Gingrich: Look, I would
like to mop up that pool of people who
are not here legally in two ways. I have
suggested that we may want to
re-establish the equivalent of the World
War II selective service committees, so
you have local decision making and local
analysis.
People who have no real ties to the
United States, frankly, we should send
home. Period. People who have been here a
good while, who are married, have kids,
have ties, we should allow them to
get what the Krieble foundation calls a
Red Card. Make them a part of
America, but not a path to citizenship.
Have them pay a penalty for having come
here illegally.
But, get them integrated so that, three
years from now there shouldnt be
anybody here who is illegal.
They should either have a red card,
because we have decided that they can
stay, or they should have been deported,
or they should be stopped at the border.
Our goal is to have a legal America. I
would also, outlaw sanctuary cities. I
would say any city which declares itself
a sanctuary, loses all federal aid.
Period.
So, I say fine, you want to fail to
enforce U.S. laws, you dont get a
penny. By the way, all of them will cease
to be sanctuary cities in about 3 weeks.
Christine: On the EPA,
youve talked about replacing it
with an Environmental Solutions Agency.
You spoke of this wacky proposal by the
EPA to regulate dust?
Gingrich: Well, I just
did a newsletter, I do a newsletter every
week at Gingrich Productions. It comes
out through Human Events. The Washington
Post wrote this outrageous article that
there really wasnt a dust
regulation. Well, it wasnt true,
this was EPA propaganda. The EPA under
the Clean Air Act has responsibility for
particulate matter, it is
called dust.
They were looking at regulation that will
affect farming by establishing that, if
the wind was blowing enough that the dust
would leave your fields, then you shouldnt
plow. You talk to farmers who drive down
a dirt road and they kick up dust.
I mean, its insane. In Arizona theyre
in this fight because Arizona is a
dessert. They actually have some areas in
Arizona where they want them to water
down the dirt so that they dont get
these huge dust storms. I met with a
group from Arizona who said we keep
trying to explain to the EPA that the
reason its called a desert is that
there is no water, and you want us to
take the water that is there ...."
Duggan: (laughing) you
have to explain that to the EPA?
Gingrich: Yeah, Look, I
think its an agency which has, for
three generations, self selected radicals
who are anti-business, anti-local control
and who believe in a radical version of
environmentalism at any cost. I would say
its probably the most destructive
anti-manufacturing agency in the Federal
Government. No other agency has
contributed as much to the decay of
American manufacturing as the EPA has.
I say this as someone who taught
environmental studies and believes in the
environment. I co-authored a book called
A Contract with the Earth, What
Conservative Environmentalism is Like.
Thats why I dont just want to
abolish, I want to replace it with a
common sense, practical,
innovation-oriented agency that starts by
collaborating with state and local
government and collaborates with
business. Not automatically issuing
dictatorial rules and litigating
everything.
Duggan: Can you tell us
how a President Newt Gingrich, would deal
better than the other candidates with the
Middle East situation, the problem with
Israel, the gathering storm of all of
these Muslim countries as they are
starting to rise and overthrow their
governments and really leaning more
towards Sharia law than anything, it
seems as though Israel...
Gingrich: It has
extended now down to Nigeria. There is a
war in Nigeria, which is the most
populous country in Africa
Duggan: Are you the most
pro-Israel of all of the candidates...
Would you like to be thought of as the
most pro-Israel candidate?
Gingrich: AIPAC said I
was the most pro-Israel Speaker in
American history, if that gives you some
sense of ... Let me . its
interesting, because we have this debate
on tomorrow night, on CBS and its
the first time Im [going to say
this]
Duggan: So we are your
practice?
Gingrich:
Yeah it is, and as you can tell I
think out loud and I try to evolve and
refine, ...so let me just give you this,
just as background Im going to talk
about this tomorrow night.
When you think about national security,
my dad spent 27 years in the infantry. I
grew up with the Army.
I am the longest serving teacher in the
senior military. I taught one and two
star generals and admirals for 23 years.
I started working with the Armys
Training and Doctrine Command in 1979.
So, my background in National Security is
unlike anybody elses who is running
for President, including the current
President. I think I have literally
taught every general officer in the last
generation at one time or another.
I think we are in REAL trouble. And I
think it is much deeper than people
understand. If you go to Newt.org and
read the 21st Century contract with
America you will see part of this. And I
will come around to to Middle East in a
second.
First of all: China is largely a problem
about American self discipline. If we
re-build our education, we re-invest in
science, technology, and engineering and
we re-build our manufacturing base, the
Chinese cant catch up with us in
your lifetime. Its a really about
us, not them.
But its a real challenge because,
at the present rate, we are decaying and
they are not. And we cant ask them
to be as stupid as we are.
And this is a real problem because if the
Chinese see an imbalance of power, there
are a couple of things that they can do
that would be very dangerous. And we need
to understand that not because they are
evil people, but because they are a
natural competitor.
Second: We have to really worry about
emerging technologies that nobody
understands. Hacking is one of those
things. The whole concept of cyber
warfare and electro-magnetic pulse attack
... we have to worry about those kinds of
things.
I think we have to worry about nuclear
weapons. I was called by Senator Rudman,
the father of homeland security. The
Homeland Security Department I want has
to be capable of dealing with 3 nuclear
events on the same day in 3 different
cities. Because, I think you really have
to worry a lot about getting hit, if you
look at the Iranian nuclear weapons. But
the fact is, the Pakistanis have over 100
bombs. And Pakistan is not necessarily a
reliable, stable country. I mean this is
a country that hid bin Laden for at least
six years. So, why do we think we can
trust the Pakistanis?
So, thats the background, the other
thing I can say is, we have to understand
the emergence of the Gray World. The
underside of the emerging global market
is this gray world: Human trafficking,
800,000+ slaves a year across borders,
90% women, mostly for prostitution and
illegal arms trafficking, illegal drug
trafficking, etc.
If you look at the Mexican drug war,
these guys have billions of dollars and
sometimes they can buy technology faster
than governments can, so sometimes they
are better armed, they have better
radios. This is serious. So, those are
the real parts of real national security.
John Abizaid who was the only four-star
general fluent in Arabic, said to me
about two months ago (he is former head
of the central command) that our
strategic deficit is bigger than our
fiscal deficit. So, if you have a two
trillion dollar fiscal deficit and our
strategic deficit is bigger, its a
sobering thought. We havent come to
grips with how big this problem is and
how different it is. You are dealing with
a world-wide effort to impose on us a set
of values we dont believe in and,
if necessary, to do it by terrorism and
by force. The truth is, the biggest
funder of that is Saudi Arabia, which is
why I am for an American energy policy
designed to minimize the importance of
the Saudis.
A rational American strategy would try to
make the Strait of Hormuz irrelevant.
Because then you could deal with Iran
without any problems and you can deal
with the Saudis without any problems.
Thats why a major component of our
national security is energy.
The Saudis have been paying about two
billion dollars a year to schools,
madrassas around the world to teach
hatred, including here. Theyre
primary funders of madrassas in the
United States, the primary funders of
chaplains in prisons which almost always
represent Wahhabism which is
the most extreme version of Islam.
Youve got the Saudis on one front,
youve got the Iranians on the other
front. Theres a great book by Mark
Bowden who wrote Black Hawk Down,
called Guest of the Ayatollah.
The sub-title is the First Shots in
Irans War Against America.
Guest of the Ayatollah is the hostage
crisis of 1979. So in Mark Bowdens
view, Iran thinks its been at war
with us for 32 years. And we are confused
by it. They killed the Marines in
Lebanon. They killed American forces in
Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. They are
the primary funders of Hamas and
Hezbollah. They are the primary
protectors of Assad. So I look at this
pattern I believe the odds are
very high that we have lost the 3rd Iraq
war.
The first Iraq war drove Saddam out of
Kuwait in 4 days in 1991.
The second Iraq war defeated Saddam in 23
days in 2003. And then, for reasons that
I still dont understand, Ambassador
Bremer decided that we would radically
change Iraqi society without having the
means to do it.
We have fought a war for 8 years and I
think weve lost it.
I think as we leave, it will become
obvious that weve lost it. Nouri
al-Maliki (the new head of Iraq) is much
more afraid of the Iranians than he is of
us.
I mean, this tells you how bad things
are: The Iranians held a conference on
terrorism and Maliki came from Iraq and
Karzai came from Afghanistan to an
Iranian conference on terrorism. And the
UN Secretary General sent a special envoy
as though the Iranians werent the
largest funders of terrorism in the
world.
Now, think about the sheer arrogance of
that. Its Hitlarian in its
dishonesty.
So I really think we have to re-think
from the ground up what we are doing. We
have to understand that, in the long run,
we are for fundamentally changing Saudi
Arabia. We are for fundamentally changing
Iran and Pakistan. In the absence of a
fundamental strategy, we are just
floundering.
I think that there is a grave danger that
the Arab spring is going to turn out to
be an anti-Christian spring. You look at
the decline of Christians from 1,200,000
to 500,000 in Iraq after the American
Liberation. So, an American victory meant
that over half the Christians have been
driven from the country. You look at the
Coptic Christians that have been there
for 2,000 years being persecuted now in
Egypt. You look at the moves towards
Sharia in Tunisia and in Lybia and you
have to really ask yourself, why is
it that western elites think its an
advantage to have extremists take over
countries?
Christine: Youve
been very supportive of the Tea Party
from the beginning. This Occupy Wall
Street movement has been compared to the
Tea Party, I know you disagree with
that... the comparison.
Gingrich:: Well, there
is no comparison. The Tea Party people
are almost all committed to a stronger,
better America. They are almost all
committed to studying and learning the
constitution. They are almost always
positive in their attitude. They are
angry, but they are trying to direct
their anger to a positive outcome.
The Wall Street groups break into two
groups. One which I can sympathize with.
People are just in pain, and angry and
saying Why does Goldman-Sachs get
billions of dollars and I lose my home
I dont think thats a bad
question. Its classic populism.
The other element of the Occupy Wall
Street group is a Nihilist, an
anti-civilization thuggery of people who
are astonishingly arrogant. Why doesnt
a reporter go up to them and say Why
do you think everybody else owes you a
park that you can live in? Why do you
think that you have the right to use
somebody elses bathroom?
Theres been violence and vandalism.
A hot dog stand was vandalized because
they could not afford to feed them
anymore. I think there is a childish,
temper tantrum part of this and their
intellectual framework is leftwing.
I dont think we have ever been
clear enough about this with Obama. Obama
is a Saul Alinsky radical. (BOX)
Obama preaches class warfare. He is a
natural step towards the hostile parts of
the Occupy Wall Street philosophy
because he preaches These people
who are successful are bad.
Well, guess what, when the president of
the United States tells that to America,
hes dividing America. I tell people
that I am for the 100%. They ask me if I
am for the 99% or the 1%? People ask,
are you for the 99% or the 1%?
The answer is, and I tell them, For
an American, I am for the 100%, because
we are all Americans. It is a
European radical concept to suggest that
we can be divided.
And to suggest that Henry Ford, when he
was a young man, was in the 99%, but
Henry Ford when he invented the modern
automobile was in the 1% ... so the guy
who put all of us on wheels is bad? Bill
Gates who put all of us on Windows is
bad? Steve Jobs who gave us all iPhones
is bad?
I mean, you guys [at the Valley Patriot]
are a good example.
Duggan: Can you tell us
something nobody else knows?
Gingrich: This probably
wont be new by the time you come
out, but its new now. You can use
this on the radio tomorrow if you like. I
was talking to Laura Ingraham (radio
host) and I came to understand something
in talking to her that I dont think
anyone else has captured yet. In the
newest polls I am tied with Romney for
second in the CBS poll and I am second to
Romney in the Quinnipiac poll. Cain is
now in third. So, [Laura] asks, when
are you going to start taking Romney
apart? And I just want you to think
about this and you can use this on the
radio tomorrow. Romney is at 15% in one
poll and 18% in another. That means that
in one poll there is 85% of the people
available. And in another theres
82%. So I said to her, I am not going to
attack Romney at all. My job is to get
the 85%. Let Romney target me. I think
thats the way you need to see this
whole campaign. Calista and I will be out
there campaigning in a very positive way,
trying to help Americans save our own
country and rebuild the land that we
love. And let the other guys decide to
attack us.
TRANSCRIBED BY DAWN BRANTMULLER >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
All pictures and written
material are (C) Copyright, Christine
Morabito & Valley Patriot, Inc.,
2011, All rights reserved