Difference between revisions of "Talk:Essay: Gingrich Administration"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Gingrich is not currently ranked #1 in Conservapedia's list of likely candidates to win the Republican nomination)
(Gingrich is not currently ranked #1 in Conservapedia's list of likely candidates to win the Republican nomination: Wikis are not blogs or books. Wikis are written by many people at different ...)
Line 32: Line 32:
  
 
How can one page argue that Mitt Romney is the likely nominee and another page argue that is Gingrich the likely winner of the presidential election? [[User:ScottDG|ScottDG]] 19:26, 25 December 2011 (EST)
 
How can one page argue that Mitt Romney is the likely nominee and another page argue that is Gingrich the likely winner of the presidential election? [[User:ScottDG|ScottDG]] 19:26, 25 December 2011 (EST)
 +
 +
:Wikis are not blogs or books.  Wikis are written by many people at different times.  Not every entry should be expected to be completely consistent with every other entry.  And, by the way, which page "argu[e]s that is [sic] Gingrich the likely winner of the presidential election"?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:11, 25 December 2011 (EST)

Revision as of 20:11, 25 December 2011

To me the obvious choice for AG would be John Yoo. AngusT 08:16, 13 December 2011 (EST)

The position calls for an attorney, yes, but one who is ideally also knowledgeable about other fields, such as technology/engineering (so he can take into account the effects of rapid technological development on the law), education (so that he can make the tough decisions easy to understand for the regular guy), and religion (so that his decisions are guided by faith, a close knowledge of Biblical text is a must). ScottDG 19:59, 13 December 2011 (EST)
I'd go further and say that he has to be so knowledgable about the Bible that he can identify the liberal bias inserted by the famously leftist 17th century English. And given the importance of the internet in modern society a thorough knowledge of blogs, or even wikis, is essential too. --HarryPagett 20:11, 13 December 2011 (EST)

This article is just silly. CasparRH 08:48, 19 December 2011 (EST)


I think Hannity is the most likely for Press Secretary, and Ron Paul would be a great Treasury Secretary. He'd get us back on the Gold Standard, eliminate the Fed, and work to overturn Dodd-Frank. Should these be added to the article? AngusT 13:02, 19 December 2011 (EST)

Here are my picks, assuming Gingrich is President:

  • VP: Marco Rubio
  • State: Rick Perry
  • Treasury: Ron Paul
  • Defense: John McCain
  • Justice: John Yoo
  • Interior: Sarah Palin
  • Agriculture: unsure
  • Commerce: department will be eliminated
  • Labor: Scott Walker
  • Health and Human Services: Mike Huckabee
  • Housing and Urban Development: unsure
  • Transportation: unsure
  • Energy: Dick Cheney
  • Education: department will be eliminated
  • Veteran's Affairs: Bob Dole, if he isn't deemed too old
  • Homeland Security: Michelle Bachmann
  • Press Secretary: Sean Hannity (though he'd have to take a huge pay cut, so maybe not)
  • National Security Advisor: Paul Wolfowitz

I'd be curious to hear others' thoughts as well. AngusT 13:11, 19 December 2011 (EST)

Gingrich is not currently ranked #1 in Conservapedia's list of likely candidates to win the Republican nomination

How can one page argue that Mitt Romney is the likely nominee and another page argue that is Gingrich the likely winner of the presidential election? ScottDG 19:26, 25 December 2011 (EST)

Wikis are not blogs or books. Wikis are written by many people at different times. Not every entry should be expected to be completely consistent with every other entry. And, by the way, which page "argu[e]s that is [sic] Gingrich the likely winner of the presidential election"?--Andy Schlafly 20:11, 25 December 2011 (EST)