Newt's Newest Tune a Noggin-Scratcher

Some of y'all might have seen this:
Michelle's reaction:

I thought the Robertson/Sharpton pairing was going to be bad, but it’s nothing compared to these two stiffs on a couch peddling eco-alarmism. There was a time when Newt Gingrich and the Beltway GOP establishment could be counted on to defend free market environmentalism, property rights, and rational cost-benefit analyses. No more.

Allapundit differs:

He’s been all for market solutions in his most high-profile statements on this subject in the past and, judging from his website
, still is. Watch this snippet from his debate with Kerry last year to see what he prescribes for inducing developing nations towards conservation. Al Gore clutching Hu Jintao’s sleeve and whimpering “please?” with tears in his eyes doesn’t factor in.

Gingrinch responds to the many complaints in "Why I Took Part":

Many of you have written to me to ask why I recently taped an advertisement with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for The Alliance for Climate Protection, a group founded by former Vice President Al Gore.
I completely understand why many of you would have questions about this, so I want to take this opportunity to explain my reasons. First of all, I want to be clear: I don't think that we have conclusive proof of global warming. And I don't think we have conclusive proof that humans are at the center of it.
But here's what we do know. There is an important debate going on right now over the right energy policy, the right environmental policy, and making sure we do the right things for our future and the future of our children and grandchildren. Conservatives are missing from this debate, and I think that's a mistake. When it comes to preserving our environment for future generations, we can't have a slogan of "Just yell no!"
I have a different view. I think it's important to be on the stage, to engage in the debate, and to communicate our position clearly. There is a big difference between left-wing environmentalism that wants higher taxes, bigger government, more bureaucracy, more regulation, more red tape, and more litigation and a Green Conservatism that wants to use science, technology, innovation, entrepreneurs, and prizes to find a way to creatively invent the kind of environmental future we all want to live in. Unless we start making the case for the latter, we're going to get the former. That's why I took part in the ad.

Okay, so do I have a beef? It sounds like Gingrich is trying to pass off his ad as "good intentions." I'm not sure how Limbaugh would respond to that (I guess we'll find out soon), but that just might not cut it with the rest of us conservatives. In the ad he explicitly asks us to "demand action from our leaders." I believe it was Ronald Reagan who said (in his first inaugural address) who asked us to not look to our government for all the solutions. It is in this that I think Newt gravely erred in this ad since his actual intentions as he claims them to be are not presented sufficiently.

I believe Mr. Gingrich is making one other mistake as well. He is of the mind that rejecting the Anthropogenic Climate Change movement is akin to Barry voting "no" on Civil Rights, arguably causing conservatism to miss that bandwagon for at least a decade, if not ever since. However, ACG may be a mere fad. If Newt really believes there is a powerful "conservative" way to address catastrophic human-induced climate change, there are better ways of communicating that perspective than through this ad.

And finally, the number one reason not to do the climate change cult...AQ is a dues-paying member.