Mitt Romney Hammers Gingrich on Moon Policy, Space Mirrors


Earlier, we wrote about last night’s GOP debate in Des Moines and Mitt Romney’s proposed $10,000 bet with Rick Perry over claims that Romney’s book was edited to change a portion about health care. This fleeting and insignificant moment overshadowed the real issues that were discussed by the candidates. That’s right, we’re talking about the moon and its precious moon minerals.

Mitt Romney attacked Newt Gingrich on his plan to mine our moon. When asked how he was different than the former Speaker of the House, Romney immediately went to lunar policy. “We could start with his idea to have a lunar colony that would mine minerals from the moon,” the former Massachusetts governor said, “I’m not in favor of spending that kind of money to do that.”

Gingrich fought back, refusing to waver on his dream of sucking that giant floating rock of all its resources. “I’m happy to defend the idea that America should be in space and should be there in an aggressive, entrepreneurial way,” he said.

A day before the debate, Romney met with the Des Moines Register and went after not only Gingrich’s moon record, but also his planned space mirrors that will be used to light our highways:

If you can’t hear the above video because you are at work or on the soundless vacuum of the moon’s atmosphere-free surface, this is what Romney said to the Register:

“I saw the Speaker had a measure that I read about that was to put a permanent colony on the moon to mine rare materials from the moon. I think we’ve got some other priorities for our spending before we do that. He even talked about a series of mirrors that we could put in space that would light our highways at night. I’ve got some better ideas for our resources.”

There you have it, primary voters: You can either vote for a compulsive gambling Mormon or a career politician who will stop at nothing until he rapes our moon of all its pure and untouched resources.

Choose wisely.

Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich spar over moon mining, child labor [LA Times]