I believe the earth gets warmer, and I also believe the earth gets cooler, and I think history points out that it does that and that the idea that man through the production of CO<sub>2</sub> which is a trace gas in the atmosphere and the manmade part of that trace gas is itself a trace gas is somehow responsible for climate change is, I think, just patently absurd when you consider all of the other factors, El Niño, La Niña, sunspots, you know, moisture in the air. There's a variety of factors that contribute to the earth warming and cooling, and to me, this is an opportunity for the left to create — it's really a beautifully concocted scheme because they know that the earth is gonna cool and warm. And so it's been on a warming trend so they said, "Oh, let's take advantage of that and say that we need the government to come in and regulate your life some more because it's getting warmer." Just like they did in the '70s when it was getting cooler. They needed the government to come in and regulate your life because it's getting cooler. It's just an excuse for more government control of your life. And I've never been for any scheme or even accepted the junk science behind the whole narrative.

When Thatcher ran for prime minister she said — remember this, this is the Iron Lady — she said, "The British national health care system is safe in my hands." She wasn't going to take on health care, because she knew once you have people getting free health care from the government, you can't take it away from them. And the reason is because most people don't get sick, and so free health care is just that, free health care, until you get sick. Then, if you get sick and you don't get health care, you die and you don't vote. It's actually a pretty clever system. Take care of the people who can vote and people who can’t vote, get rid of them as quickly as possible by not giving them care so they can’t vote against you. That's how it works.

We have laws in states, like the one at the Supreme Court right now, that has sodomy laws and they were there for a purpose. Because, again, I would argue, they undermine the basic tenets of our society and the family. And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does.

I don't believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and vision of our country.

Try QuoteGPT

Chat naturally about what you need. Each answer links back to real quotes with citations.

Share Your Favorite Quotes

Know a quote that's missing? Help grow our collection.

We all know that this country was founded on a Judeo-Christian ethic but the Judeo-Christian ethic was a Protestant Judeo-Christian ethic, sure the Catholics had some influence, but this was a Protestant country and the Protestant ethic, mainstream, mainline Protestantism. And of course we look at the shape of mainline Protestantism in this country and it is a shambles. It is gone from the world of Christianity as I see it. So they attacked mainline Protestantism, they attacked the Church, and what better way to go after smart people who also believe they're pious — to use both vanity and pride to go after the Church.

This is not a political war at all. This is not a cultural war at all. This is a spiritual war. And the Father of Lies has his sights on what you would think the Father of Lies, Satan, would have his sights on: a good, decent, powerful, influential country, the United States of America.

I want to create every opportunity for women to be able to serve this country, and they do so in an amazing and wonderful way and they're a great addition to the— and they have been for a long time— to the— to the armed services of our country. But I do have concerns about women in front-line combat. I think that could be a very compromising situation, where— where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interest of the mission because of other types of emotions that are involved. And I think that's probably— It already happens, of course, with the camaraderie of men in combat, but it's— I think it would be even more unique if women were in combat, and I think that's not in the best interests of men, women or the mission.

Go Premium

Support Quotewise while enjoying an ad-free experience and premium features.

View Plans
The place where he was, in my mind, the most successful, and first successful, was in academia. He understood pride of smart people. He attacked them at their weakest, that they were in fact smarter than everybody else, and could come up with something new and different, pursue new truths, deny the existence of truth, play with it, because they're smart. And so academia, a long time ago, fell.

At a time when, over and over again, we were told, "Forget it, you can't win", we were winning. We were winning in a very different way, because we were touching hearts. We were raising issues that, well, frankly, a lot of people didn't want to have raised.

Well, as a matter of fact, I've voted to kill Big Bird in the past. So, I have a record there that I have to disclose. That doesn't mean I don't like Big Bird. I mean, you can kill things and still like them. I mean, maybe to eat them, I don't know.