Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
ALMOST THE ENTIRE top team of Republican Newt Gingrich’s US presidential campaign resigned yesterday, leaving his campaign in disarray just a day after he returned from holiday.
The former speaker of the US House of Representatives had to contend with the resignations of campaign spokesman Rick Tyler, campaign manager Rob Johnson as well as a host of other senior strategists and aides in the early primary and caucus states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
He announced his candidacy in May vowing to forge a new ‘Contract with America’ having acted as the de facto Republican leader during the presidency of Bill Clinton and becoming the first Republican speaker in the House in nearly 40 years in 1994.
However, questions about Gingrich’s commitment to the campaign were raised as well as his vision for winning the nomination to face Barack Obama in the autumn.
The fact that he recently embarked on a cruise with his wife to the Greek Isles, returning only this week, might not have helped as other potential nominees ramped up their campaigning across the early primary states.
But his campaign was in trouble long before his decision to go on vacation following his stinging criticism of a Republican congressional plan to reform the Medicare social insurance programme for elderly of which he stated:
I don’t think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering.
This forced him into issuing an apology to the the plan’s architect, congressman Paul Ryan.
Aides said that the 67-year-old refused a request to show a copy of his personal schedule and cited his willingness to give his wife a large role in campaign decisions as a reason for their departures.
Gingrich told his now-departed aides he would remain in the race but he faces formidable obstacles in assembling a new team in time to compete in a campaign that’s well under way.
He has the allegiance of several former aides who served him when he was in Congress, but most if not all of them have moved into other fields.
He vowed to fight on despite the setback, taking to Facebook to set out his plan:
I am committed to running the substantive, solutions-oriented campaign I set out to run earlier this spring. The campaign begins anew Sunday in Los Angeles.
- additional reporting from AP
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I prefer mars to snickers. The past history of either is not really that important
A combination of factors Val. 4 billion years ago Mars was a much warmer place than today, as the planet had not cooled sufficiently since its formation. The interior of the planet at that time was similar to Earth’s today, i.e. a thin crust floating on a molten interior giving rise to volcanoes such as at Olympus Mons. The interior, as on Earth, is made primarily of iron, and in such instances where the core is molten, this iron creates a magnetic field (such as can be seen on Earth). The magnetic field protects the planet from solar radiation. This radiation breaks H2O molecules down into their respective parts – Oxygen and Hydrogen. With the cooling of the planet’s interior the magnetic field breaks down allowing the solar radiation in which then breaks down the H2O. The hydrogen is too light to remain on Mars’ surface (bear in mind Mars has only1/3 the gravity of Earth) and floats to the top of the atmosphere where, now that the magnetic field is gone, solar winds are allowed to tear the hydrogen away from the planet and carry it into space and ionising other particles which are also stripped away. As the atmosphere thins the planet cools even further. Any water that remains becomes locked in the rocks, any oxygen which remains ends up bound in CO2. The process is a relatively fast one. See this article from NASA on the process.
great comment
Global warming ;)
Deadly bit of news. Little bit disappointed by the artists image though. Surely Mars then wouldn’t have looked the same as now i.e. red and dusty, if it had an ocean would it? Surely it would have looked a little bit closer to our own planet. Raises serious questions about what happened there for an entire ocean to dry up also.
That would really depend on whether or not the ocean was there long enough for life to evolve. Our planet only looks like it does because of the plant life, if you look at the deserts you get an idea of how it would’ve looked if life didn’t happen. The only difference I’d put into the artists impression is a bit of cloud cover, maybe.
The view of the sky from the surface of Mars is blue, like Earth. NASA admitted that they touch those shots “for effect”.
the sky is only blue at sunrise and sunset
How I wish the human race could solve our problems here and explore inner and outer space together. The trillions spent on war could feed and clothe us all and used to expand our understanding of our home. The universe.
It will never happen, but still.
Who cares we should be looking after our own planet
Alan, we may need a new planet. Mars may become important in the same way as the USA was. Who says we must only live on one planet?
The fact that there was once water on Mars is old news. The mainstream news is only catching on now?
Read the first 2 lines of the article please.
It says that in the article, this is not news of water on the planet, it is news of the remnants of a particular ocean.
Ah crap, apologies folks. I read the article but the first couple of lines must have indeed escaped my attention! Whoops.
have your say