MEREDITH, N.H. (CBS) – It’s not easy leaving Newt Gingrich at a loss for words, but it happened Thursday night.

He went up to Meredith, New Hampshire to try to convince a few hundred Tea Party members that he’s their candidate in Tuesday’s GOP Presidential Primary.

At one point, a young man asked Gingrich what he would do for the future of the younger generation.

But the man took a unique way of asking the question.

Listen to WBZ NewsRadio’s audio of the exchange:

“I know that many people in this room are on their way out,” the unidentified man said.

“I say that in a respectful way, that in maybe ten years, a lot of people in this room will have passed away.”

That line drew laughter from the crowd, as the man said, “I’m serious.”

“Well that’s certainly a level of optimism we haven’t had all day,” Gingrich replied, adding the man should “revise and extend” his remarks for the audience and not defend the initial statement because “it’s gonna get worse, believe me.”

“I noticed that in my age bracket no one cares about politics because it is something for old people, I say that respectfully,” the man continued, “because it seems like a lot of the issues are catered to them.”

Then he got to his question.

“I would like to know what hope I have as a hard-working, young individual, what change will you actually accomplish in Washington? What can be done in eight years that will affect the life that I have yet to live, that you have already lived?”

That drew more laughter and applause from the crowd.

“You know, there are moments in this business where I’m just left speechless,” Gingrich said.

What do you think?  Are politics just for ‘old people’?

Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Comments (120)
  1. MMarcia says:

    This young man has hit the nail on the head. Most politicians are older; to be elected president, you have to be over 35. The ‘young’ ones will be paying off this country’s debt for years to come. They need to get involved, and should start by reading up pin all the candidates.

    Gingrich should have told him that one term as president is four years, not eight.

    1. tsalnew says:

      MMarcia – A person can become involved in local elections from the time he/she is old enough to vote. My brother was town meeting member in our town at 18. You are right – this young man should spend time reading and educating himself.

      1. Todd says:

        I actually worked on G. Mcgoverns campain at age 12, Igrew up in an activest family. And I am now over 50 and most people are still not engage. This is not a condition of the young. But apathy affects all age groups in America.

      2. Mark says:

        People can get involved and even become candidates before they’re able to vote. A 16 year old boy ran for and won a spot on a city councel in a small rural Washington town just outside of Vancouver a few years back.

    2. Kurt says:

      Its a ridiculous question. These questions, even when asked by Tea Party members seem to imply that Washington is responsible for giving people Hope (and Change). It is up to the individual, not Washington. Washington can care less about any thing that isn’t Washington. Do it yourself, do wait for someone to “give you hope”.

      1. machtyn says:

        It is not a ridiculous question. It is the question being answered by Mitt Romney nearly every day. Mitt Romney is in this for his children’s children. He talks about shrinking government, shrinking debt, and making sure we have a sustainable economy. He wants this to be America’s Century.

        Just how serious is Newt Gingrich? This is just sad that he has no answer.

      2. lr says:

        It is not a ridiculous question. It is the same question each of my children asked me when they got their first paycheck-why don’t I get to keep all of what I earned?

      3. sickoftalking says:


        He actually gave an answer. It just wasn’t reported in this story, which is a bit sensationalistic. He listed a couple of issues that should be important to young voters.

        He said he was speechless a bit jokingly about how the young man said everybody in that room was going to be dead so they didn’t matter.

        Watch the full exchange on C-SPAN’s site.

      4. Cindy says:

        @machtyn here is Newt’s answer

        You should know better…CBS will always edit something in an attempt to make a conservative or Republican look foolish. Newt with no answer, you obviously don’t know the man too well.

    3. BBright says:

      Of course, if Gingrich couldn’t offer him any hope in eight years, he probably couldn’t have offered him anything in one term.

    4. lee says:

      not only is a presidential term 4 years, but you also have to be 40, not 35, to be eligible for the Presidency.

      1. lee says:

        MMarcia was correct. 35 for President, 30 for Senator, 25 for Rep.

  2. tsalnew says:

    If the young are not involved it is because of complacency. I had a long discussion with an under 30 year old who visited us last weekend. He is not only very knowledgeable but is very involved. I was involved from the time I was in elementary school. What is stopping this person and friends from also becoming involved? Seems as if this young man would be happy to write off all “old” people. Wonder if he knows he’ll be “old” one day also!

    1. mike says:

      The young man is absolutely right. How much talk is there about Social Security? Much. How much specifically aimed at those 35 and under? Virtually none unless you count education. Most issues are framed at people with grandchildren, i.e., the old. Of course the fact is senior vote in the largest numbers. If 18-35 year olds voted in mass numbers issues would be framed with them in mind. You need a youth version of AARP to force the change by the vote.

    2. Bill-n-Evv says:

      Sorry tsalnew, but I believe you miss the point of this young man’s comment. Let’s face a FACT…in 10 years, many elderly will pass away. But even “optimistic” outlooks do not show a correction in our countries debt/deficit situation for 20 years.

      I hate to sound so callous, but we MUST modify Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid to reduce the financial burden. I am 48 years old, and understand that this means I may be one of the first that has to deal with the “future” adaptations. So be it! By my complacency, we have gotten here. So it should be us that pays for it as much as possible, not future generations!

  3. John says:

    Young people want their freedoms back, and want a dollar that’s worth something. Newt can’t give us that. Ron Paul can.

    1. David Quinlan says:

      Ron Paul’s concepts of national defense and foreign policy are so inadequate it is scary. I’m in my 30’s and have young twin babies…the idea of a Paul Presidency literally terrifies me, but the level of support that he has according to the polls makes me sad.

      1. roman says:

        are you one of those who sing ‘the land of the free and the home of the brave’ then why are you terrified of the constitution and of having the military resting in our land free of foreign entanglements. concepts of national defense and foreign policy should not produce ‘scary’ but pride. paul just wants to be environmentally in the right place protected by two oceans and a good neighbor to canada mexico and latin america.

      2. Nathan says:

        What? He wants to protect ourselves and our allies using diplomacy and if we or our allies are attacked then he wants to meet the enemy with overwhelming force. He also wants to secure the border by enforcing laws that are already on the books.

        In what ways does that scare you?

      3. free_independent says:

        Do people ever get tired of repeating talking points?

      4. Dave says:

        @Roman … the logical fallacies in your response are scary. Btw, how well did those oceans serve us on 9/11? We don’t live in the same time period as our founding fathers and until you understand that you’ll never understand why people disagree with Paul’s foreign policy. While I agree with much of what Paul says, his foreign policy is just dead wrong. We have history as our guide on this one.

        Tbh, as a conservative I’m getting really frustrated with these Ron Paul supporters and I’m beginning to question both their sincerity as well as their intelligence. You all sound like the Obamaniacs from the previous election … repeating talking points, trying to talk over those that disagree, spamming every corner of the internet you can find with the same garbage over and over, and yet very little actual thought put into what he is proposing beyond the surface level talking points. Get off the bandwagon, think through your ideas ON YOUR OWN, and then decide which candidate most closely reflects your views. But for the love of God, please stop annoying the rest of us with your copy and paste skills.

      5. Stephen Bozich says:

        Doesn’t the idea of an all-volunteer force fighting two wars for nearly ten years “terrify” you? You can’t take an all-volunteer force for granted. Tell me: Does a draft terrify you?

      6. Josh M says:

        Let me guess…you’re scared of Iran…Remember 20 years ago when we faced off against Iraq during Desert Storm? And we promptly destroyed 75% of their entire Army in 4 hours….that’s right…4 hours…mind you that was 20 some years ago.

        Now let’s look at Iran….an Army with 30 year old equipment, a Navy of mostly speedboats, no Air Force to speak of, and…oh yeah LoL,,,they have to import their gasoline.

        Real scary when you put it into persective huh?

      7. Josh M says:

        @Dave…I’m sorry my friend, you do not have history on your side. Our interventionist foriegn policy over the past 60 years has led to the world we live in. It hasn’t worked anywhere. Faulty intelligence allowed 9/11 to occur and also led us into a futlie war in Iraq (and before you go nuts, I did serve there twice). Remember how North Korea was developing a nuclear weapon, and we had to impose all these sanctions and get involved…what’s the result? They have a nuke. We created Iran, going back to 1953, and our intervention there is what led us to this situation. It’s time we obeyed the constitution and the wisdom of our founders who warned us about foriegn entanglements and intervention.

      8. Greece R US says:

        I am also in my mid-30s with a young daughter and the thought of anyone other than Ron Paul as president terrifies me. Without Ron Paul, we can expect more endless wars, more deb, more bailouts, and more loss of personal freedoms. I don’t want my daughter growing up in an NWO police state run by globalist bankers. I’d prefer her to grow up in a U.S. guided by the Constitution and where Liberty is a right not a privilege.

      9. Dave says:

        @Josh M … I think you’re putting words into my mouth. I was not speaking about our mistakes in foreign policy, many of which i would probably agree with you on. Rather I was directly responding to the “protected by two oceans” comment. By history being on my side I was referring to the difference between colonial times when it took months to travel across the ocean compared to more recent history when we’ve seen firsthand how little the oceans protect … Pearl Harbor, the first attack on the WTC, 9/11, the flood of illegal immigrants from our southern border, etc. My point being, to sit back and say we’re safe because of our oceans, is a very antiquated view and does not fit with our modern day reality. We live in a different world now and we can not just curl up into a ball and pretend the rest of the world is not still out there and that bad people don’t exist. How is an ocean going to protect us against a cyber attack? Do you have any idea the amount of damage that can be done with an internet connection?

        I admit the solution to all of these modern day problems may not be simple, but it’s extremely short-sighted (imo) to think we can just disengage. Bad people do bad things and if we aren’t on at least some kind of an offense, it would be way too easy for them to hurt us. What is Ron Paul’s answer to this? Wait until they hurt us? Sorry, but that’s not OK with me. If someone was about to hurt your child would you wait until they were hurt or try to prevent it beforehand? And what about your friends? Would you not stand up for them as well?

        I firmly believe we can protect ourselves, stick to our conservative principles, and respect and obey the constitution without resorting to isolationism. But this is a discussion that this country must have and we must be able to actually discuss these issues without shutting down, putting blinders on, and reciting tired old talking points that have little substance behind them. It’s simply more complicated than that now.

        But on a side note … thanks for your service to our country sir.

      10. Dave says:

        @Josh M … well it seems the site lost my comment, so I’ll try one more time, but keep it brief. I think you’re putting words into my mouth. I wasn’t talking about our foreign policy mistakes, rather I was responding to the “protected by two oceans” comment. By history on my side I was referring to the moments in history when those oceans did nothing for us … Pearl Harbor, the first attack on WTC, 9/11, illegal immigration from Mexico, etc. And I too believe we should be obeying the constitution. But, how are oceans going to protect us from a cyber attack? Did the founding fathers envision this? Doubtful :) My point being, this is not as simple as Paul makes it and referencing back to the founding fathers when talking about ballistic missiles or computer hackers or airplanes, etc … its silly.

      11. Kampf Hund says:

        @Dave No, you’re thinking in terms of Cold War imperialism and you’re living in the past. The truth is, no national defense is possible if every day our country and economic power (which is the real industry and control of military might) is owned more and more by foreign interests that themselves loom as greater threats than Iran, etc. Whoever wins this election will have to either correct the path of true strength of the US, or doom it to second class status for decades to come. If Iran builds a nuke (which is the issue where most talking points from anti-Paul people come from), Israel may engage in a war with them. This is probably fact. That does not mean we should go to war as well. And, the concept of pre emptively striking Iran to prevent them from obtaining it is as silly as pre emptively striking Nazi Germany to kill Hitler. It would have happened anyways. Iran will eventually have a nuke. Ever since there has been nukes, has been the threat that countries we don’t like getting nukes. This is why we have nukes ourselves, as a deterrent. You people poo pooing Paul have got to wake up and realize there is no going back to the simple world of 2 super powers, and no one else, this is a complex world stage and waging war is not determining your strength. We have got to rebuild this country or else this is a moot point, we will no longer be the go-to person in the room for anything. People need to get their foolish ideas of supremacy out of their behinds and realize that we were only in that position because we used to stand for something, now we defend bloated and disorganized government, and a self-serving, navel gazing culture, and expect that when we demand other countries to bow to us they will comply. Why should they?

      12. Scott says:

        I simply can’t understand your reasoning. No other country has the level of military spending that the USA does. I understand you are concerned about your children but what are you concerned about? Invasion? That is the only realistic thing. The task of invading the USA is one of the most ludicrous military scenarios in all of history.

        Terrorism kills virtually no one. In 2001 10x more people were killed in the US by car accidents than by terrorism. In ’01! Even if you accept that Paul will completely abrogate his responsibility for defense (which he wouldn’t) your children have far greater worries. I understand the argument that the federal governments main responsibility is defense, fair enough but even if the budget was cut it half it would be massive.

        PS. Not a Paul fan on almost everything. I just see him as the least likely to start WW3 on the Republican side. Nor do I like Obama’s gutting of civil liberties.

      13. Daniel Tipping says:

        There’s a terrorist under your bed.


    2. po boy says:

      Ron Paul is legit NUTS So is Newt. The conservative wont be serious until Christie runs

  4. John says:

    This young man though thoughtful is typical of how younger people have been educated. He assumes that Washington can do more for him than he can do for himself. If he wants a better life it’s up to him to make it happen…not some elected official.

    1. David Quinlan says:

      While I agree with you that it is our responsibility as individuals to improve our own lives, I must respectfully disagree with your implied point that voting isn’t a vital part of that responsibility! The question he asked, and the context in which he couched them are important. Vetting our representatives and holding them accountable is one of the most important responsibilities we have as citizens. Please don’t scoff at this young man, he is doing what he should be doing right now.

      1. John says:

        You seem to be getting a lot of exercise jumping to conclusions. You have inferred that in some way I believe voting is unimportant. That is not what I said. Neither did I scoff at the questioner. He wants to know how Washington will make his life better. They won’t. He’s responsible for his life. He should vote for whom he wishes accordingly.

  5. Derek says:

    The sad part is, you don’t know anything until you are older, yet an 18 year old’s vote counts the same as a 65 year old’s vote.

    1. Dave says:

      I completely agree. I think we need to weight our votes based on specific factors concerning each individual’s investment in this country. Yes we are all created equal, but we do not all invest equally in this great country. These would be my suggestions for factors: Age, Home Ownership, Having Children, Criminal Records, Receiving Welfare, and Service in our Military. It only makes sense that the more you give to this country, the more say you should have in how it operates. The more you take, the less say you should have. (Can’t wait for the hate filled responses from the libs).

    2. Bill-n-Evv says:

      This may be true, but in years gone by, I believe that adults were more willing to sacrifice for the sake of future generations….not anymore!!!!!!!

      1. John says:

        Do you believe that people exist to sacrifice themselves for others? People exist for themselves, including younger people. That’s what our country is founded on…individual rights.I agree with Dave.

      2. Truthteller says:

        @ John

        Willingness to sacrifice is not the same as an obligation to sacrifice; the former does not involve coercion, the latter does. Providing commentary about how society has changed does not mean one does not support individual rights. With age once came wisdom, but the current generation of old politicians see CIA and FBI adventurism, giving the President unlimited rights, infringing on people’s right to ingest whatever they choose, as their right. That is what is infringing on individual rights. The current generation of politicians aside from a few, are Neoconservative statists, want to violate your freedoms in the name of “security.” They are leftovers from the bygone Cold War era.

        The American public has been brainwashed into thinking Iran is full of evil. You created Iran with your blowback. Islamofascists are the Neoconservatives of their society. The prey on fear, just like Necons do. Iran has a very liberal population run by a religious oligarchy. If you had left Iran alone in 1953 instead of going to bat for British and American oil interests, Iran would a stable Muslim democracy. Instead you installed a despot who deserved ousting. When he was ousted, you got something you hated more than Mosaddegh. The 1950s adventurism wasn’t about national security, it was about protecting oil property in a place where you had no right to enforce your system of property rights. If a foreign country believes that BP, Shell and other oil companies are a threat to their national security, or they feel like they are not providing to its citizens a part of what they take out of the ground, then they should rightfully choose their citizens over the multinational oil companies.

        I fear the same thing may happen in Egypt, but I am more optimistic about their chances. I think the democratic liberal Egyptian youth will overpower the Islamofascists.

        Why do rights only work one way? Why does the US have the right to drone Pakistan, Libya, Yemen? Why does China or Pakistan not have the right to drone the US? Neoconservatives either can’t see this or ignore it. This shows their lack of empathy. They are as sociopathic as the Islamists.

        Check out The Power of Nightmares by Adam Curtis. It will unveil the curtain. Neocons and Islamofasicsts are on the same side. Without the other as an enemy, neither would exist. They are both on the side of oppression.

  6. Methadras says:

    From the mouth of babes. This man is right. Politics is an older mans game which will reap an older mans benefits for other older people. The young, as the system is setup now, are the fodder to supply the hard expended life energy for money to enrich the ones who have already expended theirs. This man highlights the scam that this parasitic system has become.

  7. Charlie says:

    Funny how the commentors have chosen to attack the questioner rahter than the Newt for failure to answer the question.

    But back to the “young” man’s comment. I’ve been doing political races for over 30 years and there is no secret why Republican “activists” are older; it’s because most are retired and have the time. They populate primary eletions, precinct caucesses, and conventions. Thus, political discussions are aimed at them.

    This wouldn’t happen if political parties didn’t control elections. The Republican Party has no incentive to encourage the younger voter to vote. The name itself, Grand Old Party, says it all.

  8. JB says:

    I’m speechless, too. Good lord. What a 4 billion candlepower-bright, shining example of the so-sad “What is Washington going to do to help me?” attitude ingrained in so many people (young and old) .

    I have an answer for the guy: “Go start a business with your own money and try to live off of it for a few years. Come back then and see if you want to ask that same question again.”.

    1. brian says:

      I don’t think he is asking for a handout like older people demand, he’s silly asking a man whose running for president, wondering what he as president what he would propose doing to improve things for an overlooked constituency, the young working person.

      Take a look at it from his perspective, the Federal Government puts great demands on the young working class, yet operates almost entirely at his detriment. If not for the Feds, he would have more money in his pocket without SS or Medicare payments and much more freedom to do with his life as he chooses. He could not be forced into war, only persuaded with larger salaries. He would be indebted to pay for older americans poorer housing decisions, so he could purchase his own home, and pay less for all these things. He could purchase Healthcare at affordable rates since he wouldn’t be forced to pay into pools that included groups that needed substantially more care. He couldn’t be pinned down by women using a child to latch into his wages. He would free to discharge excessive debts in ways enjoyed by every other class of Americans. He would certainly be more free, happier and more appreciated as well as respected because they couldn’t take from him by force what he choose not to give freely.

      But thats the trap, no one will let the young run free to live to pursue their own happiness. They must be tied down and used like cattle. There’s too much money to squeeze out of them. Best to fill them with false promises of the future before they get smart and realize that their future has been mortgaged for the others in the present who callously enslave with dogma of “If you don’t give me your money, you don’t love me”.

      To this I say let everyone eat your cake. Let the old and the young and everyone else live their own lives. Life’s too short to let be controlled by the government.

  9. John Charles Henderson says:

    That is such an easy and obvious question to answer. Newt should of said: I will do everything in my power to STOP the irrational , redundant and unproductive spending in Washington and turn over more of these well intended but ineffective programs to state control. With all he debt we are laying on future generations by this administration, they don’t stand a chance and that is where I would start.

  10. Gibbs Bentley says:

    “If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner.”
    ~ H. L. Mencken

    1. Blake says:

      Well said. And having said that, Ron Paul is the only candidate that’s telling the truth in that, sooner or later, we’re going to have to pay back for all of our irresponsible fiscal behavior. There is no easy way out people. And the longer we wait, the harder it’s going to be.

      P.S. Ron Paul is the only candidate in either party that will actually close our southern border. One more amnesty, and we’re done.

  11. Roman says:

    That question was important and the way it was asked was correct. Some of the trouble is that old people do not respect young people’s interests when deciding how to vote; just as conservative christians do not respect those who disregard religion when deciding how to vote. If Iowans would have respected young people they would have given stronger consideration to Ron Paul, since it has been said that young people are interested in his convictions. The MSM also has disrespected young people in the same way when dismissing or dissing Ron Paul know full well they have expressed an interest in Ron Paul’s policies. That question has a clear answer, I know personally that the answer to that question is curbing government intrusion and control in the market and in systems that will be curtailing their civil liberties.

    1. SilaSez says:

      Really? Stronger consideration to the OLD, WHITE, ANGRY guy Paul? He’s an idiot who’s time has passed and has gotten more consideration than deserved. He’s better suited for a role on “Grumpy Old Men” or as one of the two guys in the theater on the Muppets than as President of the United States. We don’t need that old racist anywhere near the White House.

      1. Benjamin Napier says:

        Sila, you are an interesting critter. Ron Paul is the only person I know if running that understands the first little bit about economics and understands we will either stop our incessant wars and bring our troops home, we will stop borrowing ans spending money, we will shrink our federal government by at least 50% (for starters), qwe will close the federal reserve or we will cease to exist as acountry.

      2. Roman says:

        I was referring to young, hatian, happy guy paul.

      3. Methadras says:

        Benjamin, you are out of your mind if you think Ron Paul will do any of that, much less convince congress that it has to be done. He’s been in congress for 30 years and in those 30 years hasn’t convinced a single one of his colleagues much less any of the presidents during his tenure in the congress that his ideas are correct, much less executable.

        No. His ideas sounds great and they do have some merit, but they are grandiose and would cause erroneous problems. He’s a neo-isolationist and while he would derail American foreign policy and influence abroad, our rivals will gain strength. He wants fortress America, which wouldn’t be much of a fortress at all considering the leaking Southerner border we have now. Will he stop that? Unlikely. Much less his preposterous idea of returning to the gold standard, which would never work in a global economy as we have today.

        How would you like returning the value of your currency to be tied to a finite resource that other people will own and horde short which you cannot allow your own citizens to have? Will he allow more gold exploration while other countries start to use it against us by finding or buying their own? Furthermore, you have gold tied to the usage of electronic components and assemblies world wide, so how much do you think those will go up in price? What happens when gold becomes so scarce that your currency can no longer sustain the inflationary cost of the scant resource? Well, you either need to find more, because you can’t make it, steal it from your citizens who may already have it and stop them from attaining it, or go to war with other countries to steal theirs. Or guess what, go off the gold standard so you don’t hobble yourself by putting your gold back currency all in one basket.

        Frankly, the man is a leftist by all definition. What is his domestic policy outside of his libertarianism? What is he going to do with entitlements? Nothing, because he can’t. Instead he will posit that he will shut down 5 federal agencies and cut back the budget by $1 trillion, effectively cutting back government by about a third to one half. How does he propose to do that? You hear nothing but crickets on that front. Saying you will do something is completely different than having to show how you will do it and who supports it.

  12. FredTX says:

    Why in the world does the article just end without telling us Newt’s answer.. Yes, he was speechless at such an ill-worded question, but he did answer it…

    Who in their right mind writes an article that only focuses on half the conversation?

    1. Fryguy says:

      Thank you Fred. What a stupid article.

  13. Benjamin Napier says:

    That should have been the easiest question in the world for Old Newt. ” I will go to Washington and shut down most of government and will find a way to end SSI, medicare and medicade so you kids won’t be saddled with the debt you are now looking at” I humbly apologize for leaving things in such a mess and will spend the rest of my life tryign to fix the problems I, with others of my generation have caused. Above all, I will work to reduce the debt that I will leave to you.”

  14. SilaSez says:

    So this “young man” believes all the “old” people in the room will be gone in 10 years and he will still be living his life? How arrogant and foolish. Sad really that he thinks because he’s young that his life is guaranteed beyond his next breath…and I’d hardly say that Newt was left “speechless” as the headline would believe you to believe. What the headline should have said was “Newt asked question by young idiot”.

    1. Benjamin Napier says:

      I am confounded by your statement. We geezers have spent money that won’t be printed for another hundred years. We have left the youth of this country debts that they cannot pay. If we insist on keeping SSI in its present form, we will absolutely bankrupt the youth and destroy the country. I think Newt is an idiot and the kids asked a very fair question.

    2. William Davies says:

      OK, time to stop the Internet drivel and false assumptions (and, we know what happens when one “assumes”)…. First of all, let me say that the unidentified young man is, my son. I’m very proud him, and am glad he had the courage to present an idea and ask a question (even if not ideally formed by script writers). For the record, when he mentioned people being gone in 10 years, he meant more of a figurative sense than literal – the reality is, most of us who were in that room in Meredith will be retired [if not expired] in 10 years, including me.

      Now about my son: he is 22, and 1 of 10 children; during high school, he served his community for 4 years as a member of the Civil Air Patrol (including, an honor unit recognized in Washington D.C.), he also played soccer and established many lasting friendships; after high school, he became an international missionary, has been in 17 countries on 6 continents in 5 years, taught English in Africa for a year, survived sickness and surgery in foreign lands, and endured being abducted in India; he and his young wife started their college education through the University of the Nations while missionaries (she is currently a computer science major at UNH, while working part-time; my son works full-time to help pay for her schooling and living expenses, so they don’t have to take grants or incur the burden of loans); when my daughter-in-law completes her degree, my son is headed to finish his degree in science and engineering; additionally, he is well read and has a personal library that eclipses ones that many amass in a lifetime. My son has a strong work ethic and believes in giving back more than he takes…!

      In closing, my son was not necessarily asking what Washington was going to do for him personally, as much as he is concerned about a solid foundation for all citizens (including, his 15 year old sister who happened to be sitting next to him).

      If you would like to know this fine young man further, email me … we’ll do lunch.

      Sincerely, A Patriot and Proud Father.

      William Davies

      P.S. Any candidate seriously considering the presidency would be well-served by a constituency of young people [like my son]. Thank you!

    3. Rob says:

      I think this, too, was very sad. What a rude way to say a question.

  15. Pete says:

    Politics might be for old people, but it’s you young people who are going to have to pay the piper.

    Young people had better wake up and ask themselves, “how much longer can this country spend more than it takes in by borrowing ever increasing amounts of money, before the manure hits the fan?”

  16. Dorothy says:

    What a very foolish question on many levels. First he seems to have been conditioned to think that some leader in Washington is going to take care of him. Second he doesn’t realize the job of the government is not to take care of him but to regulate actions taking place among citizens. Third the young have no sense of the history of government, unable to see further back than the year they started to become aware of what is going on. Fourth, at what time do individuals stop being children and start being responsible for themselves.

    1. Dorothy says:

      I should have added that we were all born into a system we didn’t choose before we were born. What makes him think that we were born in perfect society. No matter the age, we have all had to work to improve the world in which we live.

    2. No To Slavery says:

      How about a leader in Washington who will end the debt and taxation bondage on young people? Slavery to the federal government is not helping anyone get ahead.

  17. ttj says:

    Ron Paul won’t give anybody anything, because he doesn’t stand a chance of being elected.

    This guy, however, asked a pertinent question. Newt Gingrich, rather than being left “speechless’ should have given him an answer. Really, why should this young guy vote for an older candidate…what is Newt proposing for the future of the country?

  18. DHBrooks says:

    Why do so many people commenting think he’s asking for a handout? He said right there in his question that he’s a hard-working individual, and his question is perfectly legitimate. The elderly are putting their wealth and luxury on a credit card they won’t have to pay back, one that will be passed on to the young as an ever-growing mountain of debt. Most of those who caused these problems will not be around to see the consequences. Chances are pretty good he will.

    Give the kid some credit. Why couldn’t Newt answer that question? What effect WILL he have on the long term future of America? That’s all he had to answer, but he couldn’t. Because he isn’t interested in the long term effects, just getting elected and being in power.

    1. GRBarker says:

      Spot on DHBrooks! There is scarcely a politician in Washington that thinks beyond the next election and what can be done for those who helped get him there. Look at the contributers, look at the sponsers and answer the young man’s question. The system no longer serves old or young. It serves the Banks and Large corporations and the war machine. Only one candidate is talking about ending costly wars, reducing the size of big goverrment and reigning in the federal reserve banking monopoly — and it is not Newt. It is the one and only man that the has taken the Constitution as his platform.

  19. Robin says:

    The premise of the question is faulty to begin with. .The assumption that a previous generation is responsible for the welfare of those in the next generation makes no sense. espcially when they are dead
    Or better yet, what is this young man going to do for himself and his generation. If we are dead,

    1. methadras says:

      He won’t be saddled with contributing to your entitlements.

  20. James Burkes says:

    Simple answer: get spending under control. Stop spending moeny we don’t have. Thatb alone will affect (for the better) the life this person has yet to live.

  21. Jesse Davies says:

    I am the “young buck” who asked the question, last night in Meredith, NH. I am impressed to see how many people are attacking me in the previous comments, though I am not at all surprised. I need not defend myself, because that would be in poor taste, tough I appreciate the well balanced opinions of those commenting on here that are speaking from a well-balanced worldview, most of all mature and realistic.

    I welcome the discussion and I hope this attractions everyones attention, for the greater good and a means for effective, lasting change that will enable the younger men and women of this country to operate with hope, in a world seemingly void of it.

    1. Dorothy says:

      Are you suggesting that challenging your thinking is in poor taste? I’m glad to see you are hearing other points of view. If you are as interested in government as you appear to be, start getting involved at the local level. No excuses. No letting others stop you. You will learn that real politics has very little to do with the media reporting of it.

      1. Jesse Davies says:

        I apologize for the miscommunication.

        I was suggesting that defending myself would be in poor taste, so to say, who am I think I am such and such? Not to mention boasting about myself online, of all places, which I find utterly useless! I need another to speak on my behalf.

        Thanks for your wise words of encouragement! I will consider them, most definitely.

  22. roman says:

    all the petroleum we need we can get now from Brazil, Venezuela, Mexico and Canada plus the large amount we can produce from our land. plus all the natural gas we need we can get from Bolivia, Venezuela, Canada and through fracking reserves in our own land. Lets bring the troops home now. Lets give our young people a crack at their future. stop buying oil form the middle east and lets get america united into one economic zone made off of two continents. ron paul is the only candidate that can help us begin that path. learn spanish.

  23. NVRAT says:

    It`s the “OLD PEOPLE” that must look after the young people. The decision(s) made today by the old people will effect the most youngest of our society. If the system works as our founding fathers envisioned to assure a free and prosperous country, those of us that pay attention to politics and compare our Representatives to those of the past will try to make the most out of the new laws, rules and regulations to assure all of them fall within the constitutional limits of our country. Unfortunately our educational institutions have slid towards the left and began to teach Socialism thereby clouding the issue of freedom and personal responsibility. Many of the “OLD PEOPLE” remember the days of personal responsibility and believed in the Constitution as to how it affects the lives of everyone in the country. As our society continues to gravitate to entitlements and socialism through the efforts of the progressives (Democrats) the young have no future in terms freedoms, riches or the opportunity to be creative other than to be a ward of the state. This has been tried in the former USSR (and many other country`s) and if you are old enough you have seen the fall of that Union and realize that it is the future of the USA. The creation of SSI, Medicaid etc. was the start of the decline and the Democrats have saddled the our society with the weight of these programs. The Young People at that time had no control over the New Deal. The young man asking the question now has that same responsibility so, what is the answer Socialism or Freedom? he is the future “OLD PERSON”.

  24. Cy Nick says:

    “You know, there are moments in this business where I’m just left speechless,” Gingrich said.”

    With Gingrich, it’s always been a business — all about his income.

    As long as career politicians rule this republic they will first and foremost position themselves as the beneficiaries of its largesse.

  25. Jenn says:

    As I began to post my thought that this was a Obama plant that asked the question, I look up to see the snarky post from Jesse, the ‘young buck’, laying claim to the question.

    What a load of hopey-changey clap trap.

    Just like I thought: Obama plant.

  26. fantum says:

    John Kennedy: Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country!

  27. dg says:

    This is the worst ‘news’ article I’ve ever seen. I am no fan of the GOP or Gingrich but I was listening to this event, and the writer goes out of their way to misrepresent the situation. Yes the above is all true, however it leaves out the important fact that Gingrich went on to specifically discuss 4 different issues issues in some detail that will affect the young man’s generation, including the future of a nuclear threat and crippling college debt. Being ‘speechless’ was a joke based on the admittedly funny way in which the question was prefaced.. this article makes it sound like Gingrich had nothing to say to the young man which is completely in correct. A several minute response followed.

  28. frank says:

    Newt will do nothing except for himself & friends. We’ll have to pay for it. I’m so tired of the assinine knocks on Ron Paul’s foreign policy — troops in the active military give him more than double what they give all other Republican candidates COMBINED. They are the ones there who know what is going on the best. And can you imagine that giant sucking sound of our money going into the middle eastern sand stopping for once? The level of prosperity that would follow for the USA!!! We’ll knock China right back in the dirt.

  29. David says:

    Gingrich can think on his feet. Lol.

  30. patty says:

    Newt is a heavyweight champion in a ring – he’s quick on his feet and can deliver the goods – can’t say that about Mittens can ya?

  31. web says:

    SSI isn’t for old people, I think one of its biggest problems is that is was expanded for all ages. I know many well able bodied people in their 20’s (young enough?) who are on SS disability for their emotional distress and not being able to work. boo hoo….same goes for some of the medicare.
    I think you work hard all your life, and yes, it would be nice if there was a small safety net from the government so that when you are old and feeble, you won’t die in the street. If you are young and not able to work…find a relative to live with. Let’s face it, young people can and should work and contribute, but I don’t think an 80 year old person has the ability to.

  32. glasshalf says:

    he’s not looking at the big picture…it’s not only about his life, but the life of country, the ideals that started her, and the prosperity that has brought..he’s looking 8 years out, but he needs to see the foundation being laid in those years, not the completion or final result…the left has created a deep foundation in this country that has taken us from an independent, self-reliant energetic mindset to one of sloth and superficiality..

  33. Don says:

    Ive got my plans and suit pivked out for my passing away. I dont want to suffer, so I was gonna drink drano. But I cant find my I.D. Soon to be Obama Govt TV ads.. Ive fallen and I cant get… Drano!!!

  34. Curtis Quico Reed says:

    The concept of the question is sound, but the manner in which he asked it just revealed the absurdity of the young man’s opinion. What value did it bring to suggest that in 10 years many of the attendees would be dead? Would it not be better simply to state “I will have to live with the results of the current politics for decades. What specific policies do you have that will benefit my life and career?”
    Gingrich really could have responded to the man about how reduction of debt and deficit and reduction of taxes would strengthen the job market, give him more money in his paycheck to invest, strengthen markets so retirement funds would be worth something, stabilize social security so it would be solvent when he retired, and many other similar statements. He missed a golden opportunity.

  35. willblogformoney says:

    And then Grumpy Gingrich yelled at him for walking on his lawn.

  36. Doc says:

    Life is a big cycle. Later on in life the young guy will have four stents in his heart , two knee replacements and probably a left hip replacement. After that he will come to me because his prostate is the size of a basketball. Trust me , his thoughts about others will change then. Prostectomy is on me , catch you on the flipside!

  37. David Powell says:

    It reminds me of Ronald Reagan. He was Governor of California when a young protestor, this being the late 1960s walked up and demanded to know what Reagan could do for young people. He told Reagan point blank that when people like Reagan was born there were no jet airplanes, no rockets to space, no television, and a lot of the things that the hip people of the day took for granted weren’t even around.

    Reagan looked back to the young man and said, “Son, that’s true. My generation had to invent them.”

  38. KenCatskin says:

    It’s an easy question to answer.

    ‘I hope to leave you with less government to deal with then you have when I take office.’

  39. Mike says:

    Does he have any plans to protect future taxpayers from massive debt as the workforce shrinks and boomers pass through Medicare?

  40. Brian says:

    Ron Paul connects big-time with the younger demographic. Go ahead and call them all “foolish”.

  41. David Bennett says:

    Wow! A real, honest to God question. Newt can’t answer those. Neither can the lunatic in Chief.

  42. David Bennett says:


    I forgot!

    RON PAUL 2012!!!
    RON PAUL 2012!!!
    RON PAUL 2012!!!
    RON PAUL 2012!!!
    RON PAUL 2012!!!

    1. Gwen Marsh says:

      Foolish question!! doesn’t this young man realize that what is decided today may affect future generations. Social Secuity was instituted 80 years ago and today young people are stiil affected by that liberal piece of work. Furthermore the world does not revolve around young people only it also revolves the very oldest person alive. There is nothing stopping young people from participating in the political system but they are not interested because they are just too interested in “having fun” or whining about their lot in life (occupy wallstreet) because they don’t “get” everythijng they want – spoiled brats. Advice: 1)Educated your self, learn about politics and change what you don’t like and work for what you do like. 2) the government CANNOT give you money or happiness you MUST learn what you want and then work for it. To whining young people – GROW UP!!!

  43. Doug says:

    This guy deserves credit for his honest question. People who are 60+ are the wealthiest age bracket in America, and the biggest bunch of whining hypocrites who constantly have their hand out to the government.

    Serial politicians like Gingrich cater to them because that’s where the money and voters are. If only more guys my age (like the questioner) would wake up. The Chinese aren’t robbing us blind, our grandparents are. Sad but TRUE.

  44. Gwen Marsh says:

    RON PAUL = Anti Semitic, anti black
    RON Paul = open borders
    RON Paul = legalize drugs including cocain and heroin
    RON PAUL = weaken and destroy our armed forces
    RON PAUL = Let Iran blow up the middle east and America with their nuclear
    bombs (who are we to interfer)
    RON Paul = America derserves what it got on 9/11 conspiracy

  45. T says:

    However awkwardly and offensively stated, this kid has hit the proverbial nail on the head and America has yet to realize it. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid for nursing home care, and the Older Americans Act Programs, coupled with the annual debt service these programs helped to create, consume approximately 55% of the annual federal budget. And the “Age Wave”, that is the Baby Boomer generation hitting 65, the year of eligibility for all of these entitlements is an unsurvivable financial tsunami for this young man’s generation.
    Thus, his question is most prurient.
    When The New Deal of the 40’s created Social Security, the average life Spanish of an American was in the early 60’s. Now, it’s almost the early 80’s.
    Until America recognizes government cannot manage eligibility for these entitlements for people starting at 65, which is really now one’s “late middle age”, America will continue to drive the financial locomotive of this country off the proverbial cliff. And, as a lifelong advocate of older people, I would tell you that lots of them are terribly worried for their grandchildren, agree with the characterization, and are willing to openly talk about it.
    Regrettably, politicians, like this alleged intellectual genius, “don’t get it” or don’t have the political courage to try.

  46. Founders1791 says:

    “The Constitution only guarantees the American people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.”
    — Benjamin Franklin

  47. Frank says:

    He’s absolutely right, career politicians that have spent decades in Washington and have attributed greatly to the influence of the old boys club like Newt don’t care for the younger generation or the prosperity of this country because they have already benefited from this country in their own lives by raping and abusing its disposition to benefit their own special interests. The legacy that they have chosen to leave is not of one that is better than they came into, but one worse when they left it because when they die, they won’t care what happens to this country because their lives have already been fulfilled as they’ve already taken full advantage of what this country had to offer and abused it to no end. Their legacy in turn is nothing more than giving the middle finger to this country in thinking that they got theirs, why should they care about what happens to this country’s future? It’s a selfish and greedy ideology, but you see Obama and the democrats primarily instilling that consensus each and every day with the overwhelming abuse of power the attempt to wield with their influence.

  48. Cleary says:

    So let me answer this young man in the way that Newt SHOULD have answered this, and this is why I am no longer enamored of Gingrich. (Though any Republican – even Ron Paul, is better than The Messiah). The answer to that young man is this: What ANY of the Republicans will do for you is give you a President who loves and doesn’t hate America. You will have a President who values contract law, who understands and cherishes the difference between the public sector which can very quickly become a class of parasites (read that again) and the private sector which is the engine of our culture. You will have a President who doesn’t pay homage to idiots with no stake in the system like the OWS crowd. You will have a President who (as long as it’s not Ron Paul) values our military and will treat our friends as friends and our opponents and enemies as the SHOULD be treated. You will have a President who is eager to bring down the national debt and who won’t create wastelands like Solyndra. You will have a President who doesn’t confuse the providing of safety nets (necessary) with big entitlement boondoggles like MessiahCare. How’s that for starters?

  49. Chris Diamond says:

    I think it is a completely fair question that deserves as much attention as anything discussed regarding seniors in our country. We have a responsibility as individuals to take care of our parents and our grandparents, but if we’re at an immediate disadvantage in taking care of ourselves, how in the world can we hope to take care of them?

  50. Gerard says:

    Its a very valid question.. washington has sent kids overseas to fight, ostensiblynfor freedom, but anone with a clear head knows it was to keep the oil flowing, all the while we dontndrill our own.. Washington looks the other way on illegal immigration.. We have 14million unemployed, with another 10 million underemployed, and we have 12 million illegals herebworking. That crushes entry level jobs for your people and the semi retired and ….keeps downward pressure on wages… washington has outsourced jobs and entire industries.. Washington over regulates and hinders business growth and profits, and us older folks will be a terrible burden on our kids due to a huge imbalance between what we stand to receive in social security and medicae and what the young will be required to pay…All of the above has been created and fostered by the folks in Ongress the Senate and the White House….It sure is a valid question.

  51. Derek Smart says:

    LOL… Newt’ has plenty of pop, left in that old soda bottle.

  52. Derek Smart says:

    As did Ronald Reagan’s jobs plan, Newt’s plan would greatly help the jobs market… for both the almost gone and young alike.

    Romney’s plan, is weak to say the least. He has mostly nothing but bla bla bla to run on.

  53. Steven Vincent says:

    He asks a vaiild, cogent, legitimate question and Gingrich and his supporters laughed. If you cannot give a serious answer to that question you are not fit to be President.

  54. Mark Wells says:

    This is the question of our time. I think Dave is spot on in his question and I don’t infer any dependency bias on his part. He is asking what the president with congress can do to turn the current course of government and make sure his life is not used as nothing more than a mechanism to pay someone else’s debt. Dave didn’t ask for entitlements that are now bankrupting future generations. The older people in the room (those who will be dead in 10 years ) did. They have rigged the system with unsustainable and unconstitutional programs that benefited themselves and cannot be shut off without pain. I’m sure Newt answered the question well. I think he was speechless that the old people didn’t attack Dave when he asked “who farted”.

  55. Derek Smart says:

    The exchange was “funny”. Because of the way the this young man kept writing off the old folks in the room. Newt played off on that, not the actual question he was asking.

    Besides, Newt has the best fix for our “Soicial Security” system. Just one of many real solutions for our economy and this young mans future.

    1. Jack Mehoff says:

      Social is spelled S-O-C-I-A-L.

  56. Derek Smart says:

    Only the anti-Newt people can find a ways to turn this into a negative moment. It was “FUNNY”

  57. Jerrod says:

    OK, I have read a lot of comments and seen a lot of things that I think are inaccurate.
    On defense: Our country can defend itself from other nations just fine. We cannot defend ourselves from the treasonous forces at work here at home. Wars have always been about two things, religion or money not that that is a specific order of occurrence. The majority of wars are started to enrich the banking cartels, let’s face it if your loaning money to the participants in both sides of a war then who is it that is actually winning? Makes sense that the richest of the rich would push a war agenda.
    9/11 was perpetrated in order that A: banks would get rich and B: as an excuse to take away our freedoms here at home. The war on terror is a fantastic idea because you have a faceless enemy who will never give up and the war can go on literally forever. This will lead to more wars, more lost freedoms at home, more debt to the banking cartels.
    Ron Paul is the best hope for reversing this disastrous cycle. We as Americans should be terrified at the freedoms lost in this country and of what the New World Order has in mind for our future. One world government is coming rapidly, and my guess is that NATO will be the head at least initially. Henry Kissinger reportedly stated that China was the idea model for society. Is this what we have to look forward to? I would like to leave you with a link to a site with a load of valuable information on what is REALLY going on both in our government and the world in general.
    I have been reading the stuff on this site and it truly has opened my eyes.

  58. Flo says:

    My husband and I watched the TownHall meeting, and felt he handled the question very well. He took his time and was very sincere with the answer. After the meeting, everyone that was there stood in line to either ask more questions and take pictures. The young adult also was in line, shook Newt’s hand and took a picture with him.

  59. David Cholesterol says:

    Since you deliberately edited out Newt’s brilliant response, this is nothing more than liberal propaganda to make the dopey stoner look smart.

  60. Mark says:

    This kid’s (not man’s) remarks were disrespectful and ignorant. Sounded more like an entitled ‘what’s in it for me’ type of individual as opposed to a hard working one. I know Newt answered the question (off air) but this is why I’d never make it in politics; boobs like this asking ignorant and disrepectful questions. “The government is not for just ONE group but rather for the entire population”. Sounds like he’s anxious to ‘bury’ everyone in the room and is definitely more ‘out of touch’ than even Washington is.

  61. George says:

    Newt, by remaining speechless, said it “all”. He knows there is NO FUTURE for young people because of the failed policies of the past and also knowing there is NOTHING he can do to change that. And the only hope for old people, who have only 10 years or less, is heaven.

    A question I have is why anyone would attend one of those foolish BS campaign stops appearances and believe any of these candidates can actually make a difference….Republican or Democrat?

    Does anyone ever read what they stand for? “Cut, cap and balance” and having had, I KID YOU NOT, “a mix of experience in the public and private sectors.”

    Now doesn’t that allow you to go to sleep tonight feeling so comfortable and secure about your economic future with strong convincing statements like that? LOL