Rick Perry struggles at Republican debate

[soopaman2]

I almost feel sorry for Mr. Perry.

Don't get that confused with "liking". I am still voting for Lady Gaga'

Bush was a bad debater too, but a strong president. No one messed with Bush, and like it or not, he spoke honestly and from his heart

In before you blame the financial meltdown on him, that was a combination of Reagan era "supply side" econimics (aka trickle down) and Clinton era NAFTA agreements.

In summation, a persons speaking abilities alone is never a fair guage on the true character of the man. I guess all I am asking is to be fair, and look at all sides of a candidate, before you choose, or ridicule.

These men are still human.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by soopaman2

In before you blame the financial meltdown on him, that was a combination of Reagan era "supply side" econimics (aka trickle down) and Clinton era NAFTA agreements.

I agree, although it is worth pointing out that NAFTA was a piece Reagan-era diplomacy dating back to 1986, later signed (symbolicaly) by George H. W. Bush and formally ratified under the Clinton administration. That puts the paw prints of three US presidents on the disaster.

[soopaman2]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I agree, although it is worth pointing out that NAFTA was a piece Reagan-era diplomacy dating back to 1986, later signed (symbolicaly) by George H. W. Bush and formally ratified under the Clinton administration. That puts the paw prints of three US presidents on the disaster.

Thanks for the elaboration.

This puts our problem at failed policy, rather than failed ideaology.

Both left and right can learn a bit from another.

Somewhere in between is where the "real Americans" are.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by soopaman2

Thanks for the elaboration.

This puts our problem at failed policy, rather than failed ideaology.

Both left and right can learn a bit from another.

Somewhere in between is where the "real Americans" are.

This is, for the most part, my own political belief, although I would invert the opening statement to a degree. Our policies have failed because of our collective obsession with ideology. Just look at political discussion on SubSim as an example in microcosm. Too many feel that their ideology must be taken pure as a solution to all, and that those who do not adhere to this dogma are somehow cancerous. We no longer compromise. We no longer do that which we have, historically, done best. And so each party's 'turn' in office ends in the same result--failure.

[soopaman2]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

This is, for the most part, my own political belief, although I would invert the opening statement to a degree. Our policies have failed because of our collective obsession with ideology. Just look at political discussion on SubSim as an example in microcosm. Too many feel that their ideology must be taken pure as a solution to all, and that those who do not adhere to this dogma are somehow cancerous. We no longer compromise. We no longer do that which we have, historically, done best. And so each party's 'turn' in office ends in the same result--failure.

What can I say?

I can make folks read it again though.

Politics has taken on a "Sports team" type situation.

It's like when I got to the Yankee vs Mets (aka subway series games).
The opposing fans spit on each other, but in the end we are all new Yorkers.

I always got to Mets home turf with my Yankees gear and always end up shaking hands with a bunch of met fans at the end of the game. Even got a ride to a hotel across the bridge when I was too drunk to drive.

If New Yorkers can do it, then why can't anyone else? I thought we were the biggest jerks in the world?!?

[Bilge_Rat]

Perry on Letterman joking about his performance:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68116.html

I actually think that is a wise move, trying to make light of it with self-deprecating humour.

[Platapus]

I don't think his mistake will make any difference nor will it change anyone's minds. People who like him will continue to support him, people who don't like him will continue to dislike him.

I feel the same about the Cain issue. I really can't see anyone changing their opinion of him based on just this.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Originally Posted by soopaman2

Bush was a bad debater too, but a strong president. No one messed with Bush, and like it or not, he spoke honestly and from his heart

Could you then tell me where he hid Saddam's weapons of mass destruction?

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by kraznyi_oktjabr

Could you then tell me where he hid Saddam's weapons of mass destruction?

In his safe at his ranch, right next to the reports that say Saddam helped the Al-Qaeda.

[soopaman2]

Originally Posted by kraznyi_oktjabr

Could you then tell me where he hid Saddam's weapons of mass destruction?

I am usually somewhat pretty left leaning. And not a big Bush fan, but he had testicles. And other world leaders didn't think him a joke. Bush as a republican, compared to the ones running today, was a moderate.

Do you understand Presidents get their info from intelligence agencies?

Do you know the huge backlash, and reorganization that happened to those agencies after this came out to be not true? The American people themselves were angry.

I can write 15 posts on how bad Bush was, but can write just as many on the good he did. It is easy to throw stones from across the sea.

Pardon me for being objective, rather than blindly partisan

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Originally Posted by soopaman2

I am usually somewhat pretty left leaning. And not a big Bush fan, but he had testicles. And other world leaders didn't think him a joke. Bush as a republican, compared to the ones running today, was a moderate.

Its very unfortunate that I have to agree with this.

Originally Posted by soopaman2

Do you understand Presidents get their info from intelligence agencies?

Yes, I understand that.

Originally Posted by soopaman2

Do you know the huge backlash, and reorganization that happened to those agencies after this came out to be not true? The American people themselves were angry.

I have not seen anykind of evidence of this. Apparently it wasn't news worthy in this side of the pond. Could you provide some links?

Originally Posted by soopaman2

I can write 15 posts on how bad Bush was, but can write just as many on the good he did. It is easy to throw stones from across the sea.

Pardon me for being objective, rather than blindly partisan

I personally hate Mr. Bush, I admit that. However I don't say that he was bad in everything. Just wanted to make this clear as your text sounds like you think I'm all leftie peace loving anti-Republican who would support and vote Democrat even if his/her policies would be like taken from Mein Kampf.

Do you understand Presidents get their info from intelligence agencies?

do you remember how the nations ridiculed and rejected the "intelligence" that was presented.
Poor old Powell, to see his career reduced to that level by the White House ideological crusade

[Bilge_Rat]

Romney rivals continue to implode

[Gerald]

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2...for-romney/?hp

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by soopaman2

In before you blame the financial meltdown on him, that was a combination of Reagan era "supply side" econimics (aka trickle down) and Clinton era NAFTA agreements.

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I agree, although it is worth pointing out that NAFTA was a piece Reagan-era diplomacy dating back to 1986, later signed (symbolicaly) by George H. W. Bush and formally ratified under the Clinton administration. That puts the paw prints of three US presidents on the disaster.

OMG, how DARE either of you say anything bad about Saint Ronald Wilson Reagan!
(Yes that's sarcasm. Policies aside, I just remember as a kid how everyone looked up to him. He was like this great fatherly figure. Guess that was his Teflon coating, eh? )

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

This is, for the most part, my own political belief, although I would invert the opening statement to a degree. Our policies have failed because of our collective obsession with ideology. Just look at political discussion on SubSim as an example in microcosm. Too many feel that their ideology must be taken pure as a solution to all, and that those who do not adhere to this dogma are somehow cancerous. We no longer compromise. We no longer do that which we have, historically, done best. And so each party's 'turn' in office ends in the same result--failure.

I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsleter. Or nominate this as political post of the year.