Rick Perry struggles at Republican debate

[Gerald]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15669242


Note: 10 November 2011 Last updated at 03:40 GMT

[Gerald]

The man with many faces,

[Ducimus]

Wow watching that was painful. That brainfart was like watching W and Palin all rolled into one.

[Gerald]

[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.

[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?

[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.

[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

[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.

[papa_smurf]

Good to see its just not UK politicians mess things up.

[Gerald]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15684676

[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