-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Everybody has at some point lost their train of thought. I’ve set out to make multiple points on television and forgotten one, or forgotten if I had run through them all, before myself. So on one level, Rick Perry’s inability to remember the third federal agency he would eliminate is simply part of being human.
Unfortunately, it also seems to be a big part of what it means to be candidate Rick Perry. There are small debate gaffes that seem to sum up what’s wrong with an entire campaign — Bob Dole’s “Democrat wars” line in 1976, George Bush looking at his watch in 1992, Al Gore sighing prissily and behaving like a lunatic in 2000. This is one of them.
Perry has bombed every debate since he entered the race. He has generally seemed uniformed and uninterested in matters of substance. His forgetfulness was the only memorable thing about his entire performance. Fairly or not, it has raised questions about his intellect. Perry has also raised questions about his two biggest assets: his conservatism relative to Mitt Romney and his electablity relative to all the non-Romney candidates. Perry’s slip symbolizes both problems. It is hard to imagine him successfully debating President Obama. And what conservative can’t come up with considerably more than three agencies he would like to abolish?
The Perry camp no doubt is aware that this was a significant problem. A Washington Post blogger tweeted that a major Perry fundraiser told him, “Perry campaign is over. Time for him to go home and refocus on being Gov of TX.” Perry took to the spin room himself to admit he’d stepped in it after the debate. Not a good showing, and not for the first time. We’ll see if it’s the last.
Sean| 11.10.11 @ 12:26AM
Perry is an empty suit. A dumb one at that. He has trouble remembering lines that other people have given him. That is why he is doing terrible in these debates.
Kingofthenet| 11.10.11 @ 2:52PM
First Post NAILED it, these aren't 'HIS' thoughts, they are given to him, it's hard to remember or care when it's not your own.
Alleena| 11.10.11 @ 12:30AM
I have to disagree. I watched the entire debate. I thought Rick Perry did a good job. He forgot a third government agency for about five minutes. I didn't judge him by the five minutes; I judged him by how he did over the two hours.
If you disgree with Rick Perry's policies, don't vote for him. If all you see is five minutes of a two hour debate, please don't vote. What these debates have taught me is that most commentators are more interested trashing people according to the consensus than in telling things as they happened.
Dayna| 11.10.11 @ 1:27AM
Alleena , I can't add much more to what you said ,I totally agree, you can help with a lot of things but you just can't help shallow.
Grzmlyk| 11.10.11 @ 1:46AM
"It is hard to imagine him successfully debating President Obama."
Are you kidding? It is hard to imagine Perry successfully debating a shoe.
I'm sorry, but the man couldn't spell "cat" if you spotted him the "c" and the "t."
Please, Mr. Perry, for the love of God, stop the insanity. Do not go on. Do not appear in any more debates. Do not even speak any more. Just put duct tape over your mouth and slink away.
It may suck and it may be unfair, but this man should NEVER be near a camera or a microphone again.
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.10.11 @ 6:23AM
Grz,
before you make a complete ass of yourself, please check this out.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7386800n
Grzmlyk| 11.10.11 @ 9:10AM
Ken, just because Perry is from Texas doesn't make him a messiah.
I think any sentient human being would say it is Perry who continually makes an ass of himself, and so do you, Yosemite Sam. Yee hah, buy a fucking clue.
Margie| 11.10.11 @ 11:19AM
I second that emotion.
While Ken the old Tex is busy accusing soooome here of being "judgmental", just try speaking your mind, no less stand on Scripture, and he'll demean the Hell out of you, or falsely accuse you of things and try to destroy you.
Better watch it, Grz, you might be next. Just keep speaking your mind, as honestly as you do.
As to Rick Perry~ I agree with your assessment. And from the very beginning (and I've said it here), he has struck me as a man who isn't really INTO becoming President, doesn't seem to really want it, unlike his opposite in that department, Herman Cain.
He has always struck me as a man whose wife has put him up to it, instead. Hey, those are MY thoughts, what can I say?
Guess I've just "made an ass of myself", too.
LOL.
Grzmlyk| 11.10.11 @ 3:24PM
Yes, it's hard to say if Perry has the fire in the belly or what exactly's going on there - lack of preparation, some kind of learning disability - who knows?
I heard Rush Limbaugh make light of Perry's latest in a long line of gaffes - I understand Rush wants to circle the wagons around all the GOP contenders, but can anyone imagine Perry as the nominee, going head-to-head with Obama or having to conduct a news conference?
It would be like feeding time at the zoo.
I keep waiting for Perry to show some improvement in his debating skills. Looks like I'll be waiting a very long time.
As an aside, who told these GOP nominees that they had to do 50 debates - mostly hosted by unfriendly mainstream media blowhards?
They've become just another reality TV show - people watch hoping for a train wreck. But the results are always the same - Newt hits it out of the park (but can't overcome his baggage); Cain performs well but lacks specifics; Romney's amazingly slick and is declared the winner; Perry implodes; Bachman and Santorum are ignored; Paul has his cheerleaders and answers domestic questions wonderfully even as he veers into unreality on foreign policy - every debate seems to be a repeat of the one before it.
Margie| 11.10.11 @ 11:46PM
Gryz,
I like your honesty, and because you're honest, you get things right most of the time. (Of course, that's in MY good old humble opinion. :^).
Now, don't go taking that smiley face the wrong way. Ken thinks I asked him to marry me.. yet he hasn't posted that mysterious e mail to that effect. Just don't want you to get the wrong idea. LOL.
Anyhow, I was wondering if you saw that video of Mrs. Perry where she talked all about getting her husband to run for President. It was at some kind of conference or get together of friends or something. I'll try and find it, and you can judge for yourself.
That's why I say what I say about it~ that maybe he's not really into it. It was her actually convincing him to run. And she was talking about his "persecution" because he's a Christian. I don't remember if she actually used the word persecution, but she was acting like it's because he's a Christian that people are treating him the way they are. I kept asking myself, huh? Treating him what way? I somehow must've missed that.
I can't help being honest myself~ if you really WANT to become President, you'll show it. I'd vote for him. I just don't know if he wants it himself, I honestly can't tell.
As to the debates, ah, let them have them all, I must be nuts because I like seeing the candidates speak~ I get to see their spirits/personalities in action, get the whole picture of the person. But I know what you mean, and I think you are right in your assessments of them.
Yet, these are the individuals who are putting themselves out there for our sakes, and I respect that.
Hey, you could always run, dude. Hee hee.
Seriously though, you COULD. So could Simon Templar here.
See, this is partly why I like Herman Cain so much. He's genuine. And he's not just another politician.
He's like you guys.
Know what I mean?
Grzmlyk| 11.10.11 @ 9:30AM
By the way, in that video, he's speaking to a friendly audience. On the national stage, as a Republican, he's virtually NEVER going to face a totally friendly audience - and he folds like a cheap suitcase under those circumstances.
As I said in my original comment, it may be unfair - it probably is; I mean, the man MUST be able to function at some level. But he would be eaten alive during a general campaign.
And, by the way, I sympathize with him; when I get flustered my IQ drops by about 50 points. But that's one reason I don't pursue political office. You simply cannot come off on national TV like a moron, and he does - EVERY SINGLE TIME.
His candidacy is a non-starter, Ken. Ain't gonna happen.
rightasrain| 11.10.11 @ 7:45AM
As excited as I was to see Perry enter the race, I am now more excited to see him exit. How could we ever nominate a candidate whose debate performances are so cringe-inducing? All of us here are continuously politically engaged and informed but many Americans only become interested after watching the major candidates debate. It would be disastrous for us to nominate Perry and have to put his pathetic debating skills against Obama's.
BalmerLiberal | 11.10.11 @ 8:06AM
Rick Perry: Part of a complete breakfast. In other words -- he's TOAST!
http://www.examiner.com/libera.....-breakfast
JimH| 11.10.11 @ 8:25AM
As I replied to Aaron's article below, Texas toast.
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.10.11 @ 9:00AM
Antle and TAS,
Just stay on Governor Perry's butt!
Governor Perry is aimed at firing SEVEN OR EIGHT departments...not just three.
That's OK, guys. Perhaps we can elect him the President of Texas, and the rest of your piddly ass States can freeze in the dark without our oil and gas and good government.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7386800n
Derek Leaberry| 11.10.11 @ 9:05AM
Occasionally the glib Winston Churchill would lose his train of thought when making a speech to the House of Commons and would have to sit down. So even the best speakers have mind locks. Perry's problem is that television, radio and the internet amplify his mind lock of last night. What is more worthy of criticism is that Perry has no intention of mothballing agencies and departments. Moreover, even if a Republican wins the presidency in 2012 with a mandate, the Republicans take the Senate and retain their House majority, the Republicans will not mothball one department and most likely no smaller agencies. The concept of the Republican Party as being the party of small government is a lie.
JimH| 11.10.11 @ 9:24AM
Churchill could not be elected in this country and perhaps not in Britain now either. His was a face and body not meant for television, unfortunately a fatal flaw in these superficial days.
Derek Leaberry| 11.10.11 @ 9:30AM
Excellent point, Jim. Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and George Washington couldn't be elected these days either. Instead we elect Barbara Boxer, Patty Murray, Barack Obama, Barbara Mikulski, John McCain and an army of half-wits to office.
Grzmlyk| 11.10.11 @ 10:17AM
Also, Jim, Great Britain itself summarily dumped Churchill in 1945, after the war was won.
In today's deluge of 24-7 images, the sad fact is that leaders don't have the luxury of being selective in their appearances; they cannot stage-manage their images in the same way as they used to, when FDR's fireside chats were a big event. Today's politicians - all of them, not just the president - are in our face all day, through radio, TV, the Internet, podcasts.
Whether this is a healthy turn of events is irrelevant. The fact is, Perry simply comes off as an idiot under the glare of oppositional questioning. Again, it's not fair - he may be a very capable guy. It doesn't matter. He will NEVER get the nomination. And, frankly, his deer in the headlights vapor lock worries me - think of all the off-the-cuff questions a president has to deal with. Think of world summits and interactions with leaders both domestic and foreign that are on camera. If you can't think on your feet, you can't cut it as the leader of America. I mean, George Bush was pilloried at home and abroad for his inarticulateness, and he was positively William F. Buckley and Dennis Miller combined compared to Perry on the national stage.
Michael Jordan was a tremendous athlete - perhaps the greatest basketball player of all time. But when he tried to play baseball, he couldn't hit a fastball; he looked BAD on the ballfield, even though he was brilliant on the hardwood.
Jordan gave up his dream of being a major league ball player, and Perry is going to wind up giving up his dream - and I'm not even convinced his heart's in it - of being president.
Grzmlyk| 11.10.11 @ 10:04AM
Derek is correct.
It's very easy to glibly assert you are going to eliminate entire departments. It ain't gonna happen.
The balance of power has shifted in the last 50 years; the real power does not lie with the chief executive when it comes to the inertial momentum of the DC Ruling Class. These career lobbyists, staffers, activists and bureaucrats have more power in their lowliest representative in terms of holding onto their turf than any transient president, who's going to be GONE in 8 years max while this lowly bureaucrat will continue to amass larger and larger income and benefits for the REST OF HIS LIFE.
One obvious illustration of this is that all of us accept that every government department must grow LARGER every year, and the language for slowing the INCREASE in the size of governments is now accepted as "cutting government." So if Tom has a budget for 2012 of $50 million, and that is scheduled to go up to $60 million in 2013, and I come in and say, you know, Tom, we're only going to up your budget by $5 illion in 2013, so you'll have $55 million, not $60 million - the entire WORLD views that $5 million INCREASE in Tom's budget as a CUT.
Even Republicans buy into this rubric.
Republicans have no vested interest whatsoever in a truly smaller government; they're about cosmetic changes and, yes, allowing the welfare state to continue by modifying it somewhat.
But any presidential candidate who vows he's going to eliminate whole departments is creating an unkept campaign promise. After all, Reagan was going to elimiante Energy - it grew under the Gipper.
Bob K.| 11.10.11 @ 9:36AM
Perry has never learned to think in sound bytes and talk in slogans as every successful presidential candidate must do these days. Especially since the leadership of our nation will turn, not on the message delivered, but on who is the most articulate speaker in the 5 minutes that television gives them to deliver any message they have. This, as most political advisers will agree, is the maximum extent of the average voters attention span. Hence the criticism of Perry. He is remembered not for what he says but for how he says it.
crazy| 11.10.11 @ 11:57AM
Imagine if this standard were applied to other famous figures who choked on occasion there would be no home runs, strikeouts, winning shots at the buzzer, overtime wins, etc because we'd be so risk-averse we'd only select the safest players. So let's get this over with and anoint the safest choice - you know, the guy 70% doesn't like because of 100% of what he's been both for and against.
Byron York probably called this about right when he said Perry and his folks are still trying to do a year's worth of preparation on-the-fly while still doing the day job of governing Texas. Perry's book would lead us to believe he's inclined to advocate major reform for ALL of them not just the 3 the staff thought would make the best sound bite.
I can think of plenty of reasons not to elect Gov Perry, but this isn't one of them.
Margie| 11.10.11 @ 12:02PM
It doesn't have anything to do with trying to prepare on the fly while governing, that's lame.
It has everything to do with his desire to be President, and to me, and plenty of others, he just isn't showing it.
It doesn't take "preparation", it takes the right spirit, and DESIRE.
Herman Cain, case in point!
Grzmlyk| 11.10.11 @ 12:05PM
Crazy, Perry has choked during 100 percent of the debates.
Ask a major league team to sign a player who was great in the minors, or who hits over .300 when his team is ahead, but strikes out in the clutch, with men on base, every time.
If you're a sports fan, you'd be crying for the team to unload the guy.
This is not a small deal. Thinking on one's feet under the glare of an antagonistic spotlight is pretty much what a Republican nominee will do all the time during his campaign. And, should he win the presidency, every single day he will be compelled many times to speak in front of the cameras - often on the fly. He will also have to deal with sudden exigencies on the fly.
I actually LIKE Perry. I think he might be a good president in many ways.
But a major league outfielder who cannot hit a fastball will not be a major leaguer for very long - even if he's a gold-glove fielder, he can run faster than anybody else on the team and he's smart.
martin j smith| 11.10.11 @ 1:27PM
We have no messiahs. We have bunch of very imperfect people who are less imperfect than Obama by a lot. My position is that some of the pundits do the Socialists too many favors. Battering candidates makes it more difficult to run a campaign. I think that needs to be born in mind because some one will have to deal with Obama. Do you really want to give Socialists ammunition ?
rightasrain| 11.10.11 @ 1:47PM
Martin, we're not giving the Socialists any ammunition, Perry is doing an excellent job of that all by himself. I was a Perry fan, but the fact that he is so bad and has actually gotten worse with every debate is mind-boggling. I'd rather deal Cain with all his sexual baggage than have to deal with yet another Republican that all the Dems and the MSM label a moron. It's too exhausting
Simon Templar| 11.10.11 @ 2:31PM
Your last sentence is very revealing and forms the basis of your focus and concern.
"I'd rather deal Cain with all his sexual baggage than have to deal with yet another Republican that all the Dems and the MSM label a moron. It's too exhausting."
Now, I am not singly you out but I could not resist in giving some feedback to you and all the rest on the thread here.
The reality here is quite simple. We need to do exactly as Martin suggests. We must stop tearing down our candidates for the smallest infractions and mistakes, stop jumping on the liberal smear campaign bandwagons, stop listening and accepting their liberal narratives, accusations, and criticisms, and stop giving the MSM and Dems credibility on their political attacks.
As far as they are concerned we all are morons, not just our candidates. Right now, they are attacking Cain with a Chicago style smear sunami to take him out. His sexual baggage? How is that?
Please tell me just how many states there are in the US, Mr. Obama? Corps, moron, not corpse.
What you need to start doing is not accepting the double standard and judging our candidates by their double standard.
Now, if you feel that a candidate, can not seem to handle public presentation and public debates as they might lack those skills and you think they are essential in a Presidency, then fine. But this does not mean they are a moron or should be treated with the disrespect that you show to your own. Save it for the enemy, they deserve the disrespect.
Perry may not be ready yet, but the guy is certainly not a moron. His accomplishments in Texas are well known and he has been a very effective leader there and should be damn proud of it.
rightasrain| 11.10.11 @ 6:03PM
Simon, my point was that Perry is doing this to himself by being so pitiful during the debates. The MSM doesn't have to manufacture any smears against him--it's right there for all to see. Of course I don't think Perry is a moron, but having to go through the procedural exercise of proving over and over again that you're not an idiot before anyone listens to you on the substance is just too much of a hurdle.
Simon Templar| 11.10.11 @ 6:54PM
You are right and he is taking responsibility for it and admitting he screwed up. I know what you are trying to communicate. The point again is not making this out to be a campain killer or overreacting and letting oneself be too influenced and played by the MSM or feeling like you have to explain anything to these asshole liberals.
Try to remember when their great Obama ran and all the incredible screw ups and gaffes which seemed to matter nothing at all.
Like I said, let's first tell the liberals to screw off, they have not a leg or argument to stand on, and you and I will judge our candidates worthiness and what WE feel is important. The general American public is very forgiving and forgetful..keep that in mind. Remeber these are just human beings and can not always live up to perfection. It is the slick, never make a gaffe idiots that we have to look out for, these are the dangerous ones.
Margie| 11.10.11 @ 11:55PM
Simon is a good soul.
You're right.
I hope you can see that my point is that I just plain wonder if he's really into it. It isn't just one debate that is telling, but it's getting to be every debate.. is he sabotaging himself purposely? Why does he keep acting strange? He looked and acted really stupidly toward Romney in the one debate with the illegals Romney supposedly hired, when Perry himself is into freebies for the illegals in his own state.
And actually, if a man isn't truly into running for President, he shouldn't. This isn't grade school. It's serious business. I can't see him getting the nomination unless he starts showing he really wants it.
That's just my opinion. I'll be happy to vote for him if he wins it.
Solo| 11.10.11 @ 3:20PM
Well said, Simon but.....
I've been a Perry fan and cheerleader for some time now and I keep making excuses for his gaffes and apparent lack of preparation in these debates.
I keep waiting for him to show up at the debate and really hit one 'out of the park'. And...every debate, it actually gets worse--not better.
Like it or not, debate skills are critical in this process. If you can't thrust and parry with your opponent, you're skewered.
Too bad Rick Santorum doesn't have more financial backing. He may be the most viable "non-Romney" candidate left standing.
Simon Templar| 11.10.11 @ 4:46PM
Thank you, Solo.
It is my personal opinion that public speaking skills and the ability to communicate and connect clearly with your audience is an asset as a President. Not sure if debate skills are that necessary particularly the ones needed for these farces the MSM calls debates.
Thrusting and parrying with your opponent may be really needed if you are a congressman.
I think, what is needed in a President is the ability to actually listen to everybody, see the flaws and strengths in these opinions and ideas, and make a reasonable, logical, and effective decision. Diplomacy and a disarming demeanor and style served Ronald Reagan very well. The biggest asset is having some ideas and a vision and being able to explain it to others.
Just wanted to clarify....
As far as Santorum, I have no doubt that if he did indeed rise to the top of the polls, he would be smeared and ridiculed just like all the rest. They will make it up, if they have to do so. I am sure he would stumble into one of thier traps, he is human like the rest of us.
The idea which I seem to be having trouble communicating lately on my post is that anyone of these people would be better than what we have now but we do not seem to recognize this, act like it, or incorporate it in our thinking and reaction to these candidates.
We got to stop pissing in our pants every time they make a mistake, the MSM throws a mud ball or accusation, or they seem to lack one thing or another.
How can anyone honestly say that other than perhaps Cain and Gingrich that they know anything of real substance about them, their ideas, or their solutions? These debates are worthless and are ONLY opportunities for the liberal MSM to make our people look like fools. Gingrich is the only one who refuses to be played and fall for the idiotic traps. Is this how we want to pick OUR candidate? Tell me?
Sunnyr| 11.10.11 @ 3:42PM
Don't sweat the small stuff, Governor Perry. Remember, the "most powerful man on the planet doesn't know how to pronounce the word, "corpsman," and he's the WORST excuse for a leader we have ever had in our nations highest office.
Kick butt and take names, Rick! You are a REAL Leader, with a REAL record of achievement who will be a REAL Commander in Chief. Good luck in the Saturday Debate!
ILLEGITIMI NON CARBORUNDUM!
Perry - 2012!
Kingofthenet| 11.10.11 @ 4:10PM
The 'Bigger' issue is, where does ANYONE running for President Get off thinking He/She can create and end ENTIRE Federal Depts. at will? Your running for President, not King.
Simon Templar| 11.10.11 @ 4:59PM
A very good question. The first sign of intelligence. Maybe there is hope for you yet.
It is a good question because it recognizes the strength, size, and power of these arms of government. It also implys that it would be very difficult, which it would, and also implys that whether or not they are revelant and wanted anymore by the people of the US, these departments seem to have a life of their own and are difficult to slay.
You have just made the case and also identified the core principle of conservative thought relative to the size and role of government in a constitutional Republic. Why is this so difficult or impossible? Really, think about it.
What if the majority of Americans, their congressman, and the President all seemed to think that a particualr program or department was not needed, had to be reformed, minimized, or done away with all together? This is exactly our point and is what is broken here. We seem to NOT have control over our own government..this is suppose to be a self governing nation but it is broken in this regard.
You know I am telling the truth.
marcos azul | 11.11.11 @ 12:09PM
acompañantes colombia
marcos azul | 11.11.11 @ 12:09PM
escort service colombia
marcos azul | 11.11.11 @ 12:10PM
colombia escort service
marcos azul | 11.11.11 @ 12:10PM
chicas prepago Colombia
chicas prepago Bogota
marcos azul | 11.11.11 @ 12:10PM
prepagos colombia
marcos azul | 11.11.11 @ 12:11PM
prepagos Colombianas