One Week Into His Campaign, Rick Perry Disavows His Book

LadyJazzer wrote: Nice deflection... Irrelevant... You weren't asked if you were a Perry supporter.

If he's such a "patriot", and "loves America"... (Was that before or after he wanted to secede from the Union?)

That was during....

Is it forbidden to use rhetoric to illustrate, or punctuate your point now? Is it now against some law to publish opinions that you realize are far beyond reasonable politics, but that serve to illustrate the direction you'd like the country to move?

Hey, he either "loves his country" or he wants to secede from the union... Which is it?

That was during....what?

LadyJazzer wrote: Hey, he either "loves his country" or he wants to secede from the union... Which is it?

That was during....what?

His patriotism and love of country were being displayed during his discussion of secession. Realistically, everyone knew it wouldn't take place, so the discussion was used to illustrate that he REALLY didn't agree with the direction the country was currently headed. I'm not saying it was a smart way to make a point, but that's all it was.

Let's use you as a fer'instance... If your posts ever came to light during a campaign, would it be accurate for someone to say "I'd rather have someone in office that's not constantly surprised by her opponents statements."?

So, in this case "words don't matter" because it was being used to "illustrate" something? Have I got that right? I want to be sure of this new standard, and check that against the standard that Obama is being held to... So, if "that's all it was", then the constant harping on the point that "Obama 'promised' to have unemployment down to 8%" when the economic conditions and the GOP refusal to negotiate ANYTHING in Congress was just an "illustration", and "that's all it was"? I want to make sure I've got this constantly moving standard correct...

LadyJazzer wrote: So, in this case "words don't matter" because it was being used to "illustrate" something? Have I got that right? I want to be sure of this new standard, and check that against the standard that Obama is being held to... So, if "that's all it was", then the constant harping on the point that "Obama 'promised' to have unemployment down to 8%" when the economic conditions and the GOP refusal to negotiate ANYTHING in Congress was just an "illustration", and "that's all it was"? I want to make sure I've got this constantly moving standard correct...

There's no moving standard with me - others will argue with me, but as far as I'm concerned words coming out of a politician's mouth are immediately suspect. The one and only hope of predicting future actions is to look at their voting history.

I didn't believe Obama during the campaing - I knew Gitmo would stay open and he was just pandering to the left. I knew he couldn't fix the economy, becuase he voted for spending far too often. All that talk about hope and change were for the benefit of the soundbyte voters, which are unfortunetely far to numerous for our own good. I also don't believe Obama (or anyone else) when they blame all their failures on the Republicans - the blame should be shared. I'm sure the view from those with their right eye superglued shut (so they can only see to the left, get it? ) is far different than mine.

I don't believe Perry was ever going to follow through on getting Texas independent. I do believe he'd be better at bringing the federal budget under control that Obama - simply based on past actions. That is a point that can certainly be debated, but that's how I see it.

Amazing deflection... I expected no less.

LadyJazzer wrote: Amazing deflection... I expected no less.

I've been taking notes on your defense of failed liberal ideas

lol The more the Left attacks Perry just shows how worried they are about him beating President Obama.

SS109 wrote: lol The more the Left attacks Perry just shows how worried they are about him beating President Obama.

Since they're attacking anyone with an 'R' behind their name, does that mean they know a rutabega(R) on the ballot can beat the one-term spender?

And the fact that you always side-step the issues about the (R) candidates with "as long it's not Obama" shows that your candidates have nothing to beat Obama with...other than "They're not Obama"...