E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
AP
Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) at the NBC-Politico presidential debate at the Reagan Library.
Since 9/11, the United States has been embroiled in wars and nation-building in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as involved in military operations around the globe from Pakistan and Libya to Yemen and Somalia.
But the current front runner for the Republican nomination, Rick Perry, does not appear to have a clear foreign policy.
Looking at the Texas governor's statements on foreign policy over the past month on the campaign trail and in two debates reveals a foreign policy that is inconsistent, muddled, and sometimes contradictory. Perry's not the only one. His top rival, Mitt Romney, has also been inconsistent, especially when it comes to Afghanistan.
It's particularly striking that the two men most likely to lead the Republican Party next year -- a party that usually doesn’t mince its words -- do not appear to have a clear direction on foreign policy. And it reflects the tension in the GOP between the hawkish neo-conservatism of the Bush-Cheney years and a public that’s grown tired of war. (The prominence of a Tea Party that’s skeptical of any federal spending, even on the military, also plays a role here.)
Perry made extensive remarks on foreign policy Aug. 29 before the VFW National Convention. There, he spoke out against multilateralism.
"We cannot concede the moral authority of our nation to multi-lateral debating societies," he said. "And when our interests are threatened, American soldiers should be led by American commanders."
But yesterday, Perry seemed to suggest the opposite when he talking about engaging allies.
"Our response cannot be to isolate ourselves within our borders," he said, "but to engage our allies and the quest to build these enduring allies around the world for freedom."
In his VFW speech, He also has seemed to be for muscular interventionism -- "We must renew our commitment to taking the fight to the enemy wherever they are, before they strike at home."
But then in the very next sentence, he seemed to be against it -- "I do not believe that America should fall subject to a foreign policy of military adventurism. We should only risk shedding American blood and spending American treasure when our vital interests are threatened."
Asked about his "adventurism" comment at the NBC-Politico debate, and whether he thought former President George W. Bush had been rash in launching full-scale military interventions, like in Iraq, for example, Perry deflected.
"I was making a comment about a philosophy," Perry said, declining to say how as Commander-In-Chief he would put that philosophy into practice.
Pressed for specificity, Perry, reiterated, "[T]hat was a philosophical statement that Americans don't want to see their young men and women going into foreign countries without a clear reason that American interests are at stake, and they want to see not only a -- a clear entrance, they want to see a clear exit strategy as well."
But then instead of delivering a critique of the Iraq war, which never had a clear exit strategy under the previous administration, he pivoted to President Obama.
"We should never put our young men and women's lives at risk when American interests are not clearly defined by the president of the United States," Perry said, "and that's one of the problems with what this president is doing today."
In the subsequent CNN-Tea Party Express debate five days later, he was asked about Afghanistan.
"[I]t's time to bring our young men and women home and as soon and obviously as safely as we can," Perry said, in part.
But then, he added this -- "But it's also really important for us to continue to have a presence there."
And he seemed to advocate a narrower presence, that the U.S. should reverse course from fighting insurgents and nation-building.
"[I]s it best spent with 100,000 military who have the target on their back in Afghanistan?" Perry asked. "I don't think so at this particular point in time."
But then, in directing his answer to the original questioner, a female Afghani émigré, Perry seemed to advocate a position that would likely mean a broad U.S. presence, or at least significant funding.
The U.S. needs to "continue to help them build the infrastructure that we need, whether it's schools for young women like yourself or otherwise," he said.
Leave a Comment:
Like esteemed Repubican strategist Mike Murphy tweeted...
Nuff said! lol
Akakakakakak.
Pay-To-Pay-Perry talking about 'moral authority'...........
Me-Me-Me Perry demonstrates zero caring, no love or respect towards actual people.
Just God.
Pay-To-Pray Perry: The 'Freedom' to exploit anyone/thing that gets in your way.
Al this coming from a guy that wants Texas to be a foreign country from the rest of America after they suceed.
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL
Listening to Perry try to a put a complicated policy sentence together is like watching a chimp play with a locked suitcase..
Nuff said! lol
Feisty
BINGO!
Backhouse
Pay-To-Pray Perry: The 'Freedom' to exploit anyone/thing that gets in your way.
Backhouse
LOL...
And Pray-To-AVOID-Capital Punishment
What is trully scary to me is that republicans are wanting to back this guy...who has no clear idea of what is going on in this world today. This will not be Texas..he will not have or at least I would hope , he did not have so much money thrown at him that this country is sold out even further than our elected in congress have already done.
This is absolutely ridiculous. Perry and Romney's foreign policy is based on what the President has done. If President Obama did it, then it's wrong. President Obama IS their foreign policy, and they don't know what he's going to do next. How can they tell you what their policy is, when the President hasn't told THEM what it is?
Come on, Mitt and Rick. Just drop out now and criticize from the sidelines. That's the TRUE Republican way. Ask Sarah! Quit and criticize. Get those big bucks for being stupid on national television AND you are never responsible for anything.
It's always humorous to see the liberal spin. When Michelle Bachmann was appearing to be "surprisingly strong" some weeks back, all the articles were trying to dig at her about something.
Now Rick Perry is currently the frontrunner, and the subtle attacks have shifted to him. First, it's to question his religious values since Governor Perry is apparently open with his religious beliefs. Liberals hate that ! Now, it is to try and pry apart his foreign policy decisions as inconsistent. Come Monday, it will be something new or re-hashed.
Meanwhile, back at the White House, the only thing consistent about Barack Obama are his desires to grow government, raise taxes, incessant campaigning and redistribute the wealth !
Slicky Ricky's only answer is ah ah ah ah ah Obama did this ah ah ah Obama did that. we know what Obama has done.What is little Ricky going to do.You can't bring them home and leave them there.Split those two brain cells you have in that hollow head of yours and tell America your strategy.
When folks start scratching the surface they'll discover there ain't much underneath. Seriously, how Perry has managed to be a governor for so long without any depth is mind bending. It would probably make his 'purty hair' hurt if he gave real thought to anything.
You people are not being at all fair to Mr Perry on his foreign policy accumen. I bet he CAN see Mexico from Tejas!
Perry was "lost spiritually" and now he is lost on foreign policy. There's a theme here. The guy is lost and we would be losers to support him.
"Governor Perry is apparently open with his religious beliefs. Liberals hate that...."
Look, Jim, if you're not going to pay attention to what people say, dummy-up.
Liberals do NOT hate that he is open with his beliefs or hate his beliefs themselves- they hate him trying to make those beliefs the basis for how OUR government should be run.
Got it yet?
You've got to remember that as a secessionist, Perry's foreign policy is based on how the Republic of Texas should respond to actions of the foreign entity of the United States of America.
Since Perry is the front-runner I guess it is pile on Perry time.
Most of you in here do not even live in Texas, so you really have no clue as to what Perry has done. All you know is here-say from Democratic supporters and those Republicans who have lost elections to Perry.
DBO:
I disagree. Liberals in general do Hate Perry because he does not hide from his religious beliefs. What is the difference in you not believing and a believer running the government. Each has their own belief and no matter how you spin it, IT WILL play a part in how you run the nation.
BTW: What frikken foreign policy experience did Obama have besides hating on George Bush?
Feisty- Relax and enjoy Tea time!
"BTW: What frikken foreign policy experience did Obama have besides hating on George Bush?"
None, I guess. But boy didn't he make up for it after he won office, though? (unlike this 'George Bush' we are not supposed to mention that you speak of...)
What's the surprise ? These republican morons never travel the world, they all think america is so exceptional when in fact, they have no clue about the rest of the world.. There are many countries that are far ahead of the united states, countries that have a much better quality of life, more human, happier and healthier societies.
Mid, TX,
and
Is it your natural impulse to assume that disagreement implies hate? I happen to enjoy a good argument, and may even take both sides of an issue at different times just to stimulate debate.
I reckon if we all agreed on everything, then we wouldn't need religion, government, or the Super Bowl. We could all just reject evolution and live in the trees like our ancestors, or maybe in the ocean like our ancestors' ancestors.
"Nuff said! lol"
How many times have you used the chimp line..... yea "Nuff" times yet?
Oh well ..... Watching Obama's clueless handling of Afghanistan would be as funny as watching the gorilla in the old Samsonite commercials if not for the fact that America's losses are 6 times the averaged monthly losses under Bush ..... 70% of our losses in only 32 months ..... and Obama's only plan is to walk away from Afghanistan before the next election like he accomplished something.
The smart war, the war Obama said we had to win, the war he said he would win .... and he is just going to walk away with nothing. Despicable.
Foreign policy and Obama?
Iran and the bomb that Obama promised they wouldn't be allowed to get? - Who knew Obama was Putin's little poodle on a leash. (Not fair to poodles - they aren't that gutless.)
Not only will Iran, the largest state sponsor of terrorism have the bomb, but we can't even protect ourselves from one if it comes on a missile since Obama subjugated America's national defense to Russia by stopping our missile defense!
Obama has treated our friends like enemies and our enemies like friends.
Guess what - no friends in N. Africa or the Mideast? Think I'm kidding .... name one country that respects and will listen to Obama?
Name ONE. (The rebels in Libya ... you got to be kidding ..... the guys killing Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan a year ago? Egypt .... Pakistan ....Saudi Arabia .....)
The one thing that Obama has done that will have the longest lasting negative effect is his foreign policy.
Asking repubs about foreign policy?
Why?
After Obama's spending, we will have to gut the DOD and won't be able to anything anyway.
lol
Perry is attempting the same sort of dance candidate Obama did regarding foreign policy in 2008.
Iraq...bad.
Afghanistan...good.
None of that from McCain, eh?
Perry is no more consistent than candidate Obama was...but Obama actually was elected President of the United States.
Now...every day....he infuriates a left-wing base that just hates what he's doing in Afghanistan, in Pakistan with killer drones, and in a whole host of other countries on related issues.
And, he continues to make use of all of the tools left to him by the Bush Administration to fight the war on terror. In some cases (the drones), he's even more enthusiastic than President Bush was!
You have to appreciate the irony involved.
Being President is hard...
I doubt that Rick Perry will ever know just how hard it is.
Or, that President Obama will have to endure the burdens of the office beyond his current term.
David, if Mitt and Rick's foreign policy is just extensions of what Obama has done, your fellow posters must not have very good opinions of Obamas. This whole board is made up of vile personal attacks of their intelligence and every aspect of their character and knowledge. Wow I would never think that these same people feel the same about Obama's foreign policy in the same manner.
Drive by--your wrong about attacking Perry about his so called religious beliefs. Tell me some political position he has that is inappropriate because of his religious beliefs? In fact didnt he just get criticized by the religious right for his vaccine law in texas? Didnt he get criticized by them for his anti fence and support for dream act provisions in Texas? Dont bother with pro life or anti gay marriage unless you are going to attack black and latinos who overwhelmingly are against gay marriage and there is nothing wrong with religion and experience framing our personal views. Did you attack Obama when he was praying with his eyes closed at church?
Mixed Bag
Obama's position on foreign policy may not be simple-minded enough for you to understand it, but he made the reasons clear why he thought Iraq was a "dumb" war but the war in Afghanistan was justified. We were not attacked on 9/11 by terrorists based in Iraq or working with Iraq (despite false confessions extracted under Cheney's torturers to the contrary). We were attacked by terrorists based in Afghanistan. Can you understand that?
Hiya, Houston-
Guilty as charged on the over-simplification, but...
Consider the venue.
Gotta keep it simple at First Read...the home of "Libs R Us".
Anyway...
Wasn't that the gist of it?
No?
So...you're not all-in on the Afghanistan policy? Or, the killer drones in Pakistan?
If not, Houston...
Have you considered a primary challenge to President Obama?
Or, if that's inconvenient for you, personally...supporting one?
Mixed Bag
No, as a matter of fact I'm not "all in". Am I supposed to be?
Progress, Houston-
Now...
The primary challenge?
"No eignfor icypol, ryPer si sistentincon, clearun."
I don't see a problem here.
One thing the republican party can be sure of ...the candidate that emerges as there choice for president .. will be dumber than G W B .. and that is really dumb. )
Don't think the chimp is Perry...
inconsistent, unclear ... WRONG ... he makes it consistently clear that we don't need another Texan Nut!!!
I think he's more like monkey trying to hump a football?
sparticas ... the problem is ... he's humping a lot of human footballs in Texas, and they like it ... that's the scary part!!!!!
Other than his stance on himself, which I get, I do not understand much of anything Perry says about his positions on foreign and domestic policy. He's against it and for it, so long as it's here and not there. Now if it's neither here nor there, but off over yonder, then He would likely allow others to handle it provided they did so within the scope of our interests here? Hummm. On the other hand that's as plain as muddy water.
Golly, you can see it in Perry and you can't see it in Obama? Now, what, exactly, is Obama's foreign policy? Does he have one? How can you tell?
One sad group of marbles these republican nominations are. Obama doesn't even have to spend a dime for this Presidential vote. Just let all these nominees keep talking, and we realize just how much better our current President is compared to them...Obama wins in a landslide against these nutbags.
Perry's foreign policy is eerily like brainless bush's: sit back and try not to choke to death eating pretzels and polish your cowboy boots while the V.P. runs the country. The scary part is whose going to be Perry's V.P., that dude that ran Blackwater.
mygirl 1: Obama's is real easy to understand. When he says he won't; He will. Says he will; He won't. He views the flow of the water in the branch as both "going and coming".
Well, he's right you know. If you go upstream and look down then its coming and if you go upstream and look up you get to see the sky, unless there are trees in the way in which case you see the branches. I hope this cleared things up.
no, a chimp is smarter and better educated than Perry.
amazing that people want a religious nutcase that believes demons and mystical beings are secretly running things from "a spiritual plane". someone who believes in faith healing and that he has to "take back America for christians"(take complete control of all aspects of our lives for the CHURCH). listen to the insanity preached at that "prayer day rally" he just sponsered, they are "preparing for the (mythical) rapture", and will happily drag the entire country back to the dark ages to establish religious control over all.
@Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL
Perfect analogy!
How many lawyers does it take to open a locked suitcase?
Fifty one. Eight to argue, one to get a continuance, one to object, one to demur, two to research precedents, one to dictate a letter, one to stipulate, five to turn in their time cards, one to depose, one to write interrogatories, two to settle, one to order a secretary to open it, and twenty-six to bill for professional services.
Where does the gop T-Nut party get all their idiots from ????????????????????????????
"On foreign policy, Perry is inconsistent, unclear"
You mean like Obama? He says one thing, and then does something completely different.
Apparently, it's easier to deflect the conversation to Obama than to try to defend your guy Perry. I don't blame you.
Roy, Bachmann's Husband is praying for you, are you running low on your meds ?????????
Of course Perry doesn't know how to respond to questions on policy...foreign or otherwise.
He can't have his Bush earpiece in every minute of the day. When you hear him say "I'll get back to you on that..." ? He's putting a s.o.s. call into his backers.
And I live in Texas.
LOL, roy can't come up with anything to defend taliban perry, so he resorts to attacking obama
How many lawyers does it take to open a locked suitcase?
Depends. How much money do you have?
What's really strange to consider is if either one were elected (God forbid), they would have to speculate as to what Obama might have done...then do the opposite! ...ROFLMAO
danwill "LOL, roy can't come up with anything to defend taliban perry, so he resorts to attacking obama"
And the media can't come up with anything to defend Obama, so they resort to attacking Perry. LOL
Actually, I would not vote for Perry. I hope Hillary runs against Obama - then we could get someone really COMPETENT in the office. She's the only one with common sense, and should have won the Presidency, but she was pushed aside (despite getting more primary votes than Obama) in favor of 'the historic first Black President' - someone with absolutely no experience or judgment.
roy, on the Republican side, I would consider Romney for his business experience, and I agree that Hillary would very likely be better for the Democratic side. there was another Republican that was relatively moderate and made a lot of sense, but I can't even remember the guys name now and I don't think he even threw his hat in the candidate circus ring anyways. I wouldn't vote perry, bachmann or palin (if she was running). I didn't vote for Obama because I thought he was too inexperienced for the job, and was considering McCain until he brought Palin in as a running mate, the thought of her becoming president if something happend to john was too much.
what I want is a reasonable moderate and not a radical idealogue from either side of the fence, but that never seems to be the case.
He has not been clear and consistent about anything. I take that back, cowboy boots, he is very consistent with wearing those cowboy boots, only thing is, real cowboys wear the BS on the outside of their boots.
Has Perry been clear about Israel? It should go back to the 1967 borders, correct?
At least someone agrees with Perry that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme:
This Perry guy seems pretty important to those on Liberal Island. The natives on LI spend a lot of time, and with little success, trying to destroy him.
Wrong again, FG- he has not worn cowboy boots since the back surgery.
Thanks for playing.
And YOU'RE DISMISSED! lol
If he's NOT wearing them, why does he need 22 pairs for FREE?
No lovely parting gifts for YOU!
Gee He had back surgery, did they remove a yellow stripe, a monkey, or Michele Bachmanns knife?
They took out some of his spine and offered it to Obama. Rick had too much, and Barack didn't have any.
Forrest,
Ba Da Bing!
Thetotas
Ba da boom
I did not know you were Italian!
Well now that Rick Perry has had his spine removed and has given it to Obama I guess you will voting for Obama right JS1, or does Obama have to wear a Cowboy outfit, and cap pistols like Perry.
Rick Perry's foreign policy: "Well I reckon ya got your cowboys and then ya got your injuns......"
But how many jobs has Rick Perry saved?
The transplant didn't take. Turns out Obama has a terminal case of Spineless-ides.
Barack wears what ever panties Michelle puts out for him in the morning.
JoAnnaSmith1
You're not trying to sneak in the Big Lie that Obama ever said that Israel should go back to its 1967 borders, are you? I surely hope not, because only a dishonest weasel would do something that sleazy.
News flash: Paul Krugman isn't running for president. And Krugman wasn't correct to liken Social Security to a Ponzi scheme. The rest of the quote is:
In a Ponzi scheme, the investors who get in too late get NOTHING back when the pyramid collapses. Krugman's concerns for Social Security's future viability was probably warrented, although his choice of comparisons was not. But Social Security is not going to collapse like Ponzi shcemes inevitably do in the lifetime of anyone living, unless someone like Slick Rick gets into power and finishes the job of wrecking the economy that G.W. Bush started.
If you don't have foreign policy experience, you would do well to choose a VP who does -- Obama/Biden, for example. Who can be the VP that would add value to any of these losers? Their foreign policy is to prepare for the End Times.
Fish in a barrel, Houston
You can read the rest of the article at your leisure- this is just the first two paragraphs- from MSNBC, no less.
Now who is, in your words, the "dishonest weasel"?
It is absolutely amazing that Obama worshippers will deny he said things there is ample proof that he said when it becomes inconvenient.
Unreal.
Obama Sees ’67 Borders as Starting Point for Peace Deal
Mr. Obama declared that the prevailing borders before the 1967 Arab-Israeli war — adjusted to some degree to account for Israeli settlements in the West Bank — should be the basis of a deal. While the 1967 borders have long been viewed as the foundation for a peace agreement, Mr. Obama’s formula of land swaps to compensate for disputed territory created a new benchmark for a diplomatic solution.
"We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states," Obama continued.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/middleeast/20speech.html?pagewanted=all
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-05-19/politics/obama.israel.palestinians_1_israel-palestinian-conflict-borders-settlements?_s=PM:POLITICS
and about 800 other articles...
http://www.google.com/search?q=obama+pre+1967+borders&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
She didn't think that one through did she? LOL
"This Perry guy seems pretty important to those on Liberal Island. The natives on LI spend a lot of time, and with little success, trying to destroy him."
Amen, sis. I for one wish they'd knock it off. Perry's the best thing to happen for Obama since that woman from up in Alaska turned up on McCain's doorstep.
"Barack wears what ever panties Michelle puts out for him in the morning."
Intelligent post, Smiff-
Keep 'em coming.
JS1 your first comeback was good stuff made me laugh, second comeback just a little weak, but keep em coming.
How's this for foreign policy....
The state of Texas is overrun with illegal aliens! And no one is doing a damn thing about it, least of all Perry.
If W. Bush and Rick Perry were in the same family, W. Bush would be known as the smart one.
no joe, no bo, nj
The fish you're peddling has been dead so long it no longer stinks. The president said that borders should be BASED on the 1967 borders with exchanges of territory for security of both Israel and Palestine. If there are territory swaps, then the borders cannot be the same as the 1967 borders. The assertion that Obama ever has said that Israel should "go back" to the 1967 borders is a big fat Republican lie.
NJNB watches the Jerry Springer show, so doesn't know the Republican claim of what the president said is a lie.
"Barack wears what ever panties Michelle puts out for him in the morning." I said this a long time ago about Marcus -- Stop stealing material. Original ideas are tough for conservatives.
Hell - these days ANY IDEAS are tough for conservatives...
Hell Ricky Dicky don't need no stinken policies. we are all going to prey them wars away just like all that rain they got in Texas after them their prayers yeehawww .I reckin I'm going to open a knee pad company cus them good ol boy like to be on there knees a lot if ya no what I mean!!!!!!!
I see nothing wrong with his back and forth.
When Michele Bachmann suggested Perry pushed for the HPV vaccine at the bidding of Pharma giant Merck, Perry reponded, "If you're saying that I can be bought for $5,000, I'm offended."
Here's the problem: Perry didn't finish that sentence... he didn't go on to say that he can't be bought at all. and with voters extremely skeptical of the ties between politicians and big business... this is a comment that could haunt Perry for months to come.
Meanwhile, Perry claimed he received $5,000 from Merck, but that only represented their 2006 contributions. In all, Perry pocketed about $30,000 from Merck, the maker of the HPV vaccine.
Merck has also reportedly given more than $380,000 to the Republican governors association, or RGA, since 2006... the year that Perry stepped up his role in that group. One watchdog group estimates the RGA has given Perry's campaigns more than $4 million over the last five years.
FROM: CNN's Jack Cafferty:
If you know about politics from the historical point (and I just starting to educate myself) President Obama's 1967 remark makes sense.
JFK was assasinate in 1963 with many different theories floating around as to why.
Lyndon Johnson was the first Texan to be in the White House and he served until 1969 when Nixon (amphetamine crazed) took over and all hell started to break loose outing many government scandals.
From 1969 to 1993 Carter was the only democrat to serve and that was only for four years. That's 20 years that the Republicans worked their New World Order "magic".
It all makes sense to me.
So, what were you expecting- Peace Good, War Bad?
The issues are a little bit more complicated than that.
I guess you're happier with a candidate who says things like he would close Gitmo immediately upon taking office- then finds out it's not quite so easy.
Or that he'd bring home troops within a year- then finds out that's a no go, too.
No, for Obama, it's yammering first, find out about reality later. And I guess you're still good with that.
How about this
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/181731-report-white-house-pressured-general-to-support-lightsquared
You good with pressuring a general to change his testimony, despite the danger to our military and security, because it will benefit a big donor?
Corruption okay with you, because it is, after all, Obama- and his getting reelected is of paramount importance, right? I mean, little things like corruption have no place in government USUALLY, but, well, this is OBAMA! He needs all the edge he can get, right?
Right?
NJ either you have a stalker-like obsession with Obama or a big crush on Rhinestone Cowboy Rick Perry which is it?
Well, you seem to have a curious commitment to avoiding the truth, while I am committed to forcing you to confront it.
Poor you. Obama gives me so much to work with every day.
no joe, no bo, nj
So, what were you expecting- Peace Good, War Bad?
The issues are a little bit more complicated than that.
I guess you're happier with a candidate who says things like he would close Gitmo immediately upon taking office- then finds out it's not quite so easy.
Well nojo all blow..I got some news for ya! The reason we haven't closed gitmo is because of your courageous bananna republican UNpatriots who have obstructed the process. Yall are too chicken to export these criminals to a vacant high security prison in Illinois and try them by military tribunal on American Soil. Additionally we have a model for trying terrorists in this country. You have only to look at the Israeli's military tribunals and prisons. And they don't have the death penalty!
Lastly, as a blue star father and a marine, I resent your comments concerning the CIC and the military. You haven't a clue! You madam are nothing but a phoney patriot who serves herself while others do your fighting for you!
no joe, no bo, nj
Poor you. Obama gives me so much to work with every day.
It's obvious you love it. Now you wouldn't be complaining; would you?
In your parallel world your obsession is in place.
Torpedo.....it is hard for her to think or see clearly in that fog of hate she surrounds herself, it seems to get the better of her. But hey anything she can lie about, obfuscate, denigrate regarding our President is OK with her. She's dependable like that.
@Torpedo You
You may give Obama a pass on Gitmo but why did he expand Bagram?
www.alternet.org/rights/128273/
Nice try at deflection Allan but discussion was about Gitmo. Would be interested to hear your views on the republicans cowardly response to the President's plan though!..Start another thread if you want to discuss Begram. BTW my son in law just returned from the AFG (FOB lagman)and my daughter from Kuwait treating soldiers and Marines for PTSD.. What about you and yours?
Grover- I believe if we elect GOP/TP someone also named Grover will be in charge. They've sworn an oath to him that apparently trumps their oath to America.
@TY
You brought up Gitmo. Obama tried to close it but was blocked by the congress (not just Republicans). My only comment on Gitmo is that he didn't think through the consequences of his pre-election promises. But again why was the republican response cowardly, what was the democratic response? I don't Carl Levin out there demanding that Gitmo be closed. To be honest I don't see any politician calling for it to be closed.
How is it deflection? I bring up a similar facility in Afghanistan that his Administration is expanding. If you are OK with Bagram why are you against Gitmo?
Mine and mine...now this is deflection but if you must know a 20 year-old I know is in Bethesda with no legs and not likely to make it because he stepped on a mine in Afghanistan in July.
Alan, this is a little late with a response to your post and doubt that you will see it. But, mine and mine. I sincerely hope the 20 year old was not yours, but he is someone's. And I am so truly sorry. You and yours may have a piece of my heart to go with you every day.
.
LOL ....and Obama's is crystal clear?!?!
Think Isreal, Libya and Egypt
Really mmnord??? Obama's position has always been that the 67 borders should be a STARTING point. Another republican coward with a weak deflection. Nothing wrong with his response to Libya and Egypt!
Tell me o great sage how you would have handled it since your leadership has been relatively quiet on the subject?
Obama's response to Egypt was inconsistent !
First, he supported the Mubarak regime. Then, when he saw that change was coming and Mubarak was no longer supported, Obama changed colors faster than a chameleon.
In Libya, Obama wasted weeks trying to come to a decision..... and then he got it wrong by authorizing a substantial attack with Cruise missiles...... and involving our country in a civil war where our national security interests were not threatened.
Maybe Obama was mixing up the 67 borders with the 57 states?
Maybe he thought shipping grain from our reserves in order to forestall the kind of uprisings we've seen in the region would deprive those extra seven states their rights?
Maybe Sarcozy gave him the warning in French, a language Obama does not speak?
Maybe Obama thought it was still 2008, and he was not yet president? He did, after all, sign the guest book at Buckingham Palace with that date- Just this past May.
Maybe the "thing that must not be named" was out for repairs, so he spoke extemporaneously- always a bad idea for him.
Then again, maybe he's just inept, incompetent, and a total failure.
Maybe ........ you are right no joe, no bo !
no joe, no bo, nj
"Maybe Obama was mixing up the 67 borders with the 57 states?"
Good one. Keep 'em coming.
Obama really said there were 57 DIFFERENT states, huh? What a dope. (unless, of course, he said he had been campaigning in 57 states- an entirely different matter. You know- like he maybe visited some states more than once? But that dosen't fit the rightie nonsenseical talking point, does it?)
Wow. Talk about the ability to rationalize.
Quick- tell me why he signed the guest book this past May 2008. I'm waiting with bated breath.
Well, I will be- after I stop laughing.
Hey NJ, the 57/67 thing was in my head as well.... too funny.
The Lib R Us gang is really having a hard time lately. News just keeps getting worse and there is nothing they can do about it.
So they scream and they yell and they call people names, cause they got nothin'.
But it ain't gonna get better for them or sadly us, until 2012.
Don't know about that guest book. Your comment was about '57 states'.
"Quick! Look! Over THERE!!"
WCA
With the candidates you all are forced to prop up,...I can see why it won't get better for you until 2012. Is that the magical date that the Repub Salvation begins? I wonder which Republican's prayers will be answered and which ones will be ignored? You know that IF you win the election - that darn inauguration won't happen until 2013, right?
carry on.
The Obama/ Journ-o-Lista attacks on the opposition continue because this disaster can't possibly win on his record
Madison -
You reliably dumb down a conversation.
Nothing personal. I just thought you should know.
Due to the poor leadership of Obama. Have any of you liberals considered running a diffrent Democrat for President? It's unlikley the Dems will regain control of the House. I would think it would be better to focus on running a better candidate for President in 2012. Thoughts?
Rumor has it Huntsman might give it a go.
JoAnna, how did Huntsman think he'd get anywhere in the Repub. primary? That guy needs to take his Repub mask off and show his Dem face! He's a nice guy and that's about it.
A very small niche of the party has floated the idea.
The majority of the party like and respects our President Obama.
I know he scares the hell out of the Republicans who will run against him.
Yes, Obama certainly scared the hell out of all Republicans on November 2, 2010 !!!!!
Perhaps, that is why there are so many Republican candidates...... they are ALL scared of him !! LOL !!!
No, it just takes that many republicans to pick on one president. Safety in numbers and all.
Why are the republicans pushing to replace him for the election, if he is such an easy win for the republicans? Only republicans have been pushing for Hillary as if they would vote for her.
I'm not saying Republicans would vote for a Democrat for president. I'm just saying alot of Democrats realize that even if Obama gets re-elected in 2012 he's not likley to get the chance to sign any more ridiculously liberal bills with a Republican majority in the House. Blacks are worse off now than when Obama took office, Turning a blind eye and suing AZ on Illegals wasnt good enough for the Hispanics, Abolsihing don't as don't tell wasnt enough for gays, Paying out 2 years unemployment wasnt enough for those who claim they couldnt find work, Passing Obamacare wasnt enough for those who thought the government should make all thier healthcare descions and pay for them, etc. etc. etc.
I'm just saying maybe it's time to put a fresh horse in the race....
Hey lets say republicans get control, total control, do they have a magic bullet, you think more tax cuts, wage cuts and benefit cuts, will solve our problems, because they haven't yet, and it is one of the only two ideas I ever hear out of them, the other being cut regulations. So cutting taxes, and regulations will fix the economy, improve education, solve our energy problems, ect, good luck with the less will turn into more strategy.
the repub strategy, less is more, up is down, work harder for less money, ship your job overseas to give the CEO a bigger bonus, let the health insurance company blackball you for "pre-existing condition" and then let you die "because you were so irresponsible as to not get your own health insurance".
funny how the same teabagger republithugs were screaming "Death panels" two years ago, and are now cheering FOR death panels to exterminate the poor and "unfit" as chosen by the health insurance companies.
The Democrats will not run a candidate against President Obama because they know many of us are disappointed. If another Democrat were to run it would split the votes
allowing another friggin dingbat crazy GOPTP to ruin what's left of America.
So what? So is Obama.
did you expect msnbc to write an article about Obama and his inconsistencies? haha Anyway, it would take up 141 pages. No one has the time. Besides, the Dems love inconsistencies. Ask Debbie Wasserman BULL Schultz.
so is Obama? How so?
they have this wrong, Perry is CONSISTENTLY unclear.
...and obama has been consistently unclear about all policy.
What is so pathetic is that Americans are retarded enough to vote for this imbecile again and go completely broke. This will truly be a sight to see, Americans begging mexico for food. LOL!
Funky, you're not giving the American people enough credit. There is no way the majority doesn't see what's going on with this administration. I think the only question is, is he going to lose the re-election by a wider margin than ever before in history. Actually I'm pretty shocked a Democrat isn't getting in the race that has a chace. Over the next 14 months you'll see more and more of the 33 Senate Democrats up for re-election running as far from the President as possible.
Richard, you may be right but if they were retarded enough to vote for this socialist/marxist pig there's no telling what they'll do. I've lost all hope and I am waiting for a dollar collapse. Libtards wouldn't make it 2 weeks through an economic collapse the likes of Russia.... and America desperately needs a severe cleansing.
You wouldn't know a socialist or a marxist if one walked up and slapped you in the face. But nice job at parroting. You were born for the job!
Who exactly did I parrot, imbecile?
The debates will change the dynamics. When Perry has to debate Obama America will see the real Perry and his radical ideology.
Perry will not be able to deny all of his previous statements. He wants to end SS, that will fly like a concrete helicopter.
From PSYOP to Mindwar: The Psychology of Victory," endorsed some of the ideas published in a 1980 Military Review article by Lt. Col. John Alexander,"
It doesn't matter what RICK PERRY'S foreign policy is because if any other nation has the balls to disagree with us, RICK PERRY will go in and single-handedly kick their collective ass once RICK PERRY is elected president of the United States of America, the greatest ass-kicking country to ever grace God's green earth.
Gimme me a "HELL YEAH!!!"
If Perry's foreign policy is anything like his state policies he will probably sell them America and let them move in. It would be his idea of promoting job growth.
See, it's pussies like Grover here that are causing Americans to fall behind the rest of the world in everything from education to manufacturing. We've lost our fighting spirit because of Grover and his pathetic, liberal, homosexual attitudes.
America needs to start kicking some ass all over the world and reestablish ourselves as the badass mother@!$%#ers we know we are!!!
AMERICA, @!$%# YEAH!!!
Chris, Cranberry
Nice to see your so pro America, Now all you have to do is learn how to pick your candidates because Perry is pro corporations and industry, foreign and domestic. It's not about what's good for America but what's good for his backwards ideas and thinking. He is what you call a flat earth-er. Doesn't know what global warming is and how to recognize it and thinks that god sh-t everything out on the planet. Darwin must be rolling over in his grave.
America is corporations and industry, both foreign and domestic. What country have you been living in the past 150 years? It's the companies that built this nation and made us the global power we were until a few years ago when those spineless jellyfish Democrats took over Congress. Think about it, where would the United States be without Ford, Coca-Cola, IBM, AT&T, Exxon, and other companies that employ millions of productive Americans.
And it's "CRANBURY!!!", not "Cranberry".
Pay attention Chris, Those companies have moved most of their business overseas. I'm not completely against them but it would be nice if they kept the work in America and did it in a responsible way. We are giving tax breaks to companies to import products from oversea's while they are giving the work to foreigners.
We were a global power until a party (not democrats) in charges and in time of war gave tax cuts instead of raising taxes. Now for some odd reason we have a huge debt. The republicans are freaking about the debt, but the tax plan that got us here, lets leave that the same.
In giving multiple tax cuts during war time, the republicans are outwardly trying to destroy our country or they were too stupid to know what they were doing.
Either way they have proved themselves incompetent to govern.
For the love of America Obama 2012
I have been paying attention.
Ford still maintains a very strong presence in Detroit. True, not everything they produce is made there any more, but that would change if the costs to produce here were less expensive.
All Coca-Cola products sold in the USA are manufactured and bottled in the USA. Coke Products sold in other countries are produced and bottled locally to maintain its freshness.
Exxon had to look for oil sources overseas because of all the regulation and red tape (you can't drill here because you might endanger a salamander or something) here in the USA, which is something we seriously need to look into eliminating in order to regain our competitiveness. Oil refining is still done here.
AT&T still has a huge infrastructure of phone lines and cell towers here that need to be maintained. That can't be done in a foreign country.
I would personally love it if those jobs came back here to the United States, but it's not going to happen as long the cost of doing business in other countries is less expensive than it is here. I'm not just talking about labor costs, but taxes (local, state and federal), fees, and regulations that hinder and discourage investment in this country.
And Mr. cranbury, where would these corporations be without the American worker in their beginning years. the corporations have forgotten their grass roots: the American worker.
Corporations did not make themselves what they are, the American worker did.
Ah, you senile old bastard, you still don't understand it, do you? If it wasn't for the entrepreneurs who started those businesses, the "workers" (there's a nice communist term for ya!) would never have a job to begin with. Businesses are not and do not have to be loyal to their employees or their country. Businesses are loyal to their shareholders. Businesses move to where they are going to make a profit. If it is more profitable to move production to another location, whether it's here or overseas, then that is what they will do. Try to understand this. I know it's very hard for the low-information, stuck-on-stupid liberal mind like yours to comprehend, but that's how the real world works and not the fantasy liberal world our current idiot president lives in.
hey msnbc, Perry is " inconsistent?" Where are the articles about Obama and his foreign policy, if he has one !? I think when Obama says that the middle eastern countries need to decide for themselves what kind of country/government they want, then turns around and drops bombs on Libya and at the same time, stays completely away from Syria while people are dying in the streets there.........Obama's got some " splainin to do."
LEONA (lotsa#') Apparently you are unable to comprehend the different cultures and political movements in play here. The Egyptian uprising was supported by the Army which is a widely respected institution in that country and largely URBAN. The uprising in Libya started away from Qaddafi's traditional power base and was supported by NATO with NO LOSS of American lives. The Rebellion in Syria a much smaller country than Libya (which if you take the time to look at a map) is being crushed by the ARMY. There is no role for the United States or NATO.....Yet! Class dismissed!
Sadly, they do not even see how ludicrous this article is. It reminds me of the article in the New Yorker, one of the best written magazines extant, with the most highly educated, talented writers in the country as staff and contributors.
Fed the line that Obama was brilliant, and had developed the "can't lose" strategy of "leading from behind", neither the author of the piece nor his editor realized just what a ridiculous statement they were about to make famous.
Too bedazzled, I suppose.
Look at it this way- none of the writers on this site bother to hide their bias in favor of Obama. They are upfront with it, which is, at least, a level of honesty.
It's not really professional, but it will do, I suppose.
torpedo, Who is "unable to comprehend " this ? hahaha
Leading from the side the top or from wherever.
The question is did it work in Libya? Are we on the ground losing lives and stuck for years as McCain or now Perry with his 6 guns blazing would have had us leading the charge?
I know you hate the president, but why is it bad to be smart for America?
Americans, I know you love this President but no one can figure out his real feelings on any issues. He says one thing and does another. He promises stuff and does not deliver. He blames everyone else for his failures. Leaders take responsibility! Why can't you see it? Even people like Maxine Waters and Tavis Smiley are NOT happy with Obama. We do not "hate this President." I love this country and I will not shut up while it is going downhill fast. I will speak my mind and I won't let petty ignorant people who like to name call ( like several who post here) pressure me because they disagree with me.
Rick Perry's going to single handedly kick a nation's ass????
hahahhahahhahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahhahaha
Let's send him to Iran....Right away!
Let's see.....when was the last time we heard an inconsistent and unclear foreign policy coming from a Texas governor?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGDwvAbx_fg
It seems regressives would have us double down on Texas nincompoops........
Take a look at Perry's scorched earth agenda in Texas. Undermine the states ability to respond, and fight wildfires by cutting fire department funding by 75% and Forest conservation funding by 50 million plus dollars in a state with increasing risk of wildfires and extended droughts. This eliminates any objection that conservationist may raise to companies buying and developing what would otherwise be considered environmentally sensitive lands because they are now burnt out properties that are already cleared of trees and vegetation and can be easily bulldozed flat and developed. What an easy way to promote industry and job growth at the expense of a few thousand private homes and a few of its citizens lives. With this and several other of his questionable policies doesn't it make you worry about what kind of decisions he might make if he became president and at what cost it would be to the American people? A vote for Perry is a vote for a step backwards in evolution. Oh, That's right, Perry doesn't believe in evolution.
This is Rick Perry. He listens to your question. Digests it in his brain (to the extent that that's possible). And then blurts out the answer he thinks you want to hear or seems appropriate at the moment. It's called "salesmanship". It's also called endless self promotion.
This guy is a shameless whore and if he becomes pres. he'll make Bush look like Mother Theresa.
You must have been in a coma for the last 3 years.
I'll take a guy who digests a question in his brain over a guy that has 18 people behind a magic curtain typing out responses on a teleprompter.
Who's the retard???
"Who's the retard???"
I am thinking the one that thinks Perry is smarter than President Obama.
Sorry buddy... Perry may not be the brightest bulb in the bunch but at least he doesn't need an entorage of writers and double teleprompters in order to muster up the ability to respond to questions.
Sorry... facts are facts, even if they make you look stupid.
funkysnake, these liberals love to call everyone stupid, except Obama. Obama's so brilliant , he gave us 9.2% unemployment, open borders, s&p downgrade, $15 trillion debt and the "blame game." That's what they call brilliant. Scares me.
Well Leona, perhaps the reason why liberals think some people are stupid is because hey read postings like yours. You could help change their minds by basing your opinions on facts as opposed to Fox News propaganda. For example, Obama did not give us a $15T debt. Now George W. Bush did inherit a $5.7T one from Clinton (who inherited almost all of it from Reagan, check your history) , as well as a surplus that would have paid it all of in about ten years. Instead of paying it off, he decided to give it all away in taxcuts, while adding about $6T to the defense costs and starting a couple of trillion dollar wars. By the time he left office, he handed Obama a debt of close to $14T and an economy in shambles. That is a swing of almost $20T. Bush is responsible for the mess, but his party is responsible for the inability to dig out of it by opposing anything that may make the president look good, regardless of whether it hurts the country. The S&P downgrade is a perfect example. Read their press release and you will see that it was due to the fact that Republicans in government were openly advocating default. And you want to blame that on Obama? By the way, you've also got the wrong data on the so called Open Borders...
funnysnake, more like dumb a$$ snake. You just keep believing what a great politician Parry is and convince those in your circle of idiots to vote for this moron. Check back 4 years later when Parry and the rest of the tea baggers are trying furiously to find another loser to run for President. Parry is about as big a Douche Bag as Palin and Bachman combined.
bryan... dude.. I'm not one to harp on misspellings.. but if you're going to call me a dumb a$$ snake the least you could do is learn how to spell "Perry."
Sorry... monkey.
cal usa, when Obama came in , the debt was $10 trillion. He raised it $4 trillion all BY HIMSELF. You need to start "basing your opinions on facts."
Let's talk about borders leona
THIS is the real Rick Perry:
www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/44
Perry's 2001 remarks on study of joint health plan with Mexico get scrutiny
By
Robert T. Garrett/Reporter
rtgarrett@dallasnews.com | Bio
6:00 AM on Wed., Aug. 31, 2011 | Permalink
Ten years ago, Gov. Rick Perry spoke at a border summit held in South Texas. It's a safe bet that few remember his comments that day, back in the halcyon days before the war on terror.
But some Texas tea party adherents have dusted off the Perry text and found an objectionable reference to a legislatively required study of "the feasibility of bi-national health insurance," or coverage of both U.S. and Mexican residents along the border.
Not to mention some other friendly gestures Perry made that day toward Mexico, including a boast about how he'd just signed a Texas DREAM Act that granted in-state college tuition rates to the children of illegal immigrants who are academic achievers. "Texas took the national lead in allowing such deserving young minds to attend a Texas college at a resident rate," he said.
Perry also spoke glowingly of how the Legislature in 2001 passed a children's Medicaid simplification bill and increased funding for Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program.
"More checking under the hood needed before we buy the car," tea party activist JoAnn Fleming of Tyler wrote this week. A blogger weighed in with similar criticism in this post on RedState.com. Alice Linahan, a North Texas tea party activist and media aggregator, circulated the comments. She later told me in an email, "Rick Perry is like most politicians right now. They are beholden to their large donors vs. the voters who put them in office."
You can be the judge of Perry's remarks, available here on the governor's office website.
Perry campaign spokeswoman Katherine Cesinger downplayed the reference to bi-national health insurance.
"
A bill was passed by the Legislature that authorized a study to look into this issue, which ultimately concluded there were numerous barriers to accomplishing that idea, and the Legislature took no further action on this concept," she said.
Perry's speech, delivered a few weeks before the Sept. 11 terrorist attack, brimmed with optimism. He talked about NAFTA , hailed the then-new administration of Mexico President Vicente Fox (above, AP photo from 2004) and extolled the prospect of peace and prosperity along the U.S.-Mexico border. It sure seems like a distant era ...
Dallas News.....google it and see his speech that he gave to Mexico. The first paragraph is in the body of the speech and the second paragraph is how he ended.
With Texas serving as the Gateway to Mexico, it is time that we receive congressional funding that reflects the instrumental role our state plays as a port of entry. With a Texan in the White House, I believe there is no greater opportunity to end the funding discrimination that crippled Texas infrastructure under the previous administration. Good infrastructure is essential to the free flow of commerce. It is a matter of economic fact that free trade lifts the tide for all the boats in the harbor. U.S. trade with Mexico has increased by 500% since 1994. Exports and imports between Texas and Mexico now exceed $100 billion dollars annually. Thousands of jobs have been created for Texas and Mexican workers, confirming the indisputable fact that trade with Mexico is big business for Texas.
Today, as we look to the south, we see a rising sun. It is perched above a people whose best days are in front of them. Let us endeavor to make the most of this new day through a new dialogue. Let us work together to combat disease, expand trade and provide educational opportunities. If we do, there are no limits to what we can accomplish for the betterment of all of our citizens. Thank you, and God bless you.
you were saying leona?
Subtle distinctions are obvioulsy not Mr. Montenaro's strong suit. In not a single one of the examples he provided did I see an inherent inconsistency of policy. In true political style, every one of them allowed a good bit of room from interpretation, but to assert that they indicate a wavering or unclear position - any more than similar statements by any politician over the past 70 years - is stretching the credibility of this "reporter" as a neutral source of news and analysis to the breaking point.
I think we should change the constitution so George W. became our President again and so then Republicans could continue running up the debt by starting more unpaid for wars, he could change the tax code so that anyone making more than $250,000 pays no taxes, eliminate all regulations, cancel Medicare, Social Security and ban the Democratic party from politics forever.
Wouldn't you Tea Baggers who post here just love that?
Oh I almost forgot, Fundamentalist Christianity would be the official religion of the United States and any other kind of worshiping would be a felony.
So Tom I'm not being a smart elic. I want an honest answer.
What do you suppose a business or corporation would do if it's taxes went up? Do you think they'd cut the CEO's pay? Or do you think they'd just eat the costs, letting it just reduce their profit margin?
Tom, Yuk
Wouldn't you libtards like to explain why Obama got the U.S. in a civil war in Libya ?
Would you care to give an honest estimate of the cost thus far ?? I think it is roughly TWICE the amount of money the Obama administration gave to Solyndra. Let's see .......$535 million for Solyndra with frequent, regular visits to the White House and about a billion+ for Cruise missiles and military support in Libya.
For everything else.......... there is Mastercard !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's going to be so great watching people like you starve to death after obama collapses the dollar.... that is.... after watching you watch your children starve to death :)
See this is the problem with liberals. If they ever so much as spent an afternoon running a lemonande stand they'd know more about running a business than someone with a law degree from Harvard. I'll take a minute out of my day to explain it to you Tom than you'll have more knowledge than your beloved President! When a business has an increase in expenses, whether it be cost of goods sold, rent or mortgage payments, utilites, wages, etc etc etc they will increase the price of the product for the consumer. YOU PAY more for your product. So when you demand higher taxes on businesses, you are asking for all of us to pay more for the things we use everyday!
If I had the authority, I would pass one regulation. All products sold must have disclosed on their label the following: The cost of this product directly or indirectly through taxation and regulation is $x.xx .... of course that label would cause the absolute collapse of the Democratic Party!!
JIM: You're still whining about Libya. Suddenly the Republican Party is the "Party of Peace". How lovely. How many men have we lost there???? What has it cost in comparison to the debacle and fiasco that is Iraq???
How about the fact that Ghadafi murdered several hundred Americans 20 plus years ago? I thought your crowd were the ones who always wanted to kick ass? It just pains you to see Obama succeed with ZERO loss of American lives and barely one billion in expenses. Just like Iraq, right???
HYPOCRIT!!!
RICHARD: Fascinating. Dubya was a "businessman" look at the ruin he brought on this nation. Your hero Reagan was never a businessman nor was Eisenhower or Nixon. I don't recall Ford being a businessman either. You know who was, Herbert Hoover, that's who. Need I remind you the legacy he left our nation???
Yea, you jokers really know how to run an economy. About on par with the way you wage war, which is to say a complete disaster.
Richard # 16.1 you show me a business that stops producing because its profit margin drops, and I'll show you a business that's lost its way. The purpose of business is to make as much money as possible, not to make a certain amount of money. Rising costs, like utilities, labor. taxes, transportation and yes even political donations may cut into profit margins, but that's what risking capital is all about.
You don't make money by folding up your tent and going home when the going gets tough.
Richard, ( continuing after running out of time on the re-write )
A business may react to rising costs by accepting lower profit margins, or it may restore profit margins by reducing salaries, laying off workers or cutting other costs. It may decide to declare bankruptcy or sell out to the highest bidder. While your question is not a smart elic, the answer has far more possibilities than the two you suggest.
"....etc etc etc they will increase the price of the product for the consumer. YOU PAY more for your product."
Hey, yeah. Maybe you need to see if we can have some price controls installed?
WOW, look how absolutely terrified Richard is.
Richard1550: What do you suppose a business or corporation would do if it's taxes went up? Do you think they'd cut the CEO's pay? Or do you think they'd just eat the costs, letting it just reduce their profit margin?
If a corporations taxes went up (like that would ever happen), they would cutt 30,000+ jobs from the lowest pay level, then give their ceo's a 100,000+ bonus, followed by crying to the government for some more corp. welfare or they would have to cut even more jobs.
Sounds good to me!
Perry is inconsistent and unclear on foreign policy.
So is Obama!
obama is consistently unclear about all policy
I bet most things are consistently unclear to you huh?
Gee... it must have taken you an entire 2 brain cells to muster up that one.
Failtard.
Please "economykiller" the president's foreign policy has been the highlight of his administration. Foreign affairs requires a nuanced approach and patience, GWB had neither - he was just a knee jerk reactionary and Perry will be more of the same.
The "Duh" candidate. Wait a minute, they have two of them. The male "Duh" candidate. Maybe the vaccination for the STD does cause lack of intellectual development. Maybe Ms. Bachmann was inoculated. Nah.
You've got to remember that as a secessionist, Perry's foreign policy is based on how the Republic of Texas should respond to actions of the foreign entity of the United States of America.
Perry will become very consistent when these questions are real and not hypothetical. When these questions on foreign policy or any other issues become real he rely on God's word to guide him. I mean really what more do you need? I wonder if God is available to be his running mate, that's if he gets the nomination.
Right on, Unit...I am Seattleite also, but anyway, yeah I have every confidence that good old God will provide.
Yes, indeedy, the Great one in the sky will provide a large dose of INDIFFERENCE, as HE or SHE or IT or THEY stay busy chuckling to his or herself or amongst themselves, if god is plural,at the wild and crazy folly of the human species, and the goofy ideas us humans think up, such as Rick Perry's big-time supporters those wily NEW APOSTOLIC REFORMATION people (google "AMERICAN TALIBAN"). Long story short, the NAR believes they are God's chosen ones to drive out DEMONS from 1) individuals; 2) other religions and philosophies, such as Tibetan Bhuddism and the Masons and others; and 3) their "highest" calling, driving out demons from whole large groups such as nation-states. This last calling is known as STRATEGIC LEVEL SPIRITUAL WARFARE!!! These folks are, in my possibly not so humble opinion, really delusionary, and possibly need a lot of TLC and maybe a bunch of THORAZINE too...lol. Pardon that last idea, I do really believe in freedom of religion, but religion seems to be getting wackier and wackier all the time.
Let's just stick with Obama, folks... things are fairly bad in the USA right now, I guess, but the simple truth is that we have no way of knowing if McCain would have done any better. Hypothetically, unemployment might be even way worse, there is no way of knowing. I suggest muddling through with Barack Obama, who at least can be given some credit, like, say, oh, HE SENT IN THE SEALS and KILLED OSAMA bin LADEN!!
BY the way, is 9.1% unemployment really that devastating?? Don't get me wrong, I am not saying it is good, but to blame it on Obama makes no real sense. Also, as an aside, my sister lives in a part of Spain, Andalucia, where unemployment is running about 40 (yes, forty) %, and the whole country of Spain is at about 20%. COULD IT BE POSSIBLE that things aren't really so doggone bad here as the media and others keep emphasizing?
The fact is that almost the entire western world, and much of the rest of the world, is in a pretty big economic downturn right now. Is Obama to blame? Let's just think about it a little, and see if we can come up with any other parts of world society who might be to blame. Like, maybe, the bankers who lent out money to millions of folks to buy more house than they could afford, exacerbating the worldwide real estate bubble? Or, say, the big international oil companies who have taken our tax dollars and military soldiers and convinced us with a lot of lies that war in Iraq was a good idea and got us to spend TRILLIONS on war.(those wily oil company henchmen who did most of the lying about WMD and Saddam's links to Al Quaeda were none other than George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, of course.) I could go on and on, but I am just gonna say YADDA, YADDA, YADDA for now.
Thanks for listening
Peace and Love
Brad
He is playing both sides against the middle. Saying what he thinks the neo-conservatism/extremist/fiscal terrorist want to hear. Then saying what he thinks. People who know that in the real world know that we have to have our allies. The same allies that lost soldiers, fathers and sons because we asked them to stand by us. I served with our allies during desert shield and desert strom and lost a friend from France. It was not only a slap in the face of our allies but those of us that served and lost friends. When Perry said "And when our interests are threatened, American soldiers should be led by American commanders.". Placating to extremist is not what the military is about so no, Gov. Perry would not make a good commander in chief.
These quotes do not necessarily exclude each other. The first has 2 main points:
1. US foreign policy should be decided by the US.
2. US forces should be led by the US when our interests are threatened.
The second has main points:
1. We cannot isolate ourselves from the world.
2. We need allies to spread freedom.
I do not see a contradiction. The author was trying to create a contradiction between global isolationism and global activism. However, the first point doesn't suggest isolationism rather it suggests more US control over our global activism. I would check the others but obviously the article has an agenda and therefore it is suspect.
(Personal note: No, I do not like Perry or any of the Republican candidates more than I like truth.)
I have been watching Perry do exactly this same dance for 11 years here in Texas. If you pay close attention to his speeches and debates he does say things that either contradict or is just a little off from what he just said and one of his famous ways to not explain himself and not have to back track is:
As if he really did not mean one or the other but he will never be able to tell you which was philosophy and which was a solid stance.
Memo to MSNBC's First Read: a real journalism site would hit Obama with criticism, also, where warranted.
The only criticisms you ever give Obama are political, that his poll numbers are weak. Never on substance.
Never will NBC hint that its hero Obama has gone too far Left.
BOB: Not everyone can be "fair and balanced" like Fixed News. I'll bet your just jonesing for a little bit of Hannity, right about now.
MSNBC does a commendable job confronting all politicians. I've also listened as they have given credit and "props" to politicians when and where it is due. (Chris Matthews has been very hard on the President lately).
FOX, on the other hand, gives sickening praise for anything, "conservative." Everybody knows FOX's spin on culture, religion, politics, race, economic class - no point in listening to that brain/white-wash.
I understand from some friends in Canada that FOX news does not show there, it is a Tabloid owned station. Something to like Canada for!
Yes, brought to you by the Murdoch Family empire.
"FOX, on the other hand, gives sickening praise for anything, "conservative." Everybody knows FOX's spin on culture, religion, politics, race, economic class - no point in listening to that brain/white-wash."
True, that.
But the CLEAVAGE they parade on a daily basis is, well, just great! (the cleavage- not the people it's attached to....)
Fox started adding the cleavage when Rupert added the viagra.
I pose you all with a question. Were Perry to become president (god forbid) what would happen if Perry decided he wanted the entire union to secede from itself??? How does one go about doing this. I don't believe it's ever occurred before in all of recorded history.
The question would be could any of the liberals learn a little self-reliance.
That's what the states are doing now, starting with their Republican majorities pushing voter suppression laws at the state level.
But the conservatively biased "mainstream media" doesn't cover things like that!
And if only cons could understand that their comfy way of life would not exist without the blood and sweat of Liberals. But go ahead, keep on believing how "self reliant" you are. Ha!
up until a couple of months ago Perry's foreign policy was the Mexican Border and the Country he talked about succession from.