Posted on 09/08/2011 5:39:28 PM PDT by The Bronze Titan
I have decided to post this as my own article, because everyone in the media (and blogosphere) is so focused with the "horse-race" aspect of this campaign, and the "gotcha" sound bites, that a critical moment with insightful importance during last night's debate has been shockingly overlooked (and/or ignored).
It is critical, because it relates directly to the national security and foreign policy thinking and requisite aptitude of a top-tier candidate for President of the United States.
The critical moment occurs when the questioner, in turning to Perry, diverts the debate towards a "national security" issue. At this point, I am attentive to hear what the candidate has to say national security-wise relative to the question being asked.
Simply speaking, during a debate you want to gleam some aspect of the candidate's foreign policy thinking, and how he/she would react as President relative to the issue being raised. Essentially, the question is an "opening" being provided by the questioner to the candidate for the candidate to expound on their national security / foreign policy thinking. You can either respond directly to the question at hand, or divert your response to a more pronounced aspect of your foreign policy.
What Perry does (AND doesn't do) is quite breathtaking, to the point of being scary, since it covers a huge issue in our nation's foreign policy. The question relates directly to something he wrote about in his book ("adventurism").
Perry's total lack of a coherent response to the question on such a (supposedly) important foreign policy pronouncement in his book, considering that the issue involves when to send our men/women into battle, betrays his shockingly inept ability and readiness to explain his thinking in matters of national security.
It was an odd and strange response to a very important question. Seemingly reluctant in wanting to answer the question by making a weird turn to deflect the subject matter, all the while quickly closing on the same subject matter,.
==========================================
HARRIS: Governor Perry, as we approach the 9/11 anniversary, I'd like to stick with national security for a moment. You recently said, quote, "I do not believe that America should fall subject to a foreign policy of military adventurism." Looking back, do you think President George W. Bush was too quick to launch military intervention without thinking through the risks?
PERRY: I was making a comment about a philosophy; I don't think America needs to be in the business of adventurism.
But let me just say something about the president of the United States. And I know he's -- he's taken lots of slings and arrows here today. But one thing that I want to say that he did do that I agree with is that he maintained the -- the chase and -- and we took out a very bad man in the form of bin Laden, and I -- and I tip my hat to him.
I give more props to those Navy SEALs that did the job, but -- and the other thing this president's done, he has proven for once and for all that government spending will not create one job. Keynesian policy and Keynesian theory is now done. We'll never have to have that experiment on America again. And I might add that he kept Gitmo open against the will of his base, and I'm glad he did that. America's safer for it.
==========================================
Here is the video of the entire debate, with a reference to the question and the response segment at the 1:17:52 time mark.
I have provided the transcript of this exchange below, and link to the entire debate transcript here.
(better viewing the video segment, since it captures the essence of how this was phrased and how it was responded to)
Here is the transcript page on the Perry comment: Page 19
I never thought I would say this, but...
Really! Like, big deal...
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
It must be five o’clock somewhere.
Did you play it backwards, I think there might be a satanic message in it?
Uh no.
It was a trap laid by commie-liberals hoping to ensnare the most feared candidate in the race. Perry side-stepped it, rightfully so. No one I know in top GOP ranks thought he should have done otherwise - and I know and converse with many every day.
The points he made were more coherent than the point you're trying to make...I hope you're not considering a run for the presidency...that would be troubling.
I’d like to think so, too, but ABCCBSCNNNBC/AP is doubling down for him, and the Hussein Heads still stand intolerant of anything that doesn’t proclaim Hussein to be God.
“Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz”
Says it all. Bravo
I have decided to post this as my own article,
Does this tell anything about your decision making process?
I have decided to post this as my own article.
A media empire in the making.
Perry is absolutely right about Social Scarcity. I’m a Senior, so think I can express an opinion. It IS a Ponzi scheme, and a damn one. - The “establishment” doesn’t want to do anything to fix it. When Roosevelt started SS, there were 140 workers supporting one retiree. Now, it’s just three (3) workers supporting one retiree, and soon will be even fewer than that. It’s gonna crash when it gets down to one worker supporting one retiree, but unlike the Madoff Ponzi scheme, those in Congress who raided the SS fund for PORK to buy votes, the perpetrators will be long retired and sitting real pretty.
Building a FENCE along 1,200 (one thousand two hundred) miles is an undertaking of garantuan proportions and not practical. Perry’s got a point there; if the fence is 30’ tall, then the guy who owns the 35’ ladder company will be also sitting real pretty. The problem must be approached in a practical manner.
At this point, I’m leaning either Perry/Palin or Palin/Perry. - It’s obvious the MSM is seeking to besmirch and destroy ANYONE who threatens Obama in the upcoming election. I’m like Palin in that - ABO, ABO, ABO, ABO, ABO; I’d take anyone who was on that debate stage over Obama in a New York nanosecond. I pray God’s will shall be to REMOVE him and his whole administration from off our backs.
I don't really get why this answer is such a big deal. I remember college debates, and even that was difficult. You want a point mentioned, you feel it important, and sometimes you stick it in the middle of a non related answer. I understand he hasn't been in a debate for 5 years...probably a bit rusty. Bachmann had a moment like this last night...can't remember what it was, but it was very clumsy.
Hey, at least none of them called one of our heroes CORPSEman.
Mitt is good at these things, he always looks good and stays for the most on point.
Perry came off as the real “guy”. Or, as Rush said today...he had the “onions”. That was funny...but I agree. Perry has a presence that is in charge and masculine. A very good thing. Can you imagine widdle Barry up there, alone, with Perry? I do love that image. Will really show what a thin skinned little man child he is. Oh, and probably the same with Mitt.
PROBABLY THE SAME WITH BACHMAN. Barry always comes off as a snotty 15 year old that has it all figured out.
I think, whoever wins the primary, Barry will simply be fired. Get ready for the race riots. Pathetic that the race baiters will rev the idiots up.
You mean ‘Bronze Titan’ makes MAJOR blunder, writing more vanity BS about a great man and candidate, don’t you?
I’d love to see some one on Free Republic talk about this, (talk about a nightmare to follow Obama)——————
http://gulagbound.com/20285/rick-perry-wanted-bi-national-health-insurance-with-mexico/
The guy is nothing but a global elitist. I know he would happily drive us, the rest of the way into the ground, but we could be proud Americans like the Argentinians, and it has nothing to do with corrupt government and special interests, like big Banks, or the big corporation curse that is a major theme with a country’s economic collapse. Maybe if our legal system was legal, they would be facing treason charges. If............ OH that’s right, we already fought a war to end corrupt Judges.......
"Great man"??? - He's not even President. Sounds like you've been smitten.
Do you remember Tempest? She got zotted for going overboard in trashing Republican candidates.
Just a heads up.
More I see, the more I like. It's early though. Lots of weird stuff will come out about everyone. EVERYONE. I actually think that some “journalist” is going to try to save his miserable hide and actually vet the Golden Child. I think the msm smells blood in the water, and one will actually have the nads to cover...say...the phony Michelle O job at the hospital, Rezko hi-jinks, that he likes fellers, why he fired the inspector gnrl that was looking into the Mayor of Sac (fiddling with young girls, $$$ misuse, etc.) who just happens to be Moo’s, brother's best bud. Or, golly maybe even dig into the treasonous behavior of trying to subvert the Constitution with the Fast and Furious plan.
Maybe I'm dreaming...but I actually can feel the MSM start to turn. Should be fun, if this does happen.
But, Perry...an Eagle Scout? Very cool!
It’s amazing. No matter what actions or spoken words that I present about this candidate, people just don’t want to hear about. They won’t face the truth. They can’t face the truth. Sad, really.
Ok! I appreciate it. That will be it!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.