[Polybius]

Perry deliberately insulted anyone who disagreed with his position rather than offering a reasoned justification. His whole response is predicated on feelings, rather than thought. I'm frankly surprised that conservatives are so willing to debase the core of conservatism - the rational thought process. Perry, for me, is still a possibility, but he's skating on thin ice in some ways. His thoughtlessness is just one of those ways.

These "30 Second Sound Bite" Contests that pass for "debates" nowadays do not lend themselves very well to "reasoned justification" of any complex issue.

"Fence = Good"

"No Fence = You are Pro-Illegal"

Try explaining, in 30 seconds, that even the Israelis are not building a Fence in the middle of the Negev Desert, the equivalent of the Texas desert, and instead are relying on, as Perry advocated, a combination of a Fence in the highly populated areas and, for the desert regions, boots on the .....

DING! DING! DING! "Your time is up, Sir."

Perry is a terrible debater. (See the article in Post 230.) He screwed up in a "30 Second Sound Bite" contest where sound bites written by staffers are often memorized by candidates. (The "Where's the beef" sound bite had to be taught and explained to Mondale because he had never seen a Wendy's commercial.)

Perry has since apologized.

We'll see how he fares in the next debate.

As far as "insulted anyone who disagreed with his position rather than offering a reasoned justification. His whole response is predicated on feelings, rather than thought. I'm frankly surprised that conservatives are so willing to debase the core of conservatism - the rational thought process."

Well, .... ummm .... How can I put this in a non-judgmental manner?

I can't.

In the past year, have you ever been on any thread on FR and tried to rationally discuss the merits of a Palin candidacy or dared to imply that Sarah Palin did not walk on water?

After leaving the thread, you and the horse you rode in on looked like Saint Sebastian.

[MortMan]

Yes, actually, I have personally argued that I see Palin as a potential candidate with merit who has not yet proven herself. Perhaps you can explain how that relates to my comment on Perry?

Consider my comment on his “heartless” statement this way: Perry had the opportunity to state that he believed in-state tuition was the compassionate and smart way to handle an existing problem. Instead, he threw out a two second soundbite that attacks many of the people he needs to get elected.

It bothers me that a candidate reflexively attacks his purported base. His skill as a “sound bite” debater is not the point.

With regard to the fence issue - Perry may have a perfectly sound approach to the problem of illegal immigration. I did not mention the border fence at all, in part because I have not yet studied his position to sufficiently comment on it. Which makes your argument on the fence more than a bit beside the point.

I do congratulate on your skill at posting interesting pictures, BTW. But I fail to see how anything you wrote negates my comment.