Replies

Hiring a yard service whom you discover is employing illegals, is not in anyway the same as hiring illegals. It is a dishonest take intended to imply direct guilt when there is nothing worse than negligence. It is wrong to do so and he got hammered for it by Mitt. He got hammered for being rude and interrupting (Mitt owned him on that when he commented that as President you need to let both sides speak) and he got hammered because Mitt was correct in saying that it is almost impossible for a homeowner to find out if a contractor you hire is employing illegals. It was Perry who was interrupting Romney, not the other way around. Perry was trying to talk over Romney when it was Romney's turn.

I didn't support Romney in 2008 and I don't support him now unless he is the resultant candidate facing Obama. I just try to tell the truth without any emotional attachment to skew what I see.

I don't need to see what Mitt said about Romneycare because Romneycare is wrong, it was wrong when it was created and it would be wrong for the future. It is an economic disaster for Massachusetts.

I am not defending Romney, I am simply stating fact. Perry had a very strong moment with the UN statement, he had a very strong moment with his explanation of how you secure the border . . . he had a number of strong moments, but he still came off as immature, testy, inarticulate, and limited in what he was prepared to discuss.

Hiring a yard service that hires illegals is one thing...he kept the service after finding out they hired illegals, and surprise surprise it was later found they still employed illegals and had them again working on his property. His statement that he told the service he could not have illegals working on his property because he was running for President was also very telling. That sounds like he wouldn’t care or would condone it if he wasn’t under scrutiny.

“... he got hammered because Mitt was correct in saying that it is almost impossible for a homeowner to find out if a contractor you hire is employing illegals.”

The so called ‘contractor’ was a friend of Romney's from his church. Romney knew there was illegals working at his house and did nothing about it. They worked there for several years.

Romney flat out lied in the debate. Any defenses of Romney on this is just spin to cover his lies.

I appreciate your points, but I still think it was wrong and misleading of Romney to interrupt and say, “I never hired any illegals’, when he did. Surely he knew the workers were ‘aliens’, and he could have asked if they were legal. But to emphatically deny it and then admit it, is, in my opinion, dishonest.

I don’t think Perry should interrupt, but neither should Romney. Most of Perry’s answers were brief and to the point, but not Romney’s...he has a tendency to filibuster. I suppose it is in the eye of the beholder as to whom interrupted the most. It seemed to me that when Perry and Santorum were making points against him, Romney would yell over them, “Let me speak, let me speak.” I felt he was trying to keep the audience from hearing what they were exposing about him.

I believe Nevada is a heavily populated Morman State, so I’m not surprised Perry was booed. I wish I could say the South won’t boo Romney, but, unfortunately, we have our share of those with bad manners also.

I was not suggesting you read about Romneycare, only the fact that Romney did write, referring to Romneycare, “We can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country.” He removed this line from his book, and then denied it. He deserved to be called on it, and I’m sorry it took rudeness to get the point across, but Romney would have tried to make it appear Perry was the liar when, in fact, it was Romney! I am not saying Perry was as articulate and polished as Romney, but he was a heckuva lot more honest.

I think Newt Gingrich has won most of the debates. While I think he is the most intelligent and articulate of the candidates, I am concerned whether he can lead. He did not do too well as Speaker of the House.

>>>It was Perry who was interrupting Romney, not the other way around. Perry was trying to talk over Romney when it was Romney's turn.<<<

Romney has a track record of strong-arming other candidates in these debates, talking over them, insulting them, and speaking loudest to shut them down. He did it to Perry in some of the past debates, he did it to Santorum last night.

If anything, Perry knew he had to counter Romney's arrogance and tried his best to do so. The Mormon crowd booed Perry and cheered Romney. Don't buy into that garbage. That hall was overpowered by Mormons for Romney. Romney blew McCain away in all the Mormon states in the last primary. Those people voted for the Mormon candidate. Check out Nevada, Utah, Idaho. Hands down for Romney. If that debate would have been in Iowa or anywhere else, the crowd would have got behind Perry and not Romney.

I think your average republican liked the way Perry took on Romney and didn't let off. Nobody else touched Romney or tried. Cain had a brief moment in defending 9-9-9 where he addressed Romney's attack. But later in the debate, they practically embraced and hugged.

I want to see Cain slip out of the limelight and let Perry continue prosecuting the anti-Romney case. Nobody else will do it because they are chickensh*ts and want to remain viable for a V.P. bid.

Perry had a very strong moment with the UN statement,

Not really - Perry is just rehashing an idea that Ron Paul raised in 1983 and again in 2001 (and probably in between):

H.R.3891 - United Nations Termination Act (introduced 9/14/1983)
Sponsor: Rep Paul, Ron [TX-22]
United Nations Termination Act - Directs the President to terminate all U.S. participation in the United Nations and in any U.N. affiliate. Prohibits appropriating funds for the United Nations or a U.N. affiliate. Makes the privileges, exemptions, and immunities of specified Acts relating to international organizations inapplicable to the United Nations or any U.N. affiliate. Repeals the United Nations Participation Act of 1945.

Amends the Federal provisions relating to loans to the United Nations to prohibit this Act from being construed to affect the U.N. obligation to repay its loan from the United States.

Repeals specified laws relating to U.S. participation in and aid to U.N. organizations and programs.

H.AMDT.190 (A024) Amends: H.R.2500 (offered 7/18/2001)
Sponsor: Rep Paul, Ron [TX-14]
Amendment sought to prohibit use of funds for any U.S. contribution to the UN or any affiliated agency of the UN.

I thought it was a strong moment for Perry and probably something he had rehearsed a great deal, but when you read what he said, he just wanted to discuss defunding it and didn't actually commit to defunding it. I'm related to one of those diehard Ron Paul types and they were livid that Perry was promoting a watered down version of something Paul was pushing almost 30 years ago.