Skip to comments.A national Republican star is born
Posted on 09/08/2011 7:17:47 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Anyone hoping or fearing that Rick Perry would crash and burn in his first GOP debate last night can either feel depressed or rest easy.
In his debut on the national stage, Perry proved he possesses a somewhat indefinable star quality -- exactly what Republicans were distressed to feel was missing from the field.
That quality emanated from him even when he struggled with difficult questions about his views on climate change and Social Security that present complex electoral challenges for him and his party in a national race. He knew when to speak strongly and when to underplay.
......The real controversy arose from his decision not to run from the attack he launched on Social Security in his 2010 book Fed Up, but rather to say that politicians need to be honest about the Ponzi-scheme nature of the old-age pension system.
......Hes right -- it is a Ponzi scheme. The challenge for Romney now will be making the case to primary voters that it will be fatal for the GOPs shot at denying Barack Obama a second term to have a candidate who calls it a Ponzi scheme. Hell have a strong case to make.
But there is something striking in the contrast between the two men. Romney looks like a casting directors idea of a president, and after running for the office for four years solid now, he has an enviable fluency and command of the stage.
Alas for him, theres a reason he was unable to solidify his own status as a front-runner: He just doesnt seem to have it -- that elusive quality populist politicians who find a connection with ordinary voters seem to possess.....
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Well, when Bush RAN on fixing SS through private accounts, among other things, he WON. So SS may not be the third rail anymore - but Perry is going to have to get a proposal out there pretty quickly to show how he intends to address the problem. He has rightly identified the problem, but people want to see a solution as well. If he can do that, and can reassure current and near-future recipients that they will not lose their benefits, he can actually make this argument a winner.
All those polls point to one thing - a failure of leadership. By Obama, of course, but also by the vast majority of politicians in both parties - and also by a biased media that sees the issue more as way to advance their agenda than as a problem that needs to be addressed.
Everybody knows the current SS system is unsustainable but most politicians are afraid to begin to explore fixes. Since the Democrats are lying suckasses for the socialistatusquo, its on the GOP leadership to start the movement.
And they need to ignore the reprehensible bleating from an agenda-driven press corps, determined to score political points rather than right the nation.
This didn’t happen over night and it’s basically busted. People know this.
Either we make changes around the edges and whistle past the graveyard, or we can have something good come from this and make it something other than our money passing through government fingers and out the door to someone they want to attract to their camp. Government needs to get out of our way and stay away from our earned resources.
I see this as an opportunity, not as a problem.
I did not expect any GOP “stars to be born” on an MSNBC forum. It was framed as a “gotcha” attempt to decimate Rick Perry and it didn’t work.
I'm reminded of a couple quotes from wise men of history...
"Some men run for office because they want to do something. Others run for office because they want to be something."
"Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others."
I have no interest in helping Mitt fill out his resume.
I wonder why the GOP thinks the only viable candidates are those coming out of TX or NH? It’s like any other Republican candidate doesn’t stand a chance in h_ll!
Perry’s not my first choice, but I’ll hold a soft spot in my heart for anybody who can rid the body politic of Romney.
You make good points in your post#51.
We have two Governor Goodhairs. Perry and Romney. Just on looks and presentability they can beat Bammy by 10-15 points. Just comparing Moochelle & Bammy Boy to Mitt and his wife and Perry and his wife the Republicans come out way ahead. Don’t laugh, people vote based on what they see on TV with “the issues” being secondary. They will like the way Rick and Mitt come across on the boob tube much better than the mangy mopey Kenyan
How Three Texas Counties Created Personal Social Security Accounts and Prospered Across the country, state and local governments are facing huge unfunded liabilities for their employee pension plans. And then theres Social Security.
But three neighboring Texas counties, which opted out of Social Security 30 years ago by creating personal retirement accounts, have avoided a fiscal train wreck while providing retirees with even more retirement income.
Galveston, Matagorda and Brazoria County employees, many of them union members, have seen their retirement savings grow every year, even during the Great Recession. If state and local governmentsand Congressare really looking for a path to long-term sustainable entitlement reform, they might start with what is referred to as the Alternate Plan.
More importantly, if a worker participating in Social Security dies before retirement, he loses his contribution (though part of that money might go to surviving children, if any, or a spouse who didnt work and therefore didnt establish his or her own benefits). But a worker in the Alternate Plan owns his account, so the entire account belongs to the estate. There is also, among other benefits, a disability benefit that pays immediately upon injury, rather than waiting six months, plus other restrictions, as under Social Security.
And those who retire under the Galveston model do much better than Social Security. For example:
A lower-middle income worker making about $26,000 at retirement would get about $1,007 a month under Social Security, but $1,826 under the Alternate Plan, according to First Financials calculations.
A middle-income worker making $51,200 would get about $1,540 monthly from Social Security, but $3,600 from the banking model.
And a high-income worker who maxed out on his Social Security contribution every year would receive about $2,500 a month from Social Security vs. $5,000 to $6,000 a month from the Alternate Plan
You know everyone pretty much knows paulbots spam those unscientific, online polls right? I mean, you don't really think your fooling anyone do you?
Ron Paul did bring attention to himself again though, in a sort of "I'm a completely deranged doddering fool" kind of way. Who knew that the great fear with building a fence to protect our southern border was because it might be used to stop Americans from fleeing....to Mexico.
Ron Paul will never win the Republican nomination and will never be President of the United States. He's good for a giggle now and again, but other than that he is completely irrelevant.
WOW! Thanks for this info—and AMMO!
Above all I don't want another president that fractures the English language.
SNL and the MSM will have a field day with Perry.
Also--SOMEOME needs to inform him about the minor little detail that Federal employees, including ALL members of Congress, have the option of investing in what is basically a private retirement account--namely the THRIFT SAVINGS PLAN--which is a supplement to SS. But the rate of return on TSP investments often far exceed those of SS. Yet the Dims scream and holler about the DANGERS of offering this option to employees in the private sector. I would so LOVE to see any Pubbie candidate bring up the subject of TSP accounts, because it would put any incumbent Dim in an very awkward position to have to tell how much they--or their fellow Congress critters--have earned through investments in this PRIVATE investment plan.Excellent point, and in making it you solidify my biggest worry about Perry: that he has the George Bush inability to articulate his positions.
Remember how frustrating it was watching Bush not defend himself for 8 years?
And now here's Perry, on SS, an issue he obviously cares deeply about, and he doesn't bring up this excellent point that you just brought up.
Someone please tell me why not?
Are we facing 8 years of asking the same d*mn question we asked for 8 years under Bush: Why doesn't he just SAY how the left is wrong?
It's the reason I'm now ready to hear what Palin has to say, on stage, with all the others.
Perry is still my #1 choice. But he worries me.
amazing how good Bachmann looks for her age back there..she is my age
Good hair goes a long way
OOPS—sorry about the double post—but thanks for the great responses!
The msm are socialist enablers and they WANT to see big government succeed in running the lives of us morons.
Perry wants free-market capitalism and limited government power — fix it and go home.
Romney is too enamored of the office and the power.
I agree that we can’t whistle past the graveyard. But what we as citizens, and the government, have to do is expressly recognize social security for what it is:
a system in which current payors are basically contributing to the retirements of current recipients.
Once we recognize that reality then we can start substantially reducing the benefits without hurting current recipients (via age eligibility/means testing/reduced benefits for items not directly involving monthly payments), start reducing the FICA payments, and provide tax credits to enable us who are in our 50s and younger to better save for our own retirements (or, at the very least, have a large percentage of the FICA tax actually deposited in an IRA account in which the contributions are invested by court approved fiduciary/trustees for income/growth with the suitable investment mix dependent upon the individual’s age).
Two points: First, a debate is probably not the best place to try to provide a detailed explanation as to why AGW is a hoax. Second, this election is going to be all about jobs and the economy, so if he can tie the AGW argument to that, I think he will connect with more people than trying to make the scientific argument.
The moderator asked if he believed what was in his book. Kind of hard to not bring it up now.
The truth is refreshing. I had a hard time believing that Herman Cain wanted a better working SS system and a better more efficient Dept of Homeland security.
I liked Rick Perry going into the debate. I tried an interesting experiment, I let my two older children (9 and 11) watch.
One is somewhat liberal, the other staunchly conservative. When it was nearly over (because of bedtimes) I paused it on the DVR and asked them who they thought had won. The younger one said it was just boring and he liked the guy who said that if 10 percent was good enough for God then 9 should be good enough for the federal government (Herman Cain). The 11 year old said that he really liked Cain and thought he had performed the best of the night. I asked him who he thought next would be and he said Ron Paul. Then he said Michelle Bachman did very well. I asked him about Perry, and he said he was weak and slimy. I asked about Romney and he said that Mitt looked like he was a guy willing to say whatever he thought people wanted to hear to get his way.
Frankly, Rick Perry failed to impress by a long shot last night, and I fully expect his numbers to go way down after his performance.
From the mouths of babes.......
Young, but already with good judgement !
You must be raising them well.
>>>Were there two different debates last night?
Just the one... and those who think Perry is the second coning still think that...
Yes. It must be addressed honestly. Hopefully, we can learn that we don’t need government to do these things for us. It’s crippling what being human means.
But--right now--gotta run. So--thanks again for some very excellent posts to this thread. As I said, it's encouraging!
Yes and no.
Here’s the argument:
1. Proposed AGW “solutions” will kill the economy
2. There is NO AGW
3. There might not even be any GW
You can drop #3 from the argument, but I don’t see how you credibly drop #2.
I don't. Remember, this was an MSNBC debate, which means that only the most politically engaged even bothered to watch. What most voters will see from the debate are the "highlights" - for Perry, that will include the SS question, the exchange with Romney over jobs, and the death penalty question. On all three of those, I think Perry helped himself, particularly with the Republican base (this is for the Republican primaries, after all). The SS question has the potential to be a problem in the general election if Perry cannot articulate a plan to protect current seniors while reforming the program for future recipients, but he has about 6-9 months to work on that.
My jury is still out on Perry. I’m waiting for Texans to convince me he’s really a conservative and not just another career politician willing to say what it takes to get elected (like our own Huckster). Texans should know him best, because they had to live under his governorship for years. So this is my call to you Texas FReepers, tell me what you think of Perry’s track record and do you think he would make a good conservative President?
My wife’s philosophy is that taxes are in effect the government stealing a part of your life away. We literally spend months in servitude to the government by simply working solely to pay annual federal/state/local tax obligations.
When the federal government takes more than is required for basic services rationally reserved for a central government (national defense, roads, regulation of “actual” interstate commerce), it in essence is reducing our God given life spans.
This, at best, is slavery. At worst, blasphemy.
Re Texas and alternative to SS for retirement, you might want to check out: http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/galveston-vs-social-security-39613
Successful program. Wish Rick had mentioned it - but he has had a few other things on his plate this past week in addition to campaigning, like running a state and major forest fires.
You have a smart wife!
I think Perry’s best quality last night was he showed he owns what he says. Not backing down a bit on any of his statements and willing to take responsibility on things that may have been done differently. Something much different then Romney. Newt, Paul and Romney should have done nothing else but perform great, they are Presidential repeaters. Have been well rehearsed on this stage. Perry came in as the virgin, being the “pinata” on stage and overseeing his state’s wildfire crisis for a week and still came out on top. His confidence and honesty is what stood out and that is exactly what the American people are looking for, because they sure as he!! haven’t seen it for the last 3 years.
You owe me a keyboard! LOL!
IE. Perry must stay aware there are many that have bought hook line and sinker the idea about the danger of man made global warming. The point being Perry or any Republican needs every voter possible and can not afford to put them off on any issue ... because it will be throw back at him in sound bites when we get to the real rivalry. Not that he should avoid it altogether but be very careful in his true statements about the science being “unsettled”.
It is a very difficult maneuver to stand our among like minded candidates all pursuing the same office.
There are many issues to emphasis, immigration, economy, jobs, cutting spending, balanced budget amendment, etc.
the EPA regulations, drilling for oil.
Global warming is a big excuse for draconian regulations and take over of Americans life styles. All of which are severely injuring our economy. IE. California crops, have been decimated, OR DESTROYED COMPLETLY. ... ALMONDS, TOMATOES, ETC.
Sorry, still see him as just another run of the mill politico. I want to see fire, show me fire in a candidate not more blaaaaah.
“Next time, I hope SOMEONE in the good state of Texas, who knows Perry personally, gets him to read up on the recent CERN study basically PROVING that AGW is a baldfaced lie.
Please, someone, please, tell Rick about that.”
Well, CERN doesnt quite do all that, the cloud impact on climate has more questions than answers, but certainly it debunks the ‘science is settled’ garbage.
Perry needs to have some substance to the charge. He will.
Rick Perry is not a Bush. GW Bush was and is the aristocrat son of an aristocrat East Coast Brahmin father. GW Bush thought it was beneath him to respond in kind to his detractors and was beneath the (office of the) Presidency. Rick Perry carries none of this rich boy baggage. He will not be sitting back and taking it when he is elected President
I liked GW Bush in many ways, I'm just explaining why he didn't punch back or have his surrogates punching back.
Rick Perry probably doesn’t think he did very well, but plenty of time to improve. Romney was a lot better but has had a lot more debate experience.
I noticed that when Perry was getting asked the "name two Scientists question" , all the other candidates started looking throught their notes. Guess they thought they might be asked the same thing.
Perhaps they didn't notice that Perry was getting the most questions, followed by Romney. The rest of them were mostly being ignored.
I hope you’re right. There are still plenty of debates to watch him in action.
What is destroying the almonds and tomatoes in California?
Romney was a lot better but has had a lot more debate experience.Romney ALWAYS comes across as TOO smooth. Way too smooth.
Google for back information. Check it out. California tomato crops, and Almond production denied water by Pelosi ... or some such