AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Is Rick Perry The Next Ronald Reagan?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is Rick Perry The Next Ronald Reagan? - Page 3

post #81 of 100
9/21/11 at 2:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Just like the Bush tax cuts.

The ones that have been in effect for over 10 years?

Quote:
Yep, you're claiming that, but you're not showing any data that supports your claim.

Uh....take a look at where we are now as compared to when the stimulus was passed.

Quote:
And there's no way you can disprove it.
There's no way the non-expert (you) can prove that.

You cannot prove the stimulus "saved or created" jobs. You can only parrot what the architects of the stimulus claim.

Quote:

LMFAO. First you're claiming that expert economists are incorrect for claiming that the measures helped the economy. Then you, NOT an expert, claim otherwise, as though you know something they don't. You're a riot.

One doesn't need a color expert to understand black and white. The results are in. They're pretty clear. The stimulus failed.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #82 of 100
9/21/11 at 4:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You said "a valid claim that cannot be disproved." The implication is the claim is valid because it cannot be disproved. This is no different than "Iraq has WMD because they have not proven otherwise."

Um... Actually, it is very different.

'Iraq has WMD' was a valid claim until it was proven false (assuming it Was based on evidence, and wasn't a deliberate lie or misinformation).

You do know what 'valid claim' means, right? That's not one more thing you're ignorant of, is it?

You seem to think it means the same thing as 'fact'. It does not. Educate yourself.
Reply
Reply
post #83 of 100
9/21/11 at 5:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

The ones that have been in effect for over 10 years?

Yep. The ones that were presented to the Congress that passed them as having an expiry date. As in temporary.
Quote:
Uh....take a look at where we are now as compared to when the stimulus was passed.

And look, according to these economists, where we could have been. But you won't.
Quote:
You cannot prove the stimulus "saved or created" jobs. You can only parrot what the architects of the stimulus claim.

And you can't prove their claims false.
Quote:
One doesn't need a color expert to understand black and white. The results are in. They're pretty clear. The stimulus failed.

That's using your noggin' Of course! The stimulus was the only factor affecting the economy over the last two years. The economy didn't improve, ergo, the stimulus failed. How insightful.
Reply
Reply
post #84 of 100
9/23/11 at 9:13am
The Near Meaninglessness of Party Membership

Quote:
Rick Perry’s having been a Democrat years ago has become a point mentioned by some of his Republican critics. As the Christian Science Monitor points out, that archetypal hero of Republican conservatism—Ronald Reagan—was himself a Democrat before moving to the GOP in the early 1960s.

Reagan is a great example of the meaninglessness of party membership. He was a New Deal Democrat early on, and his politics hardly changed. As governor, for better or for worse, Reagan signed the most liberal abortion legalization bill in the country, banned the free carrying of firearms, approved the largest tax increase in California history, and greatly expanded the bureaucracy. As president, he approved massive deficit spending, signed off on trade restrictions, cut and run from Lebanon after the Marine barracks were bombed, and granted amnesty to illegal immigrants. All of this could have come from a Democrat and the only difference would be the many Americans who to this day choose to love him and those who choose to hate him.

Republican Richard Nixon favored a ban on handguns, created the Environmental Protection Agency, and instituted wage and price controls. Democrat Jimmy Carter pushed through deregulation and was a tough Cold Warrior whose questionable support of Afghan rebels helped weaken the Soviet Union (along with helping to foster an anti-American terrorist threat). Republican George H.W. Bush raised taxes and signed the Americans with Disabilities Act. Democrat Clinton signed welfare reform and oversaw a significant increase in marijuana arrests. Republican George W. Bush dramatically expanded Medicare and the Department of Education. Democrat Barack Obama has widened the wars abroad, as well as the revolving door between Wall Street and the White House.

Whatever you think of these actions—I find most to be bad—they are all outside of what is supposedly expected given the party label of the president being described. The same is true up and down the political system and in most states in the country. Whether someone is a Republican or a Democrat will indeed indicate something about their policies, and much more likely, will serve as a strong indicator of what kind of rhetoric they use.

John McCain and Barack Obama were both for civil unions but against gay marriage. They had the same position, yet most gay rights advocates saw the former as an opponent and the latter as an ally. They also both had very similar positions on the war on terrorism, detention policy, surveillance, immigration, TARP, Medicare, Medicaid, the Department of Education, the war on drugs, trade, gun control, and 90 to 95% of what remains of federal policy. But their rhetoric was meant to do what it always is meant to do in politics: Excite the base (whether on the left or right) while also appealing to the center. So they spoke differently even as they advanced an agenda with 90% or so overlap in the all the fundamentals.

Have Rick Perry’s views changed since he became a Republican? Would he govern so differently if he were a Democrat? I’m guessing not really. But we can bet that the people who vote for him will think so a good deal, based largely on what comes out of his mouth and the letter—whether “R” or “D”—affixed to his name.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #85 of 100
9/23/11 at 10:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Um... Actually, it is very different.

'Iraq has WMD' was a valid claim until it was proven false (assuming it Was based on evidence, and wasn't a deliberate lie or misinformation).

You do know what 'valid claim' means, right? That's not one more thing you're ignorant of, is it?

You seem to think it means the same thing as 'fact'. It does not. Educate yourself.

You seem to think it always means a claim that is not frivolous or fraudulent. Yes, this is not how most people use the phrase. Educate yourself.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #86 of 100
9/25/11 at 4:26pm
Thread Starter 
Republican hopefuls all becoming outcasts-

"Mr Pizza's campaign is such a long shot that his strong showing in the Sunshine State poll was the equivalent of a vote for "none of the above". Mitt Romney, the former private equity boss and Massachusetts Governor who is Mr Perry's only close rival, gained 14 per cent."
~ http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...y-2360912.html

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #87 of 100
9/25/11 at 5:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You seem to think it always means a claim that is not frivolous or fraudulent. Yes, this is not how most people use the phrase. Educate yourself.

And most people on the Internet think your a looser. But that doesn't make their statements grammatically correct.
Reply
Reply
post #88 of 100
9/25/11 at 5:14pm
"Valid claim" always means not frivolous or fraudulent, unless it's being used incorrectly. In any case, you were mistaken in your assumption about what I said, because you were ignorant of the meaning of the phrase the way I was using it. Admit it.
Reply
Reply
post #89 of 100
9/26/11 at 6:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

And most people on the Internet think your a looser. But that doesn't make their statements grammatically correct.

Yes, because it means exactly what you say it does. All the time. Case closed.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #90 of 100
9/26/11 at 6:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Yes, because it means exactly what you say it does. All the time. Case closed.

It certainly meant what I say it does, when I said it. Which you misunderstood. And you're too intellectually dishonest to admit your misunderstanding.
Reply
Reply
post #91 of 100
9/26/11 at 6:41am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

It certainly meant what I say it does, when I said it. Which you misunderstood. And you're too intellectually dishonest to admit your misunderstanding.

Do you seriously want to set this precedent? You realize the next time you misunderstand what someone else posts that you are open to the exact same argument and regardless of your position you become the intellectually dishonest one? It is your choice, but it does not raise the level of conversation here based on what I am seeing so far. \

And I can see unintended consequences down the way following this.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #92 of 100
9/26/11 at 7:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Do you seriously want to set this precedent? You realize the next time you misunderstand what someone else posts that you are open to the exact same argument and regardless of your position you become the intellectually dishonest one? It is your choice, but it does not raise the level of conversation here based on what I am seeing so far. \

And I can see unintended consequences down the way following this.

If I confuse the meaning of a commonly used phrase in English, and then proceed to attack another member's post because of this misunderstanding, and then when my error is pointed out to me, ignore the fact that I was wrong, then you are free to mock me.
Reply
Reply
post #93 of 100
9/26/11 at 7:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

If I confuse the meaning of a commonly used phrase in English, and then proceed to attack another member's post because of this misunderstanding, and then when my error is pointed out to me, ignore the fact that I was wrong, then you are free to mock me.

Permission noted. I likely will not be the one you will have to be concerned with.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #94 of 100
9/26/11 at 11:49am
Thread Starter 
With growing unease amongst Republicans with RINO Perry and RINO Romney still failing to cast a wider TeaPublican net, will Gov. Chris Christie manage any better at hiding his RINO roots?

Here's some analysis from The New York Times-


Gun Control.


New Jersey, a mostly suburban state, tends to take a moderate position on gun control, and Mr. Christie has in the past as well. In 2009, Mr. Christie’s campaign rebutted a claim by his Democratic opponent, Jon Corzine, that he stood with the N.R.A. by pointing out that Mr. Christie supported the assault weapons ban and opposed concealed carry laws. A statement on Mr. Christie’s campaign Web site in 2009 said that he supported New Jersey’s existing gun control laws, which are fairly strict.


The Environment and Global Warming.


During the 2009 campaign, Mr. Christie sometimes critiqued Governor Corzine’s performance on the environment from the left, and he won the endorsement of the New Jersey Environmental Foundation, the first statewide Republican candidate to do so in 30 years.

More recently, however, Mr. Christie withdrew New Jersey from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a cap-and-trade program. But while so doing, he stated explicitly that global warming was real and manmade and endorsed the views of the consensus of climate scientists. Mr. Christie has also opposed plans to drill for oil off of New Jersey’s coast.


Immigration.


In 2008, Mr. Christie, then a United States attorney, stated that “being in this country without proper documentation is not a crime.” The statement drew a harsh critique from CNN’s Lou Dobbs, who called for Mr. Christie’s resignation, and is a good bet to make a reappearance in one of his opponent’s campaign commercials should Mr. Christie enter the race.

Mr. Christie has received an F from NumbersUSA, an organization that favors greater restrictions on both legal and illegal immigration.


Social Issues.


Mr. Christie is an opponent of both abortion rights and same sex marriage, but his campaign Web site in 2009 stated that he had “no issue with same sex couples sharing contractual rights,” an apparent reference to New Jersey’s existing civil unions law.

In 2010, Mr. Christie broke with other prominent Republicans by accusing his party of “overreacting” to the proposed construction of an Islamic mosque and cultural center near the ground zero site, although he also criticized President Obama’s position on the issue.


‘Post-Partisan’ Branding.


Although in some ways Mr. Christie’s outspoken, no-holds-barred style might seem like an antidote to Mr. Obama, whom Mr. Christie has criticized for weak leadership, there have also been times when Mr. Christie’s messaging has resembled that of the president.

One noteworthy example is a video that Mr. Christie’s campaign released in the closing days of the 2009 campaign. It featured extended and positively framed clips of Mr. Obama, who was more popular then, and interspersed images of supporters of Mr. Christie and Mr. Obama, implying that Mr. Christie would be in the legacy of Mr. Obama’s mandate for “change”.
~ http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...nti-romney/?hp

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #95 of 100
9/26/11 at 12:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

It certainly meant what I say it does, when I said it. Which you misunderstood. And you're too intellectually dishonest to admit your misunderstanding.



Quote:
"Valid claim" always means not frivolous or fraudulent, unless it's being used incorrectly.

That is false. Please don't make me do this to you.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #96 of 100
9/26/11 at 5:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

That is false. Please don't make me do this to you.

Honestly, I could care less.*

*But not likely
Reply
Reply
post #97 of 100
9/27/11 at 3:48am
Thread Starter 
More on Gov. Chris Christie running for POTUS-

"Meet the Draft Christie committee, a small but influential group of Republican-leaning donors and activists, many based in New York, united by a shared desire to see Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey run for president.

There is Kenneth G. Langone, the billionaire Home Depot founder who is perhaps Mr. Christies most fervent booster; Paul E. Singer, the publicity-shy hedge fund magnate and Republican activist who is among the most-sought-after Republican donors in the country; and David H. Koch, the industrialist, Tea Party benefactor and, according to Forbes, the richest man in New York.

I had Christie to our board meeting the April after he took office, and he knocked their socks off, said Kathryn Wylde, president of the Partnership for New York City, a business group with a gold-plated roster of prominent Democratic and Republican moneymen. And ever since, theres been nothing but enthusiasm for him. Hes considered smart, courageous, a straight talker, kind of an antipolitician."
~ http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/27/ny...d=growl1_r1_v3

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply

"If your enemies cannot find a flaw in your reasoning, they will find it in your reputation".

~ William Hazlitt

Reply
post #98 of 100
9/27/11 at 5:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

The ones that have been in effect for over 10 years?



Uh....take a look at where we are now as compared to when the stimulus was passed.



You cannot prove the stimulus "saved or created" jobs. You can only parrot what the architects of the stimulus claim.



One doesn't need a color expert to understand black and white. The results are in. They're pretty clear. The stimulus failed.

What great republican plan will jump start the economy do you purpose?
Reply
Reply
post #99 of 100
9/27/11 at 5:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

If I confuse the meaning of a commonly used phrase in English, and then proceed to attack another member's post because of this misunderstanding, and then when my error is pointed out to me, ignore the fact that I was wrong, then you are free to mock me.

I really don't understand why your feathers are so ruffled over this. You used the phrase in the literal, legal sense. I didn't take it that way initially, likely because I've heard it used correctly in other contexts. If you weren't obsessed with playing some kind of "gotcha" semantical game, you'd simply explain that you meant it in the aforementioned way. That would have been the end of it. However, you chose to flip sh*t over it, lobbing charges of intellectual dishonesty, ignorance, etc. This is not usually your M.O. Are you feeling OK?
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
post #100 of 100
9/27/11 at 5:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

What great republican plan will jump start the economy do you purpose?

I don't necessarily have a great "Republican" plan, but thus far Republicans have proposed:

--Reducing regulation, particularly through the EPA
--Reducing size of government, streamlining.
--Various tax proposals, from Cain's 9/9/9 plan, to the Fair Tax, to reducing corporate rates, capital gains and individual rates.
--Balanced budget amendment


Now, if you're asking what I would do, I'm inclined to support most of the above with preference for the Fair Tax and reducing other rates. I also think that a jump start might be necessary with 3 month Payroll Tax Holiday, or something along those lines.
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
To save time, assume I know everything.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Is Rick Perry The Next Ronald Reagan?