What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

An intimate moment with Rick Perry

Kevin_Kennedy

Defend Liberty
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
18,365
Reaction score
1,724
Points
205
RICK PERRY made a campaign stop the other day at Iowa City's Hamburg Inn #2, a small diner renowned as a destination for presidential hopefuls. Tipped off by a friend employed there, I wandered over and scored a seat just before the crowd of media and curious locals started to push up against the fire code. I found myself seated across from Drew Hjelm, a University of Iowa undergraduate studying economics and information systems. Mr Hjelm told me he had voted for Ron Paul at the Ames Straw Poll on Saturday. He sported a mises.org rubber bracelet and was not impressed with Mr Perry's small-government credentials. As we waited for Mr Perry to wend his way through the crowd toward our booth I joked with a friend about questions to ask the governor of Texas: "Why are you so handsome?" "What conditioner do you use?" "George W. Bush: Great president or greatest president?" Mr Hjelm, it turns out, had a serious question for Mr Perry. When Mr Perry got to our table, Mr Hjelm put it to the governor. I happened to catch Mr Perry's somewhat brusque reaction on video:

[youtube]-RV9OhSkoeU[/youtube]

Iowa 2012: An intimate moment with Rick Perry | The Economist
 

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,267
Points
1,283
I couldnt understand the question asked, can you help
 
OP
Kevin_Kennedy

Kevin_Kennedy

Defend Liberty
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
18,365
Reaction score
1,724
Points
205
"What I asked Governor Perry was “Considering state debt has nearly tripled and spending has increased by two thirds since you were governor, and also that ACORN considered your help their ‘proudest moment,’ what were the differences between him and the current liberal president?” As you can see, he immediately tried to excuse away the numbers."
 

Lonestar_logic

Republic of Texas
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
24,542
Reaction score
2,232
Points
205
I couldnt understand the question asked, can you help

The premise of his question was based on false information. Therefore it would have been impossible for him to answer.


The question was.

"Considering state debt has nearly tripled and spending has increased by two thirds since you were governor, and also that ACORN considered your help their ‘proudest moment,’ what were the differences between him and the current liberal president?”
 

Missourian

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
28,892
Reaction score
18,551
Points
1,405
Location
Missouri
"What I asked Governor Perry was “Considering state debt has nearly tripled and spending has increased by two thirds since you were governor, and also that ACORN considered your help their ‘proudest moment,’ what were the differences between him and the current liberal president?” As you can see, he immediately tried to excuse away the numbers."


That would be because it's not true...imagine that.


The Texas debt has doubled since 2001, not tripled.

And the reason is, according to Politifact, that infrastructure borrowing was allowed for the first time by voter referendum:
It turns out that transportation is responsible for most of the added debt load under Perry, increasing from basically nothing in 2000 to $11.8 billion outstanding as of Aug. 31 2009. That's because before 2001, the Texas Department of Transportation lacked the authority to borrow money to pay for road projects. Voters gave it that power in 2001 when they approved a constitutional amendment that Perry supported.

So the kid was wrong, and when Perry tried to explain the truth, the kid cut him off.

He had an agenda based on false information.
 
Last edited:

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,267
Points
1,283
That was actually you asking the question?
 
OP
Kevin_Kennedy

Kevin_Kennedy

Defend Liberty
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
18,365
Reaction score
1,724
Points
205
Despite the widely held view that Texas is in strong financial shape, the state has severe debt overhang. Since Perry took over as governor in 2000, blame for the current debt situation can be place at his feet.

While not raising the sales tax in Texas (Texas has no income tax). He raised just about every other fee and tax he could think of, including a surcharge on traffic violations. He also borrowed money for road bonds and borrowed from the Federal Unemployment Trust Fund.

In 2003, he launched the Texas Enterprise Fund, he quickly, in 2004, gave $20 million to Countrywide Financial, the mortgage creating machine that was a major player in subprime, no docs mortgages.

Depending how it is calculated, the debt of the state of Texas could be considered as high as $269 billion, which on a per citizen basis is $10,644 and is higher than even the $9,931 per citizen debt in the state of California.

In 2000, when Perry first became governor, total spending by the state of Texas was $49 billion. At the end of 2010, it was $90 billion.

I can just imagine what this guy would do at the federal level with Ben Bernanke around to backup his spending.

EconomicPolicyJournal.com: First Look: Rick Perry
 
OP
Kevin_Kennedy

Kevin_Kennedy

Defend Liberty
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
18,365
Reaction score
1,724
Points
205
"What I asked Governor Perry was “Considering state debt has nearly tripled and spending has increased by two thirds since you were governor, and also that ACORN considered your help their ‘proudest moment,’ what were the differences between him and the current liberal president?” As you can see, he immediately tried to excuse away the numbers."


That would be because it's not true...imagine that.


The Texas debt has doubled since 2001, not tripled.

And the reason is, according to Politifact, that infrastructure borrowing was allowed for the first time by voter referendum:
It turns out that transportation is responsible for most of the added debt load under Perry, increasing from basically nothing in 2000 to $11.8 billion outstanding as of Aug. 31 2009. That's because before 2001, the Texas Department of Transportation lacked the authority to borrow money to pay for road projects. Voters gave it that power in 2001 when they approved a constitutional amendment that Perry supported.

So the kid was wrong, and when Perry tried to explain the truth, the kid cut him off.

He had an agenda based on false information.

The kid tried to quote his source when Perry said he didn't know where he was getting his information from. Perry tried to play it like the kid was cutting him off and didn't want an answer.
 

Missourian

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
28,892
Reaction score
18,551
Points
1,405
Location
Missouri
"What I asked Governor Perry was “Considering state debt has nearly tripled and spending has increased by two thirds since you were governor, and also that ACORN considered your help their ‘proudest moment,’ what were the differences between him and the current liberal president?” As you can see, he immediately tried to excuse away the numbers."


That would be because it's not true...imagine that.


The Texas debt has doubled since 2001, not tripled.

And the reason is, according to Politifact, that infrastructure borrowing was allowed for the first time by voter referendum:
It turns out that transportation is responsible for most of the added debt load under Perry, increasing from basically nothing in 2000 to $11.8 billion outstanding as of Aug. 31 2009. That's because before 2001, the Texas Department of Transportation lacked the authority to borrow money to pay for road projects. Voters gave it that power in 2001 when they approved a constitutional amendment that Perry supported.

So the kid was wrong, and when Perry tried to explain the truth, the kid cut him off.

He had an agenda based on false information.

The kid tried to quote his source when Perry said he didn't know where he was getting his information from. Perry tried to play it like the kid was cutting him off and didn't want an answer.


Perry was right, the kid was wrong.

How exactly is that trying to "excuse the numbers"?

Perry tried to explain that the kids numbers were wrong and the kid would have none of it.

Perry was smart to walk away...how do you have an intelligent conversation with someone who is 100% wrong yet insists they are 100% right?

You can't.

If the kid really wanted an answer, he would have allowed Perry to give him one...the kid had an agenda based on faulty numbers. Period.
 
OP
Kevin_Kennedy

Kevin_Kennedy

Defend Liberty
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
18,365
Reaction score
1,724
Points
205
That would be because it's not true...imagine that.


The Texas debt has doubled since 2001, not tripled.

And the reason is, according to Politifact, that infrastructure borrowing was allowed for the first time by voter referendum:
It turns out that transportation is responsible for most of the added debt load under Perry, increasing from basically nothing in 2000 to $11.8 billion outstanding as of Aug. 31 2009. That's because before 2001, the Texas Department of Transportation lacked the authority to borrow money to pay for road projects. Voters gave it that power in 2001 when they approved a constitutional amendment that Perry supported.

So the kid was wrong, and when Perry tried to explain the truth, the kid cut him off.

He had an agenda based on false information.

The kid tried to quote his source when Perry said he didn't know where he was getting his information from. Perry tried to play it like the kid was cutting him off and didn't want an answer.


Perry was right, the kid was wrong.

How exactly is that trying to "excuse the numbers"?

Perry tried to explain that the kids numbers were wrong and the kid would have none of it.

Perry was smart to walk away...how do you have an intelligent conversation with someone who is 100% wrong yet insists they are 100% right?

You can't.

If the kid really wanted an answer, he would have allowed Perry to give him one...the kid had an agenda based on faulty numbers. Period.

The kid tried to state his source for his numbers after Perry said he didn't know where he got the numbers from. That's not exactly refusing to let Perry answer, the way Perry tried to twist it. Maybe he didn't triple the debt, but he did double it, and it's clear from the video that he wanted no part of discussing the numbers.
 

Missourian

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
28,892
Reaction score
18,551
Points
1,405
Location
Missouri
The kid tried to quote his source when Perry said he didn't know where he was getting his information from. Perry tried to play it like the kid was cutting him off and didn't want an answer.


Perry was right, the kid was wrong.

How exactly is that trying to "excuse the numbers"?

Perry tried to explain that the kids numbers were wrong and the kid would have none of it.

Perry was smart to walk away...how do you have an intelligent conversation with someone who is 100% wrong yet insists they are 100% right?

You can't.

If the kid really wanted an answer, he would have allowed Perry to give him one...the kid had an agenda based on faulty numbers. Period.

The kid tried to state his source for his numbers after Perry said he didn't know where he got the numbers from. That's not exactly refusing to let Perry answer, the way Perry tried to twist it. Maybe he didn't triple the debt, but he did double it, and it's clear from the video that he wanted no part of discussing the numbers.


I think you should watch the video again.

Perry is telling the kid his numbers are wrong and is going to explain why,

Perry says "I don't know where you got you numbers but our debt..." and the kid cuts him off.

The kid says something I can't make out, something like "What is the point of the Texas (garbled)" .


Perry asks "Are you going to let me answer or not"

Kid repeats "What's the point of the Texas (garbled)"

Perry says "I didn't think so" and moves on a little farther and looks back and says "You don't know what you're talking about"...which is a fact.

The kid says "They are your numbers"...which they are obviously not, because they are absolutely wrong.

I see no problem whatsoever with this exchange.

The Kid didn't know what he was talking about, he had an agenda and wasn't interested in having his erroneous numbers challenged and wasn't interested in hearing Perry's answer, because the kid was convinced he was right when in fact he was absolutely wrong.

Perry couldn't have handled that much better.
 
Last edited:

elvis

Rookie
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
25,881
Reaction score
4,469
Points
0
Perry was right, the kid was wrong.

How exactly is that trying to "excuse the numbers"?

Perry tried to explain that the kids numbers were wrong and the kid would have none of it.

Perry was smart to walk away...how do you have an intelligent conversation with someone who is 100% wrong yet insists they are 100% right?

You can't.

If the kid really wanted an answer, he would have allowed Perry to give him one...the kid had an agenda based on faulty numbers. Period.

The kid tried to state his source for his numbers after Perry said he didn't know where he got the numbers from. That's not exactly refusing to let Perry answer, the way Perry tried to twist it. Maybe he didn't triple the debt, but he did double it, and it's clear from the video that he wanted no part of discussing the numbers.


I think you should watch the video again.

Perry is telling the kid his numbers are wrong and is going to explain why,

The kid says "They are your numbers"...which they are obviously not, because they are absolutely wrong.

Perry asks "Are you going to let me answer or not"

The kid says something I can't make out, but I assume the is still defending his inaccurate figures.

Perry says "I didn't think so" and moves on a little farther and looks back and says "You don't know what you're talking about"...which is a fact.

I see no problem whatsoever with this exchange.

The Kid didn't know what he was talking about, he had an agenda and wasn't interested in having his erroneous numbers challenged and wasn't interested in hearing Perry's answer, because the kid was convinced he was right when in fact he was absolutely wrong.

Perry couldn't have handle that much better.

No matter how many times he watches it, he's not going to change his mind.
 

Lonestar_logic

Republic of Texas
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
24,542
Reaction score
2,232
Points
205
The kid tried to quote his source when Perry said he didn't know where he was getting his information from. Perry tried to play it like the kid was cutting him off and didn't want an answer.


Perry was right, the kid was wrong.

How exactly is that trying to "excuse the numbers"?

Perry tried to explain that the kids numbers were wrong and the kid would have none of it.

Perry was smart to walk away...how do you have an intelligent conversation with someone who is 100% wrong yet insists they are 100% right?

You can't.

If the kid really wanted an answer, he would have allowed Perry to give him one...the kid had an agenda based on faulty numbers. Period.

The kid tried to state his source for his numbers after Perry said he didn't know where he got the numbers from. That's not exactly refusing to let Perry answer, the way Perry tried to twist it. Maybe he didn't triple the debt, but he did double it, and it's clear from the video that he wanted no part of discussing the numbers.

It didn't matter what his sources were from, they were wrong!

And you cannot answer a question based on false information.
 
OP
Kevin_Kennedy

Kevin_Kennedy

Defend Liberty
Joined
Aug 27, 2008
Messages
18,365
Reaction score
1,724
Points
205
Perry was right, the kid was wrong.

How exactly is that trying to "excuse the numbers"?

Perry tried to explain that the kids numbers were wrong and the kid would have none of it.

Perry was smart to walk away...how do you have an intelligent conversation with someone who is 100% wrong yet insists they are 100% right?

You can't.

If the kid really wanted an answer, he would have allowed Perry to give him one...the kid had an agenda based on faulty numbers. Period.

The kid tried to state his source for his numbers after Perry said he didn't know where he got the numbers from. That's not exactly refusing to let Perry answer, the way Perry tried to twist it. Maybe he didn't triple the debt, but he did double it, and it's clear from the video that he wanted no part of discussing the numbers.

It didn't matter what his sources were from, they were wrong!

And you cannot answer a question based on false information.

So what was his answer going to be? "I didn't triple the debt, I just doubled it."
 

Lonestar_logic

Republic of Texas
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
24,542
Reaction score
2,232
Points
205
The kid tried to state his source for his numbers after Perry said he didn't know where he got the numbers from. That's not exactly refusing to let Perry answer, the way Perry tried to twist it. Maybe he didn't triple the debt, but he did double it, and it's clear from the video that he wanted no part of discussing the numbers.

It didn't matter what his sources were from, they were wrong!

And you cannot answer a question based on false information.

So what was his answer going to be? "I didn't triple the debt, I just doubled it."

I don't know, the kid wouldn't let him answer.

So I guess you can do what most liberals do which is to speculate and then claim it as fact.
 

elvis

Rookie
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
25,881
Reaction score
4,469
Points
0
It didn't matter what his sources were from, they were wrong!

And you cannot answer a question based on false information.

So what was his answer going to be? "I didn't triple the debt, I just doubled it."

I don't know, the kid wouldn't let him answer.

So I guess you can do what most liberals do which is to speculate and then claim it as fact.

Kevin's not a liberal. He's far worse.
 

Missourian

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
28,892
Reaction score
18,551
Points
1,405
Location
Missouri
According to Politifact, infrastructure borrowing was allowed for the first time by voter referendum accounted for the lion's share of the increased debt.
It turns out that transportation is responsible for most of the added debt load under Perry, increasing from basically nothing in 2000 to $11.8 billion outstanding as of Aug. 31 2009. That's because before 2001, the Texas Department of Transportation lacked the authority to borrow money to pay for road projects. Voters gave it that power in 2001 when they approved a constitutional amendment that Perry supported.

 

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

Forum List

Top