Reagan debate leaves Perry, Romney in control

posted at 8:45 am on September 8, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

The first Republican debate with former frontrunner Mitt Romney as a hungry challenger took place last night, and in many ways it unfolded largely as I predicted.  Romney mainly stuck to his above-the-fray strategy except for a couple of notable exchanges in the beginning with the new frontrunner, Rick Perry.  Perry avoided looking or sounding scary despite the best attempts of the moderators to make him stumble.  Michele Bachmann may in fact have been the only real loser of the debate despite giving a credible performance.

Let’s start with Perry, who was the focus of the attention for his first debate.  The Texas governor did well, especially on a late question on the death penalty and when he challenged both Karl Rove and Dick Cheney on Social Security.  He gave a good explanation of how the current model of Social Security is indeed a “Ponzi scheme” for the younger contributors who have no hope of seeing any benefits without serious reform, and rejected the idea that telling the truth was so provocative that it shouldn’t be done in an election.  Romney had one of his weakest moments when he scolded Perry for scaring people while conceding that Perry was right, which made Mitt look as though pandering rather than telling the truth is preferable.

On the other hand, Perry gave a surprisingly weak answer on a gotcha question about climate change (“Can you name any scientists”?), a topic for which he should have been prepared.  Bachmann did better on the follow-up.  Perry also revealed a tendency to pause while reaching for the right words, which some speakers usually fill with trite phrases like “Let me be perfectly clear.”  He needs to improve if he expects to joust with Barack Obama in the general election, who looks more natural on the debate stage than Perry.  However, he didn’t give anyone a reason to not support him as a nominee and should keep his momentum intact.  Perry certainly came across as a fighter and a plain speaker, which will boost his chances among the Republican base.

Other than the weak moment on Social Security, Romney excelled in the debate at maintaining a presidential approach.  Even the sharp exchanges with Perry in the beginning didn’t get at all personal, and at least one time Romney defended Perry, noting that Perry had already admitted that he shouldn’t have approached the Gardasil vaccination by executive order.  More than most on stage, Romney kept bringing the debate back to Barack Obama rather than the other candidates on the stage.  Romney made a strong showing as an alternative to Perry.

Bachmann had a technically good debate, but far short of what she needed last night.  A slew of polls show her dropping back into the second tier after Perry’s entry into the race, and nothing that she did during the debate will have former supporters returning to her side.  She had nothing to lose by going on the attack, but Bachmann seemed curiously disengaged, and more passive than any other debate in which she has participated. Don’t be surprised to see Bachmann fading even further into the background after tonight.

Jon Huntsman had a great debate for about three-quarters of the event.  He came across as magnanimous, focused on Obama, and offered a coherent center-right view.  Unfortunately, he followed in Tim Pawlenty’s footsteps when the moderators asked him to repeat assertions from him and his campaign strategist about the supposed anti-science loons sharing the stage with him.  Huntsman, who did nothing to distance himself from John Weaver’s remarks earlier, refused to repeat his earlier accusations and weakly insisted that he didn’t answer for Weaver.  Like Pawlenty, the sudden lack of intestinal fortitude on camera eliminated whatever credibility Huntsman built this week with his economic plan and the earlier debate performance.

Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain had good debates, too.  Gingrich went after the moderators again, which at least gives him some real value to the other Republicans on stage.  Don’t expect to see Perry or Romney asking to get Newt out of any debates in the future.  Cain is always engaging on stage and scored points on economics, but no more so than in any other debate.  Santorum was mainly a non-factor, while Ron Paul was … Ron Paul.  He jabbed Perry over HillaryCare, and Perry jabbed him right back over his 1987 letter to the RNC repudiating his party membership because of Ronald Reagan, which left Paul sputtering.

Overall, I’d say that Romney and Perry did well, Romney perhaps a little more so, while Bachmann lost by not engaging, and the rest of the field didn’t make a case for their relevancy to the eventual outcome.  If Perry can work on his delivery a bit over the next two debates, this will become a two-man race.

In our Green Room, Kevin McCullough calls Rick Perry the big winner of the evening, and applauds all of the participants for an excellent and spirited debate.

Update: Bryan Preston at the PJ Tatler also calls it for Perry, and makes an interesting point about Obama being the biggest loser:

By comparison to all but one of the candidates, the president comes off poorly. He delivers a speech before tomorrow night’s NFL kickoff that will not be as substantive or as interesting as this debate. Despite the atmosphere of a joint session of Congress he will seem small because his ideas are small and he is a proven failure in his office. I doubt that Americans will have any qualms replacing him next year with a solid, credible Republican, and there were many of those engaged in this debate tonight.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

Fox didn’t even cover SP’s speeches. They can go to Hell.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 4:33 PM

yeah nobody is making them cover it. If they didn’t think it was news that’s their decision. I stopped watching fox after the nov elections. they went beltway esp afte r tucson. I think they made a fundemental mistake to ignore and sideline the TEa party but only time will tell.

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:36 PM

How do you know if anyone left their places during a commercial break, where you there?

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM

good point I will give you that one and withdraw my comment about him being the only one. I don’t know that for certian

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:38 PM

unseen, you need help. Who knows what Paul said to Perry? No one cares, except you. Pick on his immigration and other real and big issues.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Exactly. Perry had a number of weak answers in the actual debate that can be targeted instead of some random, worthless picture to speculate on.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 4:38 PM

some random, worthless picture to speculate on.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 4:38 PM

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 4:41 PM

So you actually meant that Perry was the savior?

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 4:33 PM

the perrykrishnas seem to think so. I have never said Palin was the savior. thus no irony.

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:41 PM

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:36 PM

They’re mainly just noise any more. The left are mistaken to assume that Fox is on our side. The pretty-heads are so empty-headed that it hurts to witness. That includes Gretchen. Oh, I know, a few here will be merciless for reading this, but it’s true. I don’t care to see their underwear. I care for newsworthy substance, alas.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 4:42 PM

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 4:41 PM

LOL McCain looked like Igor in that picture.

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:43 PM

No one won/lost last night, nor was it a great debate…just a very cool setting.

Obama lost and that’s it.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 4:44 PM

If Palin decides not to run, people like this will scream betrayal the second she announces it and will turn on her faster than Brutus and Caesar. I’ve already seen frustrated grumbling about stringing people along for nothing and what she owes them.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 2:05 PM

Wrong wrong wrong. “People like” me will vote for whoever best matches their principles, views, beliefs, Etc. Of the declared candidates, until yesterday I thought that was Michele Bachmann. Now with her imminent implosion, I don’t know where myself and my fellow purity pushers will go. But let me be clear on one thing: Sarah Palin doesn’t owe me shit. And though I can’t speak for the rest of her supporters, I won’t behave as if she does.

gryphon202 on September 8, 2011 at 4:44 PM

But people are catching on…

I don’t know how many people I’v talked to about How even FOX is going Beltway.

idesign on September 8, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Yes but the MSM is still powerful look at the hatch job that many still believe about gov palin.

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:45 PM

I don’t care to see their underwear. I care for newsworthy substance, alas.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 4:42 PM

yes fox news had an oppurtunity to be differnet and instead they went hollywood on us. I am disappointed in foxnews more so than CNN and MSNBC at least they are honest with who they are liberal socialists. Fox news is worse because they pretend to be fair and balnaced but are simply pushing a narrative like the rest…

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:47 PM

No one won/lost last night, nor was it a great debate…just a very cool setting.

Obama lost and that’s it.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 4:44 PM

I kind of felt that way too. I might give an edge to Romney, but mostly it was a draw and the setting really was nice.

Terrye on September 8, 2011 at 4:48 PM

The other would between him and God.

Just my 2 cents:-)

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 3:33 PM
true on both parts. but it does give us a window into his character. and I don’t like what it shows.

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 3:37 PM

I understand. It would have been better not to have made any promise like that. But he’s got to deal with it. If anything is certain in life, it’s change.

I’ll cut him some slack on that and take a harder line on Huntsman. Reason being, I’ve read that after he accepted the position of Ambassador to China from B.O. he made plans to run for President while in that position. Now, THAT would be a deal breaker for me no matter the Candidate.

I need to admend my statement to the Texans that voted for him, not the Texas people:-)

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 4:48 PM

So Perry acted like a bully last night to an old man. how is that presidential?

Don’t we already have a thug in the Whitehouse?

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 2:46 PM

I don’t know if he acted like a bully or not, but I saw some photos of him putting his hand on Paul and his finger in his face and I thought…mmm that looks bad.

Terrye on September 8, 2011 at 4:50 PM

Sarah Palin doesn’t owe me shit. And though I can’t speak for the rest of her supporters, I won’t behave as if she does.

gryphon202 on September 8, 2011 at 4:44 PM

agreed. I will be disappointed but after witnessing the attacks and slime she has had to go through over the years I would totally understand if she said screw it all and will not hold it against her,

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:51 PM

I don’t know if he acted like a bully or not, but I saw some photos of him putting his hand on Paul and his finger in his face and I thought…mmm that looks bad.

Terrye on September 8, 2011 at 4:50 PM

yeap and then I thought hey he did the same thing to the college student at the IA state fair and thought boy this looks like a pattern and a narrative forming…

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:52 PM

I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m stoke for Palin’s inevitable response tomorrow to Obama’s speech tonight. That’s gonna be one heck of a Facebook note. Can’t wait for her to contrast her plan with his “plan.”

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 4:52 PM

Fox news is worse because they pretend to be fair and balnaced but are simply pushing a narrative like the rest…

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:47 PM

Indeed. That’s why I’m harsher on our side, or on the leftie looters, as opposed to their moochers, who are just fools being fooled on their plantations.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 4:53 PM

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 4:48 PM

agree 100% on huntsman

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:53 PM

Indeed. That’s why I’m harsher on our side, or on the leftie looters, as opposed to their moochers, who are just fools being fooled on their plantations.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 4:53 PM

It makes me think that they are just trying to play us for the fools the left plays their base for.

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:55 PM

the perrykrishnas seem to think so. I have never said Palin was the savior. thus no irony.

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:41 PM

No, the Irony would be you meaning something other than your actual words, or believing the actual truth being opposite of what you said; both applied to your statement. You don’t even know what irony is.

Your irony is fallacious and couldn’t be more obvious, just like your use of perrykrishna and contrived narrative that Perry is a bully.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 4:55 PM

The bias of Hot Air is unbelievable. Rick Perry not only lose the debate but he lost Florida and the nomination in one single debate.

Falz on September 8, 2011 at 12:11 PM

I thought he lost the debate because he did not have any real ideas about how to reform social security. I don’t think Romney was pandering at all..I think he was taking advantage of a self inflicted wound on the part of Perry.

Perry has called social security a criminal enterprise, a lie, a failure and unconstitutional and yet people are shocked when Romney steps up and says he will not abolish social security..well what did they expect? I am surprised that Perry has not come up with alternatives and reforms of his own…rather than just throwing around the phrase ponzi scheme and then acting put out when people call him on it.

Terrye on September 8, 2011 at 4:56 PM

I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m stoke for Palin’s inevitable response tomorrow to Obama’s speech tonight. That’s gonna be one heck of a Facebook note. Can’t wait for her to contrast her plan with his “plan.”

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 4:52 PM

It should be interesting. I would like to see her use it as a springboard to announce.

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Exactly. Perry had a number of weak answers in the actual debate that can be targeted instead of some random, worthless picture to speculate on.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 4:38 PM

He may have had a few missteps, but “ponzi scheme” and “ultimate justice” will be the only things remembered.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 4:57 PM

He may have had a few missteps, but “ponzi scheme” and “ultimate justice” will be the only things remembered.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 4:57 PM

One more, that Obama proved beyond a doubt that Kaynesianism is dead.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 4:58 PM

The bias of Hot Air is unbelievable. Rick Perry not only lose the debate but he lost Florida and the nomination in one single debate.

Falz on September 8, 2011 at 12:11 PM

He lost neither. Only Obama lost last night. None other won/lost anything. It was lackluster, but in a nice setting.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 5:00 PM

Your irony is fallacious and couldn’t be more obvious, just like your use of perrykrishna and contrived narrative that Perry is a bully.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 4:55 PM

He is a bully:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RV9OhSkoeU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_bP56SgkLQ

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 5:00 PM

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 4:41 PM

lol, ok I needed that laugh. Though with the way McCain ran his campaign in 2008, that picture may hold more truth than I would like to think.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 5:01 PM

The Hoffa union guy is a bully.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 5:01 PM

One more, that Obama proved beyond a doubt that Kaynesianism is dead.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 4:58 PM

And that King Barry is an “abject liar”

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:02 PM

lol, ok I needed that laugh. Though with the way McCain ran his campaign in 2008, that picture may hold more truth than I would like to think.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 5:01 PM

I’d like to think it was just an unfortunate moment caught on camera, but, alas…

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 5:02 PM

LOL

Hey @AnnCoulter, @IngrahamAngle, is this unelectable enough 4U? MT @ppppolls: Obama trails Palin by 14 with independents in North Carolina.

idesign on September 8, 2011 at 5:02 PM

And that King Barry is an “abject liar”

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:02 PM

True, that too, on El Paso’s ‘secure’ border, and by implicatin “You Lie”.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Here’s The Real Winner From Last Night’s GOP Debate

But after last night, both Bachmann and Perry may have problems recovering their previous momentum, meaning, among other things, that the GOP will be left with Romney as a front-runner and with that a serious charisma problem.

A Palin-shaped charisma problem.

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Amjean on September 8, 2011 at 11:33 AM

Well said.

Was “corruption” even mentioned last night? It is the theme of our time. It’s not “the economy, stupid.” We’re beyond that now. It’s the corruption, America. This is the gravamen issue out of which all other problems now flow.

rrpjr on September 8, 2011 at 11:38 AM

And you said it better than I and in fewer words!

You sound like you have a “good head on your shoulders”, therefore,
I have a question.

Do you think we should be a little suspicious that the media
who was all in the tank for Obama are now thundering down the
path with “hoops and hollers” for Perry?

Amjean on September 8, 2011 at 5:05 PM

LOL

Hey @AnnCoulter, @IngrahamAngle, is this unelectable enough 4U? MT @ppppolls: Obama trails Palin by 14 with independents in North Carolina.

idesign on September 8, 2011 at 5:02 PM

Ouch…

the_nile on September 8, 2011 at 5:06 PM

Two: She would never have made the Rick Perry “Ponzi scheme” mistake. Certainly Perry managed to own day-after coverage with that quip, but not in a good way.

SS is a Ponzi scheme. The sooner the young realize this, the sooner they will save themselves from it.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Recall that Santelli is the father of the Tea Party.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 5:09 PM

SS is a Ponzi scheme. The sooner the young realize this, the sooner they will save themselves from it.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 5:08 PM

But after listening to the numbnuts over at MSNBC last night, all but Mr. Ed were convinced that Perry mentioning “ponzi scheme” was the nail in Perry’s coffin, and that he’d never recover from it. They were absolutely giddy with joy.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:17 PM

It is not a Ponzi scheme. Get the sound bite out of your head.

I read that anyone who was contribuing into social security and made $30,000 annually should have somewhere in the vicinity of
$192,000.00 paid (adding the usual interest) into their account.

8% interest on that is $15,360.00., more than what they would
probably get from social security without touching that
$192,000.00 balance.

The problem is that the government took the saved funds, along
with the usual freebies to those not eligible, fraud, etc.

Our government IS the Ponzi scheme, not the program.

Amjean on September 8, 2011 at 5:17 PM

He is a bully:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RV9OhSkoeU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_bP56SgkLQ

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 5:00 PM

He’s clearly not mild mannered, but you’d have to be way too sensitive or easily threatened to call that bullying, especially with putting his finger on the college student – how is that threatening in any way? Or thuggish, I believe the word thug was also used here? Even the video itself describes it as a brush off, which is exactly what it is.

I don’t like elected officials interfering with cops just doing their job, so his behavior in that video is worthy of the scrutiny, yet he only expressed some irritation in that video and did not bully the officer in any way.

What I see is a guy I would love to look Putin in the eyes, because I seriously doubt he’ll try to get a sense of “his soul” or negotiate without preconditions like the last two Presidents.

I would expect the left to cobble together whatever they can find to make Perry look like a thug, just as they did with images and sound bytes to make Bush look stupid, but Conservatives?

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 5:18 PM

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:17 PM

You are to be admired. I turned it off as soon as Rachel said the first word.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 5:19 PM

Their guy and our guy

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 5:21 PM

SS is a Ponzi scheme. The sooner the young realize this, the sooner they will save themselves from it.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 5:08 PM

SS is not a Ponzi scheme, it’s a transfer payment to the elderly from young people who work. This is not a secret, it was intended to work as a transfer.

A Ponzi scheme promises outsized returns on investments, SS promises nothing but a bare minimum financial security after you retire for having contributed to your generation of elderly when you were young. It is not an investment, but a direct transfer from one hand to the other hand. Social Security is really no different than a tax credit for the elderly funded by young people.

If all the young people “saved themselves” from SS as you put it, then how would Rick Perry pay for the Social Security of current retirees and Boomers that he promised in the debate he wouldn’t touch? Perry can’t answer this, because if all the young people opted out for a personal savings account instead, then there would be no money left for the current retirees and Boomer generation, in effect killing SS to those he said he would leave untouched.

The solution to reforming SS is simple: raise the retirement age gradually to 70. That’s it.

haner on September 8, 2011 at 5:23 PM

I will be disappointed but after witnessing the attacks and slime she has had to go through over the years I would totally understand if she said screw it all and will not hold it against her,

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:51 PM

If only she hadn’t resigned.

csdeven on September 8, 2011 at 5:27 PM

I read that anyone who was contribuing into social security and made $30,000 annually should have somewhere in the vicinity of
$192,000.00 paid (adding the usual interest) into their account.

8% interest on that is $15,360.00., more than what they would
probably get from social security without touching that
$192,000.00 balance.

The problem is that the government took the saved funds, along
with the usual freebies to those not eligible, fraud, etc.

Our government IS the Ponzi scheme, not the program.

Amjean on September 8, 2011 at 5:17 PM

$192,000 dollars would last about 12 years i.e $16,000 per year. If one were to retire at 65, they’d be 77 years old and they’d have used up what they had contributed. Where does the money come from if ones lives to be 80 years old? 85?

I have no idea where you’re coming up with that 8% interest. There is not a bank or credit union paying that kind of interest, nor have they for about 4 years now. 1.5% is the average right now.

It’s ponzi scheme when you take out more than you contributed.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:28 PM

haner on September 8, 2011 at 5:23 PM

It isn’t even that. The benefit a recipient gets is determined by their contributions over the years. Eventually, because the system hasn’t been adapted to our increased longevity, it now takes from the young and gives it to the elderly when the contributions given are out stripped by the benefits taken.

SS can survive if it is adapted to our current situation.

csdeven on September 8, 2011 at 5:31 PM

I will be disappointed but after witnessing the attacks and slime she has had to go through over the years I would totally understand if she said screw it all and will not hold it against her,

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:51 PM

One of her biggest selling points is her tenacity, which is genuine, so I seriously doubt she would say screw it all because of smears.

Her family on the other hand may convince her to do otherwise, but they seem to take after her pretty well.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 5:33 PM

It’s ponzi scheme when you take out more than you contributed.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:28 PM

My three kids go to public school and I pay $10,000 in property tax. Is it a ponzi scheme that my neighbor has only one kid and he also pays $10,000 in property tax? Clearly my children are taking out more than my neighbor.

SS is no more a ponzi scheme than any other wealth distributing tax. It’s a transfer payment to the elderly from the young. No more, no less. If there’s fewer young people, then the older people get less benefits (raise retirement age). Same thing if there are fewer taxpayers, you spend less. This is not brain surgery.

Romney is absolutely in the right on this. SS needs funding reform (mainly it needs to raise retirement age to account for longer life expectancy and fewer young people), but to call it a failure is just cheap political rhetoric.

haner on September 8, 2011 at 5:33 PM

It’s ponzi scheme when you take out more than you contributed.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:28 PM

So the stock market is a ponzi scheme…

and a 401k is a ponzi scheme…

LOL

idesign on September 8, 2011 at 5:34 PM

It’s ponzi scheme when you take out more than you contributed.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:28 PM

I call that a successful investment. Since SS is not going anywhere, and it is not what is bankrupting us now, we should let it be for the time being. Scaring grandma will only help the democRats get elected.

Really Right on September 8, 2011 at 5:35 PM

You cannot spin that especially when 74% of Republicans in that Fox poll don’t want her to run.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 3:50 PM

The only reason I’m responding to this is because so many people are touting this Fox poll. I don’t know how this poll was conducted. But I know unless the bots or anyone was not permitted to vote more than once, then it can’t be trusted. I don’t trust Fox polls anyway, but I know when Greta ran polls, they were completely off. Even other polls on various sites are subject to other posters on websites saying go over to so & so and vote again.

That’s my only comment.

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 5:36 PM

It’s ponzi scheme when you take out more than you contributed.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:28 PM

The age at which a person may receive the benefit must be increased. There should be an opt in policy for SS. There would be no way the person would get more than they contributed (plus interest). This would encourage people to not get into SS and the program would go away.

And 8% is not out of the norm. I have accounts that are perfectly safe and have been earning near 8% for 30 years.

csdeven on September 8, 2011 at 5:36 PM

One of her biggest selling points is her tenacity, which is genuine, so I seriously doubt she would say screw it all because of smears.

Her family on the other hand may convince her to do otherwise, but they seem to take after her pretty well.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 5:33 PM

granted which is why I think she will not say screw it all either and is in fact running. I simply said I understand and would not hold it against her if she did say it

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 5:37 PM

social security become a ponzi scheme when abortion become legal

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 5:39 PM

I wouldn’t vote for a single one of those bought-and-paid-for tools on stage and if one is nominated I’ll sit out the election.

rrpjr on September 8, 2011 at 10:30 AM

An Obama voter, imagine that.

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 5:40 PM

Really Right on September 8, 2011 at 5:35 PM

Calling SS a ponzi scheme is not scaring Grandma if you intend to fix it so that it remains solvent for future generations. Perry did not call for the removal of SS, Grandma has nothing to worry about besides Obama and Romney jumping out of her closet at night wearing a Perry mask and shouting “BOO!”.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 5:43 PM

I am afraid that all of you Palinistas are like the poster below, who wants to lose to Obama if it ain’t Sarah.

Really Right on September 8, 2011 at 4:03 PM

I support Sarah Palin. Don’t know who you are referring to, but just another reminder: You don’t speak for me nor anyone but yourself.

Best put your broad brush away. Otherwise there is a name for your comments.

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 5:43 PM

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 5:40 PM

No, a Palinista.

Really Right on September 8, 2011 at 5:44 PM

haner on September 8, 2011 at 5:23 PM

I addressed you soone. Saver your breath. You’re only partly right.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 5:46 PM

The only reason I’m responding to this is because so many people are touting this Fox poll. I don’t know how this poll was conducted. But I know unless the bots or anyone was not permitted to vote more than once, then it can’t be trusted. I don’t trust Fox polls anyway, but I know when Greta ran polls, they were completely off. Even other polls on various sites are subject to other posters on websites saying go over to so & so and vote again.

That’s my only comment.

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 5:36 PM

The Fox poll was not an internet poll. There is a difference. Stop parroting the Palinista’s talking points if you want to be taken seriously.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:46 PM

PPP has it out on Twitter today that Sarah Palin is leading Obama by 14 points among independent voters in North Carolina. Poll to be released tomorrow.

https://mobile.twitter.com/#!/ppppolls

idesign on September 8, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Thanks for some good news!! I knew the Independents weren’t asleep, but wide awake:-)

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 5:48 PM

I don’t know how this poll was conducted.

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 5:36 PM

This might help.

http://conservatives4palin.com/2011/09/about-that-fox-news-poll.html

derft on September 8, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Calling SS a ponzi scheme is not scaring Grandma if you intend to fix it so that it remains solvent for future generations. Perry did not call for the removal of SS, Grandma has nothing to worry about besides Obama and Romney jumping out of her closet at night wearing a Perry mask and shouting “BOO!”.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 5:43 PM

How do you plan to make SS solvent for future generations? With private accounts? When all the young people switch to private accounts, who will be paying for Grandma?

Romney called Perry out, and Perry had nothing else to add aside from yelling PONZI SCHEME.

Perry’s brilliant plan for SS is a state-based retirement solution. That terrifies me to death considering the incompetence of blue states like Illinois and California in running basic pensions. This plan would make Greece look responsible.

haner on September 8, 2011 at 5:48 PM

The Fox poll was not an internet poll. There is a difference. Stop parroting the Palinista’s talking points if you want to be taken seriously.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:46 PM

the fox poll was conducted by Perry’s pollster. imagine that.

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 5:50 PM

haner on September 8, 2011 at 5:33 PM

Adressed how it works and will be fixed, much earlier, after you’d left your comment. I understand you’re for Romney, which is fine.

It is a Ponzi scheme. Go read why and how it w/b fixed. Anyone who doesn’t accept the diagnosis will not be able to bring the prescription.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 5:50 PM

The Fox poll was not an internet poll. There is a difference. Stop parroting the Palinista’s talking points if you want to be taken seriously.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:46 PM

It wasn’t an internet poll, but it was conducted by Daron Shaw, one of Rick Perry’s “Eggheads.” And the sample included 40% that would be voting for Dems.

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 5:50 PM

haner on September 8, 2011 at 5:48 PM

No, no, no.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 5:51 PM

Those Texans who have experienced Obama’s war against Texas have realized that the best thing for Texas would be for Perry to run for president. Even if he doesn’t get the nomination, he will pull the entire field to the right. At least as far as the tenth amendment goes.

cozmo on September 8, 2011 at 4:11 PM

I was responding to unseen in the fairest way possible. I hope you read the rest of my post to him. And I also understand what you are saying. Cirucumstances change. And yes I keep up with what this Admin is doing to Texas. I lived in the State for about 14 years or so and my children were born there. Loved it! And the people.

Gov. Perry is my 2nd choice, Sarah is my first. So, I’m not against Gov. Perry. Just to clear the record.

I’m glad he entered the race also:-)

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 5:55 PM

I read that anyone who was contribuing into social security and made $30,000 annually should have somewhere in the vicinity of
$192,000.00 paid (adding the usual interest) into their account.

8% interest on that is $15,360.00., more than what they would
probably get from social security without touching that
$192,000.00 balance.

The problem is that the government took the saved funds, along
with the usual freebies to those not eligible, fraud, etc.

Our government IS the Ponzi scheme, not the program.

Amjean on September 8, 2011 at 5:17 PM

$192,000 dollars would last about 12 years i.e $16,000 per year. If one were to retire at 65, they’d be 77 years old and they’d have used up what they had contributed. Where does the money come from if ones lives to be 80 years old? 85?

I have no idea where you’re coming up with that 8% interest. There is not a bank or credit union paying that kind of interest, nor have they for about 4 years now. 1.5% is the average right now.

It’s ponzi scheme when you take out more than you contributed.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 5:28 PM

I certainly don’t want to use your investment adviser!

I never said the interest came from a bank or credit union either.
Anyone with a brain knows that very little gains come from those
sources.

Amjean on September 8, 2011 at 5:57 PM

An Obama voter, imagine that.

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 5:40 PM

It’s a good idea to read entire posts before commenting.

In fact, I have read and enjoyed many of yours.

rrpjr on September 8, 2011 at 6:02 PM

it is one of his only political assets.

alwaysfiredup on September 8, 2011 at 4:12 PM

I’m sorry, but there is nothing charming about this person. Knowing what you know that has been done to this Country, how could that word even make it from your heart to your mouth?

Perhaps when a stranger would first meet him, but we know him. I have quite a few words to describe him, but charming would never be one.

Please rethink your opinion on this.

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 6:02 PM

I certainly don’t want to use your investment adviser!

I never said the interest came from a bank or credit union either.
Anyone with a brain knows that very little gains come from those
sources.

Amjean on September 8, 2011 at 5:57 PM

So putting your 8% interest into the mix, you only add approximately one more year or 78 years old. So where does the money come from if someone lives longer than 78 years old?

It’s still a ponzi scheme regardless of your leftist insults.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 6:10 PM

disagree here. his biggest asset was the MSM. and still is as the debate last night proved.

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Great point unseen!!!

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 6:10 PM

It’s still a ponzi scheme regardless of your leftist insults.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 6:10 PM

Calling it a “ponzi scheme” is extremist talk that the democRats will use to defeat us. If you are not calling for SS to be taken apart completelt, then don’t call it a ponzi scheme.

Really Right on September 8, 2011 at 6:13 PM

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 4:35 PM

Fox didn’t even cover SP’s speeches. They can go to Hell.

Schadenfreude on September 8, 2011 at 4:33 PM
yeah nobody is making them cover it. If they didn’t think it was news that’s their decision. I stopped watching fox after the nov elections. they went beltway esp afte r tucson. I think they made a fundemental mistake to ignore and sideline the TEa party but only time will tell.

unseen on September 8, 2011 at 4:36 PM

It is sort of strange that different people have come to the same conclusion about Fox. It started for me when O’Reilly allowed Cameron on his show to repeat a lie about Sarah Palin. I can’t remember exactly which one it was at the moment, but I didn’t watch O’Reilly for a long time. Then little by little it got worse. Now I hardly watch them at all.

I think Sarah would do herself a favor by leaving them. Greta is NOT her friend, but I’m sure Sarah knows that.

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 6:26 PM

Calling it a “ponzi scheme” is extremist talk that the democRats will use to defeat us. If you are not calling for SS to be taken apart completelt, then don’t call it a ponzi scheme.

Really Right on September 8, 2011 at 6:13 PM

You really need to read this thread that’s up, LOL

Santelli, Friedman duke it out over “Ponzi scheme”

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 6:30 PM

Really Right on September 8, 2011 at 6:13 PM

Ron Johnson called it a Ponzi Scheme when running for Senate in Wisconsin and he beat 3 termer Russ Feingold by double digits.

Daemonocracy on September 8, 2011 at 6:32 PM

It is sort of strange that different people have come to the same conclusion about Fox. It started for me when O’Reilly allowed Cameron on his show to repeat a lie about Sarah Palin. I can’t remember exactly which one it was at the moment, but I didn’t watch O’Reilly for a long time.

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 6:26 PM

Campaign Carl: “Like, ZOMG!!!11! They totes said that she didn’t even know Africa is, like, a continent, or something!!!11!1″

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 6:32 PM

Calling it a “ponzi scheme” is extremist talk that the democRats will use to defeat us. If you are not calling for SS to be taken apart completelt, then don’t call it a ponzi scheme.

Really Right on September 8, 2011 at 6:13 PM

Dude … “ponzi scheme” isn’t extremist talk.

An Islamist screaming he wants to vaporize Jews with nuclear weapons and cut the heads off Christians is extremist.

You’re letting the left dictate your language.

darwin on September 8, 2011 at 6:36 PM

I think Sarah would do herself a favor by leaving them. Greta is NOT her friend, but I’m sure Sarah knows that.

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 6:26 PM

They may not be covering her because she’s been walking an awfully fine line lately between running and not running, and she works for them. Either she quits and they follow her, or she doesn’t and they don’t.

I’m sure once she announces, and resigns from Fox they will have appropriate coverage.

darwin on September 8, 2011 at 6:39 PM

You’re letting the left dictate your language.

darwin on September 8, 2011 at 6:36 PM

It could be a MittWit.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 6:59 PM

Campaign Carl: “Like, ZOMG!!!11! They totes said that she didn’t even know Africa is, like, a continent, or something!!!11!1″

steebo77 on September 8, 2011 at 6:32 PM

It may have been that. I may have it in a folder. All I know it made me so angry that BOR didn’t correct him. If I find it, I’ll post it. Thanks, maybe that will jog my memory:-)

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 7:22 PM

They may not be covering her because she’s been walking an awfully fine line lately between running and not running, and she works for them. Either she quits and they follow her, or she doesn’t and they don’t.

darwin on September 8, 2011 at 6:39 PM

That could be. But I heard that after the debate last night they just had McCain on. I didn’t watch Fox anyway afterwards. I had MSNBC on for video and therightscoop for audio:-)for the debate.

bluefox on September 8, 2011 at 7:27 PM

I certainly don’t want to use your investment adviser!

I never said the interest came from a bank or credit union either.
Anyone with a brain knows that very little gains come from those
sources.

Amjean on September 8, 2011 at 5:57 PM

So putting your 8% interest into the mix, you only add approximately one more year or 78 years old. So where does the money come from if someone lives longer than 78 years old?

It’s still a ponzi scheme regardless of your leftist insults.

Knucklehead on September 8, 2011 at 6:10 PM

Let me put this a little differently so perhaps you can understand it.

I have $192,000.00 in the bank. Because my investment advisor
invests my money wisely, my annual rate of return is 8% or
$15,360.00. I live off my interest each year.

After I spend my $15,360.00 I still have $192,000.00 left over.
In year two I also make 8% and also spend $15,360.00. I still
have $192,000.00 left over for year 3…and on and on…when
I die the $192,000.00 is still there.

If the federal government did not spend all the money that
was supposed to be “saved” and “invested” the program would not
be in trouble. I don’t care how fricking long you live.

Now, of course there are adjustments for people who didn’t invest
much in the program (a lower rate of return for them and possibly
a minus figure for the “fund”); another minus figure could be when
someone dies early and their children collect social security benefits; and then there is the plus of someone who invested in
the system and died prior to collecting who either have no children or children over the age of 18.

Amjean on September 8, 2011 at 11:31 PM

correction – I would live off my rate of return each year, not the interest. I mistakenly used that word.

and by the way – I am not a leftist.

Amjean on September 8, 2011 at 11:34 PM

It is the responsibility of any candidate who supporters have turned themselves into cultists to say to those people: “Stop embarrassing me!”

Really Right on September 8, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Exactly!

Ron Paul refuses to call out his cultists. Palin(who’s certainly more qualified to be POTUS) has so far refused to call out hers.
Why?
Because they’re on an ego trip! They absolutely ‘get off’ on the attention those that would deify them give them.

If Palin calls out the cultists-she loses the attention…and it’s like caffeine for her. She can’t live without it.
The fact that the cultists are pushing away many who might otherwise support her doesn’t seem to matter as much as the attention.

annoyinglittletwerp on September 9, 2011 at 1:18 AM

and by the way – I am not a leftist.

Amjean on September 8, 2011 at 11:34 PM

No-but you’re so attached to Palin that you’re stuck to her like another limb.

annoyinglittletwerp on September 9, 2011 at 1:20 AM

Because they’re on an ego trip! They absolutely ‘get off’ on the attention those that would deify them give them.

If Palin calls out the cultists-she loses the attention…and it’s like caffeine for her. She can’t live without it.
The fact that the cultists are pushing away many who might otherwise support her doesn’t seem to matter as much as the attention.

annoyinglittletwerp on September 9, 2011 at 1:18 AM

I find it amusing that the people who continuously refer to Palin supporters as “cultists” can’t stop talking about her. The first mention of Palin in any thread usually comes from a Palin hater. Palin supporters respond because well, they support Palin and then everything gets blamed on the Palin folks.

Nice little game you got going.

darwin on September 9, 2011 at 7:58 AM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5