Politics

Rick Perry’s embarrassing political debate blunder

Perry Event 2/1/2010

Image via Wikipedia

The big political story of the week was a political blunder in the CNBC debate last Wednesday night by GOP nominee hopeful, and Governor of Texas, Rick Perry. He could not remember one of the three federal agencies he would like to eliminate, if he is elected  president.

“Turning to Texas Rep. Ron Paul to boast, Perry said: “I’ll tell you: it’s three agencies of government, when I get there, that are gone: Commerce, education and, the –uh — what’s the third one there? … Commerce, education and the uh, the uh…” before being interrupted by a question. “The third agency of government I would do away with — education, the, uh, commerce, and let’s see — I can’t. The third one, I can’t. Sorry. Oops”

About 15 minutes later in the debate, Perry said he meant to say that the Department of Energy is the third agency he wanted to eliminate.

It was an embarrassing and excruciating moment for Perry, whose poor debate performances have defined his campaign. His poll numbers have declined steadily since his first debate. Critics have noted that his stamina in the two-hour-long debates seems to wane.

PERRY: I will tell you, it is three agencies of government when I get there that are gone. Commerce, Education, and the — What’s the third one there? Let’s see.

(LAUGHTER)

PAUL: Five.

PERRY: Five. Okay. Commerce, Education, and the —

[UNKNOWN]: EPA?

PERRY: EPA. There you go.

Q: Seriously — is EPA one you are talking about?

PERRY: No, sir, no, sir. We are talking about the — agencies of government — EPA needs to be rebuilt.

Q: You can’t — you can’t name the third one?

PERRY: The third agency of government I would — I would do away with Education, the —

Q: Commerce.

PERRY: Commerce and, let’s see. I can’t. The third one, I can’t. Sorry. Oops.

According to Peter Hamby of CNN, Perry showed up at the spin room after the debate and told reporters, “I’m sure glad I had my boots on because I sure stepped in it out there.”

Happy Veterans Day America

Happy Veterans Day!

History of Veterans Day

World War I – known at the time as “The Great War” – officially ended when the Treaty of Versailles was signed on June 28, 1919, in the Palace of Versailles outside the town of Versailles, France. However, fighting ceased seven months earlier when an armistice, or temporary cessation of hostilities, between the Allied nations and Germany went into effect on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month. For that reason, November 11, 1918, is generally regarded as the end of “the war to end all wars.”

Soldiers of the 353rd Infantry near a church at Stenay, Meuse in France.

Soldiers of the 353rd Infantry near a church at Stenay, Meuse in France, wait for the end of hostilities.  This photo was taken at 10:58 a.m., on November 11, 1918, two minutes before the armistice ending World War I went into effect

Read more here: http://www.va.gov/opa/vetsday/vetdayhistory.asp

Coping without electricity

imageyq

image

It has been seven days since I updated my blog and I feel like a fish out of water.

I haven’t had power since last Saturday-when a surprise noreaster hit Connecticut with heavy wet snow, which brought down power lines and knocked out power and cable all over the state.

Thank God, I still have hot water and a fireplace.

Restoration is in high gear, according to Connecticut Light and Power, and the Governor, but if you ask me, seven days is much too long for my comfort.

Flip-Flopper Romney Can’t Close Sale On Conservatives

Mitt Romney in 2007 in Washington, DC at the V...

Image via Wikipedia

It is no secret that Republicans in the country cannot wait to see Obama go, but they are doubtful that Mitt Romney is the guy to make that happen. Over the past decade Mitt has branded himself as a who continually changes his views (flip-flopper) and that, among his many other faults does not sit well with conservatives.

The presumed GOP nominee/presidential candidate is polling behind freshman, Mr. 999, Herman Cain. This of course, is shocking, and seems unreal by many, including the Romney camp. But if I were Mitt Romney, I would be worried because the evidence indicates that–even if he were to win the nomination he may have trouble energizing the all-important Tea Party/independent vote that will play a substantial role in the 2012 Presidential race.

Romney’s problem is best described as his inability to attract and convince real conservatives that he is a worthy candidate for them to galvanize their support behind. He should do well among Northeast conservatives. However, as far as most conservatives around the country are concerned, Mitt Romney is no different that Obama. Hence is difficulty in winning them over.

Make no mistake, the central reason for Mitt Romney’s problems among conservatives is: They accurately perceive that he is not one of them, and having properly recognized this, they become justifiably annoyed at his insistence that he is conservative. While he’s not about to join McCain in calling the Tea Party ‘Hobbits,’ the truth is that there’s no love in the Romney camp for either the Tea Party segment, or the staunchly conservative base of the party. Part of this grows from the fact that he won’t sign on to various Tea Party pledges, but his more enduring problem is that he simply isn’t a conservative and he has too. too many opinions on too many important issues affecting voters.

Politics: Did Marco Rubio lie to appeal to voters?

Rubio speaking at CPAC in February 2010.

US senator and Republican Rising Star, Marco Rubio, has gotten himself in trouble–serious trouble. You might say he has a credibility problem. He lied on his resume.

According to an investigative report published on Friday by the Washington Post: “Rubio’s compelling family story embellishes facts.” (to enhance (a statement or narrative) with fictitious additions)

During his rise to political prominence, Sen. Marco Rubio frequently repeated a compelling version of his family’s history that had special resonance in South Florida. He was the “son of exiles,” he told audiences, Cuban Americans forced off their beloved island after “a thug,” Fidel Castro, took power.

But a review of documents – including naturalization papers and other official records – reveals that the Florida Republican’s account embellishes the facts. The documents show that Rubio’s parents came to the United States and were admitted for permanent residence more than 2 and a half years before Castro’s forces overthrew the Cuban government and took power on New Year’s Day 1959.

The supposed flight of Rubio’s parents has been at the core of the young senator’s political identity …. he mentions his parents in the second sentence of the official biography on his Senate Web site. It says that Mario and Oriales Rubio “came to America following Fidel Castro’s takeover.”….

The real story of his parents’ migration appears to be a more conventional immigrant narrative, a couple who came to the United States seeking a better life. In the year they arrived in Florida, the future Marxist dictator was in Mexico plotting a quixotic return to Cuba.