Rangerland Forum Information

[leetchie69]

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-augu...---the-top-tier

Can someone embed that for me?

Poor Ron Paul
The new Rodney Dangerfield

This post has been edited by leetchie69: Aug 16 2011, 02:07 PM

[Charlie]

So when Rick Perry entered the race I got scared. Really scared. I saw how he was a fire breathing conservative, and that was no surprise. Guys who wave guns around and preach about Jesus will always get a certain amount of interest. What really scared me was his economic record. It looked like he had done a really good job in Texas. I was terrified that this nutjob actually had economic chops. He would get elected, and proceed to throw this country back into the 18th century socially.

Then I actually looked at his economic record. There is one thing you keep hearing over and over with him. Half the jobs that have been created during the economic recovery have been created in Texas. And, it's true. Fact checking organizations have verified it. And that sounds big. Sounds like a game breaker.

It's bullshit. Complete and total bullshit. I'll try and address it succinctly.

1.) Texas has been creating jobs like crazy for about 20years. It has averaged 3.3% growth over that time, compared to 2.6% nationally.

2.) Texas has large oil and gas reserves. These industries have brought billions and billions of dollars into the state economy since Perry took over (oil was 25$ a barrel when he started his first term.)

3.) Texas has massive population growth. Net gain of citizens means more jobs.

Those are primary reasons behind the job gains. But then, digging further. The job gains aren't as impressive as they sound.

Texas has 268,000 workers earning minimum wage, and 282,000 earning lower than the federal minimum wage. That total is 9.5% of all workers in Texas, tied with Mississippi for the highest percentage in the country.

Additionally, the Texas unemployment rate is 8.2%. That ranks 26th in the country, completely average. That number shows, maybe more than anything, how the job growth is due mainly to population growth.

I'm not even going to address how Texas is one of the worst educated states, or how 1/4 of its citizens are uninsured (the highest rate in the nation), or how he pretty much gutted all public services.


I'm not scared of this guy at all.

[Kusand]

Then I actually looked at his economic record. There is one thing you keep hearing over and over with him. Half the jobs that have been created during the economic recovery have been created in Texas. And, it's true. Fact checking organizations have verified it. And that sounds big. Sounds like a game breaker.

It's bullshit. Complete and total bullshit. I'll try and address it succinctly.

1.) Texas has been creating jobs like crazy for about 20years. It has averaged 3.3% growth over that time, compared to 2.6% nationally.

2.) Texas has large oil and gas reserves. These industries have brought billions and billions of dollars into the state economy since Perry took over (oil was 25$ a barrel when he started his first term.)

3.) Texas has massive population growth. Net gain of citizens means more jobs.

Those are primary reasons behind the job gains. But then, digging further. The job gains aren't as impressive as they sound.

Texas has 268,000 workers earning minimum wage, and 282,000 earning lower than the federal minimum wage. That total is 9.5% of all workers in Texas, tied with Mississippi for the highest percentage in the country.

Additionally, the Texas unemployment rate is 8.2%. That ranks 26th in the country, completely average. That number shows, maybe more than anything, how the job growth is due mainly to population growth.

I'm not even going to address how Texas is one of the worst educated states, or how 1/4 of its citizens are uninsured (the highest rate in the nation), or how he pretty much gutted all public services.
I'm not scared of this guy at all.

Yeah, those points will totally sell in a campaign. People don't just react to whatever numbers they see, they analyze the reasons behind it. This is why we're always forgiving of Presidents who held office during a recession, right?

Also: http://www.politicalmathblog.com/?p=1590 and Nate Silver endorses it as a good explanation.

This post has been edited by Kusand: Aug 17 2011, 08:55 AM

[Beamer]

Yeah, those points will totally sell in a campaign. People don't just react to whatever numbers they see, they analyze the reasons behind it. This is why we're always forgiving of Presidents who held office during a recession, right?

That was going to be my comment: American voters are always rational, informed, and vote with thought rather than emotion and a belief that marriage is some gift from god.

[leetchie69]

CNN has done a pretty good job hammering his "job creation" record.
The problem is nobody watches CNN.

But we have the most viewed cable channel (Fox News) here to save the day.

Their fair and balanced approach will definitely bring to light Perry's misguided job creation record right?

I mean they report..then we decide.

[ThunderDawg]

If Rove is attacking Perry as being "unpresidential" for that ridiculous comment, Perry doesn't stand a chance.

He seriously needs to look up the word Treason, because he doesn't fucking know what it means.

[Kusand]

...most of the "excuses" you will hear about Texas' job statistics are based in nothing more than a hope that Rick Perry had nothing to do with them and not on a sound understanding of the data.

My advice to anti-Perry advocates is this: Give up talking about Texas jobs. Texas is an incredible outlier among the states when it comes to jobs. Not only are they creating them, they're creating ones with higher wages.

One can argue that Perry had very little to do with the job situation in Texas, but such a person should be probably prepare themselves for the consequences of that line of reasoning. If Rick Perry had nothing to do with creating jobs in Texas, than why does Obama have something to do with creating jobs anywhere? And why would someone advocate any sort of "job creating" policies if policies don't seem to matter when it comes to the decade long governor of Texas? In short, it seems to me that this line of reasoning, in addition to sounding desperate and partisan, hogties its adherents into a position where they are simultaneously saying that government doesn't create jobs while arguing for a set of policies where government will create jobs.

[leetchie69]

I can't find specific policies that Perry put in place that boosted the job situation in Texas...if it happened on his watch great...but you can't take credit if you did not do anything.

Obama did have the stimulus and the CBO has said that it created jobs.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/117xx/doc11706/08-24-ARRA.pdf

The problem is the dialogue has not been about where un-employment would be without the stimulus.
All this is focused is on is that the unemployment rate has jumped up since it was put in place.

[Greatone]

With the current crop of candidates, does Ron Paul actually have a chance to make a deep run in this thing? Not saying he will get the nod, but I think he is a more viable candidate than 3/4 of everyone else running.

[leetchie69]

With the current crop of candidates, does Ron Paul actually have a chance to make a deep run in this thing? Not saying he will get the nod, but I think he is a more viable candidate than 3/4 of everyone else running.

I think his problem is that he comes across as an angry old man.
I don't think he is electable.

[ThunderDawg]

[quote name='leetchie69' date='Aug 17 2011, 05:10 PM' post='473930']...but you can't take credit if you did not do anything.]/quote]

According to who exactly?

[leetchie69]

According to who exactly?

Common sense fairy?

This post has been edited by leetchie69: Aug 17 2011, 08:48 PM

[leedsy99]

I just want to thank Rick Perry for telling the nation that he doesn't believe that global warming exists. Now at least I can relax a little bit.

[Nilan 666]

J Elvis Weinstein said it best on Twitter when he said Perry thinks the Earth is still under warranty since its only 6000 years old.

[Rocha]

The Colbert Report the other night about how the GOP and it's TV Network ignore Ron Paul so blatantly was hilarious. Dude missed winning that straw poll by a couple dozen votes and to hear Fox tell it, it's like he wasn't even there.

I definitely don't see eye to eye with Paul on all or probably even half of his positions, but unlike the rest of the freak show the GOP has jockeying right now, he's at least respectable, principled and doesn't pander to his audience.

[Ebase]

The Colbert Report the other night about how the GOP and it's TV Network ignore Ron Paul so blatantly was hilarious. Dude missed winning that straw poll by a couple dozen votes and to hear Fox tell it, it's like he wasn't even there.

I definitely don't see eye to eye with Paul on all or probably even half of his positions, but unlike the rest of the freak show the GOP has jockeying right now, he's at least respectable, principled and doesn't pander to his audience.

Personally, I love Ron Paul. He is a true believer. The guy says what he believes, defends his position and breaks with his party when he feels they are wrong. If Congress had more Ron Paul's the US better for it.

When he stood there on that stage and tore at everyone of his brethren that was awesome.

[Greatone]

Outside of a mainstreamer like Romney, I don't see anyone in the GOP mix I'd vote for to be their candidate besides Paul. Everyone else is batshit insane and/or retarded.

[Nilan 666]

Which Romney? The one who was Governor of Massachusettes or the one who has spent the past fear years running like hell from the record he had doing it.

[Charlie]

Yeah, those points will totally sell in a campaign. People don't just react to whatever numbers they see, they analyze the reasons behind it. This is why we're always forgiving of Presidents who held office during a recession, right?

Also: http://www.politicalmathblog.com/?p=1590 and Nate Silver endorses it as a good explanation.

For your first point, they don't need to analyze it. But, Obama has a veteran campaign team. A very good one. They will be able to draft up some pithy responses, which work.


For your second, I have a couple of issues with his article.

He discounts the energy sector as the driver of job growth, which is fine, those numbers actually surprised me. But then, he proceeds to show how wages in Texas aren't that low. This would seem to be in large part because of the Energy sector. As I mentioned, Texas has the highest rate of people working at or below minimum wage in the country. A quarter of the population. But, then, the average wage is just barely worse than average. That seems to show that there is a large population of workers earning middle class or higher wages. White collar workers or very good paying blue collar workers (which includes most workers in the energy sector). I would venture to guess that the average wage in Texas is driven up by the wages generated by the 25% of the new employees in the energy sector.

He addresses the population growth relatively well, but doesn't look into one of the reasons that happened. Texas has a large fund that pretty much pays companies to move there. That's all well and dandy, except it doesn't result in a net employment gain for the country. That's where one of this guy's assumptions falls somewhat flat. He says he guesses people aren't moving there with jobs lined up. Texas practically pays companies to move there.

I'm not arguing that that isn't effective in growing jobs in the state. It is just that it sort of skews the numbers. A job added in Texas that moves from Indiana isn't a net gain for the country.

And, one more interesting thing. Texas' trade with China has boomed recently. A 606% increase since 2000. That has undoubtedly added jobs to the economy.

I'm not going to deny that lax regulation and no income tax hasn't added jobs to Texas. But, those policies have been in Texas before Perry, they wouldn't hold the same weight on a national scale, and lead to enormous negative externalities.

[Beamer]

Hey, Michele Bachman just promised $2 gas if we vote for her.


Of course, she didn't outline a plan for it. Hey, vote for me and I'll put a lamborghini in every pot and an elephant in every driveway!

[Nilan 666]

If the President had that level of control over the economy wouldn't we be communists?

[Kusand]

For your first point, they don't need to analyze it. But, Obama has a veteran campaign team. A very good one. They will be able to draft up some pithy responses, which work.

Dude, if Obama engages on this topic, he will get KILLED. Absolutely killed. Pithy responses will only convince people who weren't voting for Perry anyway. There are solid numbers there, so what independent do you expect to be convinced and how?

As to the article:

"I'm not arguing that that isn't effective in growing jobs in the state. It is just that it sort of skews the numbers. A job added in Texas that moves from Indiana isn't a net gain for the country.

And, one more interesting thing. Texas' trade with China has boomed recently. A 606% increase since 2000. That has undoubtedly added jobs to the economy.

I'm not going to deny that lax regulation and no income tax hasn't added jobs to Texas. But, those policies have been in Texas before Perry, they wouldn't hold the same weight on a national scale, and lead to enormous negative externalities."

Again, this is an absolutely worthless counter in the eyes of your average voter. Jobs went up there. The end. The best you can do there is say "what worked in Texas won't work on a national scale," and then the Perry campaign says "we already know Obama's strategies haven't worked."

This is a topic that Obama just needs to somehow stay away from.

[toph]

Rick Perry: Evolution is just a "theory that's out there."

In order to be a republican candidate at this point, do you just have to hate science?

[Kusand]

Rick Perry: Evolution is just a "theory that's out there."

In order to be a republican candidate at this point, do you just have to hate science?

Yes. That's called "pandering to the evangelical base."

[Greatone]

Ron Paul said that Perry makes him look moderate

[Sed]

Oh, Perry's been hating science for a long time!

[HDH]

He did get an A in world military systems

We're gonna fuck somebody's shit UP.

[Mike B.]

Oh, Perry's been hating science for a long time!

In fairness to him, I once got a 10 on an organic chemistry test. That was out of 100.

[Kusand]

In fairness to him, I once got a 10 on an organic chemistry test. That was out of 100.

Yeah, but you're not running for election and telling me you think carbon-carbon bonding is just a theory that's out there.

[Mike B.]

Yeah, but you're not running for election and telling me you think carbon-carbon bonding is just a theory that's out there.

Markovnikov was a communist!

[Greatone]

Oh, did anyone else see the Daily Show last night? That guy on MSNBC(The Ed Show?) is fucking nuts. Blasting Rick Perry for being a racist because he said there is a black cloud hanging over Washington. But Perry was talking about the debt, not Obama.

That Ed guy is as unbearable as Olbermann or Hannity.

[Sed]

Oh, did anyone else see the Daily Show last night? That guy on MSNBC(The Ed Show?) is fucking nuts. Blasting Rick Perry for being a racist because he said there is a black cloud hanging over Washington. But Perry was talking about the debt, not Obama.

That Ed guy is as unbearable as Olbermann or Hannity.

I'm still running a day or two behind - though I did enjoy the bit about Bachmann trying to bust Phineas and Ferb.

[toph]

Oh, did anyone else see the Daily Show last night? That guy on MSNBC(The Ed Show?) is fucking nuts. Blasting Rick Perry for being a racist because he said there is a black cloud hanging over Washington. But Perry was talking about the debt, not Obama.

That Ed guy is as unbearable as Olbermann or Hannity.

Ed Schultz. He's a crazy person.

[Beamer]

I'm still running a day or two behind - though I did enjoy the bit about Bachmann trying to bust Phineas and Ferb.

Squirrel!

[rightbug]

In other news, Rick Santorum is still an asshole.



Too lazy to click the link version: Gay marriage caused the economic crisis.

[Kusand]

My head just exploded. I can't even deal with Santorum's bullshit.

[Kusand]

Holy shit, Perry is the kind of nutball asshole that thinks Texas should have the right to ban gay sex. Amazing. Get your head out of your ass and make sure you can beat these assholes, Obama.

[Ebase]

Holy shit, Perry is the kind of nutball asshole that thinks Texas should have the right to ban gay sex. Amazing. Get your head out of your ass and make sure you can beat these assholes, Obama.

"And I promise to get government out of the people's lives when I am president!!!" every single viable GOP candidate

As if he never got behind that wife's ass, grabbed some blond hair with a great big "yeehah!!!"

Plus sodomy prevents pregnancy 10 times out of 10 They should be teaching that shit in public schools.

[Beamer]

A vote for Rick Perry is a vote for global annihilation!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/aug...t-civilisations

[leedsy99]

Holy shit, Perry is the kind of nutball asshole that thinks Texas should have the right to ban gay sex. Amazing. Get your head out of your ass and make sure you can beat these assholes, Obama.

Shit, I have to defend this.

First off, it was in 2002, so arguably he's had almost a decade to "mature" on the issue. But from a political choice, he was in a tough position at the time. The law challenged (in the famous Lawrence v. Texas case) was passed by Texas legislation (I believe well before Perry took office), who in political theory simply enacted the will of the people. In a perfect system, the governor doesn't repeal laws and defers to his Congress to act, so the fact that the law remained on the books was an expression of the Congress to find it appropriate. In agreeing use his executive branch to oppose the constitutional challenge, he's simply saying (though some will say hiding behind) that the will of the people is to favor the law, given that the elected officials that passed the law and continued to elect officials (including him) that support it.

I have to be okay with this process, though the law itself is terrible, because I use the same argument to defend Health Care. The American people elected a president and an congress that deemed the health care bill worthy of passage. That's just how democracy works, and there are remedies to correct it that move beyond assailing one person for it's existence. That's why I have such a tough time accepting the "theory" that it was a bad law because "most of America didn't want it." Not true. We designed a complicated and excellent political system to ensure proper representation on issues, and the passage of a law, any law, is an exercise of the people's will (rather than dictatorship or political bullying). Just like I don't think it's stupid for invoke terms like Obamacare, I can't take Perry to task for sticking up for antiquated Texas laws.

That said, the lesson by this is that Texas does not represent the value system of the American people. So we should avoid electing those people to our highest office, especially when they have less intellectual credentials than high school gym teachers.

[Kusand]

Shit, I have to defend this.

First off, it was in 2002, so arguably he's had almost a decade to "mature" on the issue. But from a political choice, he was in a tough position at the time. The law challenged (in the famous Lawrence v. Texas case) was passed by Texas legislation (I believe well before Perry took office), who in political theory simply enacted the will of the people. In a perfect system, the governor doesn't repeal laws and defers to his Congress to act, so the fact that the law remained on the books was an expression of the Congress to find it appropriate. In agreeing use his executive branch to oppose the constitutional challenge, he's simply saying (though some will say hiding behind) that the will of the people is to favor the law, given that the elected officials that passed the law and continued to elect officials (including him) that support it.

I have to be okay with this process, though the law itself is terrible, because I use the same argument to defend Health Care. The American people elected a president and an congress that deemed the health care bill worthy of passage. That's just how democracy works, and there are remedies to correct it that move beyond assailing one person for it's existence. That's why I have such a tough time accepting the "theory" that it was a bad law because "most of America didn't want it." Not true. We designed a complicated and excellent political system to ensure proper representation on issues, and the passage of a law, any law, is an exercise of the people's will (rather than dictatorship or political bullying). Just like I don't think it's stupid for invoke terms like Obamacare, I can't take Perry to task for sticking up for antiquated Texas laws.

That said, the lesson by this is that Texas does not represent the value system of the American people. So we should avoid electing those people to our highest office, especially when they have less intellectual credentials than high school gym teachers.

Dude ran on a Republican plank in 2010 that expressly called to re-criminalize sodomy, so no, I don't think he's had a decade to mature, and I don't have any interest in allowing him to hide behind "well I'm just defending the will of the people."

[leetchie69]

Scary stuff..

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/seven-w...-131634517.html

[Charlie]

First off, it was in 2002, so arguably he's had almost a decade to "mature" on the issue.

Man, what is this awesome country you live in where politicians, over time, mature and move away from extreme issues. That sounds like a great country. I want to move there.

[LisaLisa]

Scary stuff..

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/seven-w...-131634517.html

This is why Perry (or is it, Parry?) doesn't bother me so much. Every time he gets coverage or opens his mouth, the more extreme he reveals himself to be. I believe the mainstream conservatives of the Repub party are fed up with the Tea Party noise and will not back him. They want a candidate who has more than a passing relationship with the center wing of their party. Not too long ago, Perry was talking secession for the state of Texas. Not very centrist of him, IMHO.

[Kusand]

This is why Perry (or is it, Parry?) doesn't bother me so much. Every time he gets coverage or opens his mouth, the more extreme he reveals himself to be. I believe the mainstream conservatives of the Repub party are fed up with the Tea Party noise and will not back him. They want a candidate who has more than a passing relationship with the center wing of their party. Not too long ago, Perry was talking secession for the state of Texas. Not very centrist of him, IMHO.

And this is why I *am* scared of Perry and the like. I feel like Obama supporters are talking themselves into the idea that Obama won't be seriously challenged by people like Perry or Bachmann. The Republican base and Tea Partiers are going to be MOTIVATED. Their turnout, I feel, is going to end up being tremendous. If middle-of-the-road independents and Democrats don't get themselves geared up to get the vote out, I think Obama is going to flat out lose.

It just bothers me, every Obama supporter I talk to doesn't treat Perry as a serious candidate. I think that's a huge mistake.

[Nilan 666]

I actually like the first one. Given how conservative the courts are in spite of what conservatives think that would probably be the best way to deal with that. The other six are made of crazy though. Also number 3 makes number 5 impossible.

This post has been edited by Nilan 666: Aug 20 2011, 11:19 AM

[xcdudesquadloves...]

I actually like the first one. Given how conservative the courts are in spite of what conservatives think that would probably be the best way to deal with that. The other six are made of crazy though. Also number 3 makes number 5 impossible.

No man that's not how it works. The government just has money that it can balance. The people don't need to help out AT ALL. I mean the government doesn't need to do anything like provide basic needs. People can do that on their own. Want healthcare, MAKE YOUR DOWN DAMN HEALTHCARE FROM THOSE BOOTSTRAPS.

This is what scares me the most:

7. Abortion should be made illegal throughout the country.

Like the gay marriage issue, Perry at one time believed that abortion policy should be left to the states, as was the case before the 1973 Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade. But in the same Christian Broadcasting Network interview, Perry said that he would support a federal amendment outlawing abortion because it was "so important...to the soul of this country and to the traditional values [of] our founding fathers."

Are you 250 years old Mr. Perry? ARE YOU? I really don't think the Founding Fathers knew what abortion was, let alone you knowing their value systems because you palled around and played poker with them on the weekends.

This shit is frightening.

[Kusand]

Are you 250 years old Mr. Perry? ARE YOU? I really don't think the Founding Fathers knew what abortion was

Psst, they did.

[Charlie]

Psst, they did.

You know Ben Franklin did. That guy was an animal.

[teddyc]

Ron Paul follower is trying to dig up dirt on Perry They are looking for anyone who might have slept with Perry.

Fox asks Paul about it and he hammers them for giving it air time.

No wonder they don't like him.