2012 U.S. Presidential Election

[kurai]

I'm not following you.

You accept the premise that Perry characterizes human rights in such a negative manner on one occasion, but reject it out of hand on another? What is the benefit to such naivete? If one is able to interpret multiple statements in the same manner, should we dismiss this because it is distasteful? Which set of words must be uttered before Perry's anti-homosexual rights approach is a plank of his political platform?

This is the discourse which Perry himself has provided - these quotes are not out of context, but part of his campaign structure. There is no accidental continuity between his remarks. It is not coincidental - in fact, it is an intentional abuse of the fact that public interpretation will occur - you personally contend that such rhetoric will provide a beneficial outcome in the Iowa primaries.

If we are not to accept the remarks at face-value, Perry is a liar and intends to deceive the populace for his own gain. If we do accept that he believes what he is presenting, he is opposed to the liberty on which America was founded.

In neither case is he a respectable candidate for the office.

[Roy Karrde]

I'm not following you.

You accept the premise that Perry characterizes human rights in such a negative manner on one occasion, but reject it out of hand on another? What is the benefit to such naivete? If one is able to interpret multiple statements in the same manner, should we dismiss this because it is distasteful? Which set of words must be uttered before Perry's anti-homosexual rights approach is a plank of his political platform?

This is the discourse which Perry himself has provided - these quotes are not out of context, but part of his campaign structure. There is no accidental continuity between his remarks. It is not coincidental - in fact, it is an intentional abuse of the fact that public interpretation will occur - you personally contend that such rhetoric will provide a beneficial outcome in the Iowa primaries.

If we are not to accept the remarks at face-value, Perry is a liar and intends to deceive the populace for his own gain. If we do accept that he believes what he is presenting, he is opposed to the liberty on which America was founded.

In neither case is he a respectable candidate for the office.

I am willing to accept that he has made anti homosexual remarks before, but I am not going to automatically accept that every time he compares Gays, the Gay Movement, or Gay Rights to absolutely anything, he is doing it in a negative context. In this case it is one of creating a simple comparison of the advancement of rights of one group and not the other. There is nothing inherently negative of that, and one could argue the only reason that DADT was even used was because it was the most recent social rights advancement that one could pick from. If say Perry had used any different thing else as a comparison, would you and others automatically snap at it being negative, or just one making a comparison of the President's Priorities or lack there of when it comes to members of faith?

[Dark Sage]

Perry's not going to win the nomination anyway. Not only are Gingrich and Romney both ahead of him, he's made so many gaffes, he's starting to look stupid.

I'm not even going to comment on the others. Bachmann's bigotry is even more obvious. She actually wants to reinstate DADT. The rest are jokes.

And if Gingrich is nominated... May God have mercy on us all.

[Roy Karrde]

And if Gingrich is nominated... May God have mercy on us all.

And yet Gingrich right now is running a mostly positive campaign much like Obama did in 2008, and would utterly school Obama in the debates. If Gingrich continues the upbeat enthusiastic message, and does not dive deep into the dirt as Obama will have to do in this upcoming election. He has a good chance of winning.

He has not retrieved himself from the most abhorrent position possible - homosexuals should not be considered to have human rights: their right to live is "special". There is no reason to interpret any of his remarks in a dispassionate fashion. He has said these words without apology.

He is not the candidate providing for liberty and the equality of humanity.

And yet that has absolutely nothing to do with the Ad or the fact that it was merely a comparison being made.