Comments about ‘Perry attacks Romney, Romney returns in kind’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Sept. 15 2011 10:17 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
stevep38now
Provo, UT

Perry is scary! Even with his flaws Romney is a better choice and that's who I will support.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

What I can't understand is how 2 Conservative Republicans say that Government can't create jobs,
and turn right around and argue in a televised debate that if elected President, that they will create jobs!

JohnJacobJingleHeimerSchmidt
Beverly Hills, CA

"LDS Liberal | 10:57 p.m. Sept. 15, 2011
Farmington, UT
What I can't understand is how 2 Conservative Republicans say that Government can't create jobs,
and turn right around and argue in a televised debate that if elected President, that they will create jobs!"

These are the same people who criticize the President for everything he does, even when he proposes Republican ideas they used to support.

To me, Perry is a huge PHONY. Taxes are up in Texas with him as governor. He also used 17 billion in federal funds and the jobs he claims he created were....wait for it........EXPANDING GOVERNMENT with more government jobs.

Former college cheerleader, likes to spend tax payer money, Texas governor...now who does that sound like...Oh yeah, GW Bush who was for smaller government and expanded it and signed bills for 6 TRILLION.

JUST SAY NO to another Texas cheerleader governor.

J-TX
Allen, TX

No bad guy in the Social Security picture? Sorry, Mitt, but Congress has been stealing from SS for 30 years, hence the (accurate) portrayal of the system as a Ponzi scam, not that I care for Perry. The only difference is, SS was not originally set up as a Ponzi scheme. It just has become one, because invested dollars are used to pay some investors, while major funds have been stolen to finance the exorbitant, extravagant spending of an elite group - Congress.
Why don't you call out Congress, Mitt? Because you need them to get elected.

Vote out all incumbents and start over.

Politicallyminded
Spanish Fork, UT

Perry is not the man for the job in this case. I dislike him and his policies. He is an individual who feels that he can say whatever he pleases and refuse to back down. I do not think that we want someone in office who is unwilling to ever listen to other people's positions. I want a strong president, and a strong leader is someone who surrounds themselves with intelligent, experienced, and wise individuals who they are willing to take advice from. Perry seems to me to be something of a "bull in a china shop", who believes it is his way or no way. He also has an amazing ability to distort the facts and the truth. He has an amazing ability to manipulate situations to suit his needs. That is quite the talent, and one that American's do not need in the White House. We need someone who works hard for the people, not one that works the people.

coleman51
Orem, UT

Perry also made a veiled attempt when speaking to students at Liberty University to question Mitt's christianity. It has become clear that Perry will use any falsehood, lie, innuendo to attack his opponents. What this shows to me is a deeply flawed character. I am voting for Mitt because I see in Perry some serious questions not only on his positions, but also on his character.

Esquire
Springville, UT

Funny how the commenters leap to Romney's defense. Romney has plenty of baggage, and LDS Liberal is right, he like Perry rips on government then says they will do this and that when in charge of government. Phonies both.

But why is this a local/Utah story? Why assign a DN reporter to report on a national story that surely has national coverage? Is this paper a Romney newsletter?

KC Mormon
Edgerton, KS

LDS Liberal
Here is the difference when liberals say government creates jobs they are talking about government actually being the ones who create the jobs, when conservatives say they will create jobs they are talking about creating the conditions to help the private sector create. This is jobs. This is through deregulation, not the kind that Ron Paul wants that Dems always claim Repubs want but rather streamlining. The vast majority of republicans agree that we need some regulations after all we do not want to get on an unregulated airplane that might fall out of the sky. However with an average cost of farming permits running $23000 per permit per year many farmers must get multiple permits from different agencies for the same thing. Take an egg farmer for example they must have one permit from the FDA for the eggs and another from DOA for the chickens that lay the eggs. Just those two are $46000 per year when they could both be covered by one. Now take this same kind of thing to other businesses and how does that effect their ability to hire more people? Or if you hire 50 people you get more regs?

Doug10
Roosevelt, UT

much ado about nothing

RShackleford
Saint George, UT

Nice that they are tearing each other apart by pointing out each one's big government stance on things.

Give me someone that believes in personaresponsibilityty, a sustainablforeigngn policy, liberty and freedom without Big Government and speciaintereststs ruling us....Yep Give me someone that gets it. Give me a Real Republican patriot like Ron Paul!

LValfre
CHICAGO, IL

Romney will not be good for this country.

majmajor
Layton, UT

Perry has a room temperature IQ. Anyone running for office should realize that old people vote they don't have anything better to do. No one in their right mind wants to get rid of Social Security. We need to fix it. It is a question of how many Social Security recipients will each worker support?

This is a simple explanation of numbers. In the 1950s, 16 workers were supporting one Social Security recipient. Post WWII, People had lots of kids, but after 1960 the size of families has decreased. People have also been living longer. Today, it is 3.3. workers to each retiree and in 40 years it will be 2:1.

We need to realistically fix it by reducing the time on SS and Medicare (increase age to 70+), or reduce benefits. It is all about numbers.

Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

*'Perry likely can beat Romney, but he can't win' - By Kathleen Parker, Washington Post - Published by DSnews - 08/30/2011

'WASHINGTON Rick Perry's rapid lead over previous Republican front-runner Mitt Romney was predictable. But it is not a good sign for Republicans hoping to reclaim the White House and further highlights the crucial battle within GOP circles: Who is the godliest of us all?'

Romney hasn't been in office for years and makes jokes about his 'unemployment' while firms give him, literally, millions then dispear.

Texas, burns.

If this is the best the Republican party has to offer in the way of leadership...?

My support goes to Obama.

At least he is TRYING to help the country...

and not putting his party, before his country.

KC Mormon
Edgerton, KS

majmajor
One other thing to look at is the age set when SS was set up. The reason the age was set at 65 was that the average life expectancy was 64 if you lived longer than expected you got it with the exception of disability. The simplest fix would be to set the age back to one year after the average life expectancy for anyone younger than 50 today. This grandfathers those close in and restores the original plan. It was never intended to be a way to support people for 20-30 years. The second step would be to actually put a lock on the lock box. Make it a crime for congress to take money from SS for ANY other reason. This has been going on for far too long. They say we have plenty of funds in the lock box just don't open it. Why? Because if we did open it we would see that it has nothing but IOU's from a government that is $14 Trillion in debt. Does anyone really think they can ever put that money back in?

WHAT NOW?
Saint George, UT

"...Perry has an amazing ability to manipulate situations to suit his needs...".

Perry is a Politician. As a Politician, it is in his DNA to manipulate situations to suit his needs.

"...It has become clear that Perry will use any falsehood, lie, innuendo to attack his opponents. What this shows to me is a deeply flawed character...".

The Re-Publican Party has used these same tactics to "attack" the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party returns the favor whenever they can. Falsehoods, lies and innuendo are just some of calling cards Politicians use to "make a contrast" between them and their opponent.

"...The vast majority of republicans agree that we need some regulations...".

The "vast majority of Re-Publicans" are on record saying the problem with our country is over-regulation. Re-Publicans ring that "over-regulation is a 'jobs killer' bell", on a daily basis.

How do you "un-ring" that over-regulation bell, without sounding hypocritical?

Unless, of course, the whole over-regulation thing was just another way to "manipulate a stituation to suit" the needs of the Re-Publican Party.

yarrlydarb
Ogden, UT

"Perry attacks Romney, Romney returns in kind."

Yes, and I hope they "knock each other off," politically speaking.

The most significant thing about the Republican candidates is that they ALL will say and do anything at all to "buy" the votes, which includes making outlandish statements against the left or right, actually accusing even those of their "own" party of wrong-headed thinking.

To hear them say what they don't like in each other has to make one wonder about the "Republican platform" (whatever the heck that is) that any of them can actually agree on.

Carnak
Salt Lake City, UT

But can either one organize a community like our current President. Now THAT is an important quality to have.

KC Mormon
Edgerton, KS

WHAT NOW?
Yes the vast majority of republicans say we need SOME regulation this is not at odds with saying we are over regulated. Some regulation is needed like airline safety and making banks treat people fare. However over regulation causes problems like saying you must give more home loans to minorities. This causes things like giving loans to people who can not afford them just to stay inline with the regulations. This causes problems like banks giving loans to people with proof of income. Then because this leads to a housing bubble more regulations are created to try to stop the problem caused by the first regulation without removing the first regulation. And when that causes another problem it will be yet another regulation to clean that mess. This is how we got to 23,ooo pages of regulations that if a company misses one line in that 23,000 pages they are breaking the law. Why would anyone want to do buisness in this invironment?

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

GOP= a tribe of cannibals.

No one is offering any real solutions. They're all just trying to eat each other up and make the others look bad. Instead of showing why they deserve our vote, by offering SPECIFIC plans, they're just telling us why we SHOULDN'T vote for the other republican.

Pathetic and ultimately, unsuccessful in my book. Obama is going to win in 2012.

floridian
navarre, fl

Face facts, folks. Using the Social Security web site/calculator: if you are currently 27, married, making $30,000/year, expect 1% raises/year, and plan to retire at 67:

You will have paid into SS (assuming current rate and average salary of $40,000/year) an average of $2,560/year, which totals $102,400 for the 40 years.

At retirement age of 67 (using the current rate/calculator) you will be eligible to receive $3,240/month, or $38,400/year. In less than 3 years you will have received more than you contributed to SS over your lifetime. If you include the contributions of your employer(s) it would take just over 5 years to go through what you both contributed. So, if you live beyond 72.3 years, you will then be paid using someone else's money, or free loading.

Draw your own conclusions, but IMO, that is why SS needs to be overhauled. Since LBJ allowed the SS Trust Fund to be used for General disbursements the government has not been investing contributions; they have been spending it.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments