If his past behavior is any indication, when Gov. Rick Perry debates his Republican rivals on September 7, he’ll treat them pretty ugly.
Although the Texan refused to debate his Democratic opponent in last year’s election, his earlier performances show he loves a good fight.
Not that he comes out swinging. Rather, he loosens up over time. And when he’s at his most relaxed, he goes in for the kill.
Advertisement
In 2002, for instance, Perry faced businessman Tony Sanchez in the general election. At the start of their debate, the governor played it safe: He mostly ignored Sanchez’s swipes and listed his accomplishments with a pleasant, steady smile.
When a panelist queried Sanchez about a bank of his that was under investigation, Sanchez asserted, “There were two federal judges and three federal agencies who said management and directors weren’t involved [in the wrongdoing]. . . . So I feel very good.”
“Mr. Sanchez, you shouldn’t feel good,” a solemn Perry replied, shaking his head. “You shouldn’t feel good when the federal authorities tell you that there is drug money that came into your bank in cash in suitcases. And then you sent the money to Panama at the request of those drug dealers. . . . You failed the test of leadership.”
Later, Perry lightened up. After Sanchez criticized Perry’s environmental policies, the governor noted, “What Mr. Sanchez didn’t tell you is that he recently told a Corpus Christi newspaper that he would copy Europe and allow Texans only two ice cubes per drink.” As chuckles rippled through the audience, Perry held up two fingers — and half-heartedly suppressed a grin — to illustrate his point. “That’s his conservation plan.” He then shot a glance at his opponent and quipped, “Mr. Sanchez, you’ve been spending too much time in Europe.”
Perry’s teasing easily slides into ridicule when his opponent is aggressive. In 2010, he insinuated that his primary opponent, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, wasn’t the sharpest tool in the shed.
Early in their first debate, Hutchison hammered Perry for raising taxes. “The Dallas Morning News alone said you had raised taxes,” she offered, before Perry interrupted: “I hope you’re not using the Dallas Morning News as your opportunity for veracity.” The crowd relished the jibe.
Further into the program, Perry questioned Hutchison about her support for the Troubled Asset Relief Program. As she explained the intricacies of her decision process — just as he had planned — Perry played to the crowd, staring off into the distance with raised eyebrows as if to ask, “Is she done yet?”
Hutchison concluded by accusing Perry of hypocrisy: “You wrote a letter to Congress saying pass this bill. . . . And the governors association supported it.”
Perry answered, “Joe Manchin, who’s the West Virginia governor, and I did write a letter to you. We thought you all were smart enough to understand what we were talking about is ‘Stop the spending and cut the taxes.’”
“Uh, governor, that’s not what the letter said,” Hutchison replied.
“I wish we had made it a little clearer for you then, senator,” Perry retorted. The crowd giggled.
“In the first debate, the governor had a really, really cavalier attitude,” says Debra Medina, the third candidate to participate in that debate. “It’s kind of this ‘I’ve got this’ or ‘you can’t touch this’ sort of attitude.”
Kinky Friedman campaigned for Governor of Texas with the slogan "How hard can it be?", which I took as a jibe against both Perry and Bush. I think Kinky's run was similar in intent to William Buckley's run for Mayor of NYC many moons ago.
Actually, the format style of the debate will limit a lot of back and forth between the candidates and focus more on the candidate's vision for the country. I think that will help Perry, assuming he is now prepared to speak more definitively about his platform.
More interesting will be the other candidates. Romney is likely to stay above the fray, but I wonder if Bachmann in particular will need to take shots at Perry.
The others in all likelihood will also take shots at both Perry and Romney, but none of them will probably focus on it.
All in all I doubt there will be a lot of fireworks in SC. That will have to wait for the next round.
I think you are probably right. The format of these things is no fun at all and to boot you rarely learn anything about the candidates. The only useful thing accomplished in the last debate was getting Paul on the record re: Iran. I know the collective attention span of the US is about 1/8 that of a gnat, but I'd love to see longer speaking times and moderators who are versed well enough to dig past the surface of an issue. I day dream about a talk-radio style debate where various hosts take on candidates or moderate discussions between candidates for an extended period of time. Can you picture Dennis Prager holding Paul to account on Israel or Glenn Beck questioning Romney on consitution and role of government. Heck, I'd like to see Medved go after Perry on federalism.
Actually the format is going to be that way (See Katrina's article on the home page). 22 minutes each without interruptions and no gotcha questions, which was my point - maybe I didn't say it well. There won't be opportunities to say my opponent hates puppies and the focus instead will be on each candidates vision for the future. So debating skills should be less important in this one.
I'll probably watch football, but I may DVD this as well.
I'm so excited. We're making pop-corn and waiting for the next generation of the great debate moments on youtube. The lamestream and the establishment can keep thier expectation low. It's more fun when they have to draw thier jaw off the floor.
It sounds like Perry knows how to take control without getting sucked in to the types of questions that moderators ask that really aren't focused on the main issues voters are concerned about. After reading this article it also sounds like whatever style problems people have will fade away pretty quickly after he begins to dominate in the debates... everybody else will have to try not to look like they are snipping at his heels.
This article is very bad news, as far as I am concerned. Sounds like he uses dirty tricks and avoids facts. I don't know how that's going to play in a general election. The national truth-meter squads will fry him....
I’m really looking forward to the debate, and right now am very much a Perry Mare (thanks, MoDo!).
If I were one of his "handlers," the only thing I’d do differently is tone down his otherwise quality wardrobe just a bit. Although that striped, blood-purple shirt did grow on me.
All kidding aside, I really want to have confidence that he has a good grasp of where we are, and how we get to where he wants us to go.
I’m really in his corner, in a way I’ve never been in a candidate’s corner because of the crossroads we've reached.
If a punt back to the States is possible, and I think it is, then the transition will be key. Don’t you think?
I’m not sure ole’ Isaiah Berlin would appreciate the use of his quote here, but here’s one for the good Governor:
“Ridicule kills more surely than savage indignation.”
He’s talking about the redoubtable Voltaire.
Berlin’s take on Vico and the ability to grasp history properly through imagination, or in Vico’s words, fantasia, has me thinking about different aspects of current situation too.
When you’re the Left and your instinct is always to deconstruct and never to really create, imagination can’t possibly be sound and really progressive.
Aren't you glad the creator(s) of soap arrived before liberals could send in the cost-curve bending, make available to everyone experts came forcibly calling?
My, but we seem to have a bunch of delicate doilies commenting here. Does it really bother you that Perry carved up his debate opponents like Christmas turkeys, or are you just looking for any chance to take a shot? Either that or make excuses for your favorites in advance?
One of the reasons I like Perry and think he would be the strongest nominee is that he brings a gun to a knife fight and answers a conventional attack with a nuclear response. The last thing I want to see next fall is yet another Republican nominee more concerned about showing deference to his opponent and cozying up to the media than with wiping up the floor with Obama.
As has been noted before, Texas politics is a contact sport. No one who has won six statewide elections down here is going to quake in his boots when the Chicago mob attempts a hit. He is going to come out guns blazing.
"the Chicago mob" -- just perfect! I agree. We conservatives (and maybe even some middle of the road Republicans) are ready for someone to fight back. I'm so tired of mealy-mouthed responses. As long as it's in good humor, a little fire never hurt anyone...humor and truth. Potent medicine for what ails us beaten-down Americans.
"I paid for this microphone!" -- Yes, Repubs, study Ronald Reagan!
Follow
