« Did Rick Santorum Really Win Iowa?
CNN/Time Poll: South Carolina Race Tightens as Gingrich Gains Ground »
Fox Asks Rick Perry: “When Did You Stop Beating Your Wife?”
Jan 18th, 2012 | 20 responses
There is no question as to how utterly uniformed Rick Perry’s remarks about Turkey were Monday night in South Carolina.
Calling one of our staunchest NATO partners a country that is being ruled by “Islamic terrorists” is not really the savviest thing one would expect from a presidential candidate.
But perhaps we are being too rough on the Texas governor.
Here’s the question posed specifically to Perry by Fox News’ Bret Baier:
Governor Perry, since the Islamist-oriented party took over in Turkey, the murder rate of women has increased 1,400 percent there. Press freedom has declined to the level of Russia. The prime minister of Turkey has embraced Hamas and Turkey has threatened military force against both Israel and Cyprus. Given Turkey’s turn, do you believe Turkey still belongs in NATO?
“The murder rate of women has increased 1,400 percent there.”
“Press freedom has declined to the level of Russia.”
“The prime minister of Turkey has embraced Hamas”
“Turkey has threatened military force against both Israel and Cyprus.”
And, finally, given all of the horrible things above “do you believe Turkey still belongs in NATO?”
Talk about a loaded question with so many dubious premises, thrown along with so much other red meat during the South Carolina debate before a wildly cheering audience.
Given Perry’s demonstrated, limited foreign policy knowledge and experience, the guy had virtually nowhere to go but to swallow Baier’s question hook, line, and sinker and to come up with a doozy.
Bottom line: Perhaps we should not focus too much on Perry’s answers — we have heard enough of them and have come to expect them — but more on Fox’s “When did you stop beating your wife” question and on the motives for such a question.
Just musing.
Image shutterstock.com
20 Responses to “Fox Asks Rick Perry: “When Did You Stop Beating Your Wife?””
Not just faux news, faux questions at a faux debate.
Rick Perry— a candidate who is not just deluded- but downright dangerous!
Great foreign policy initiatives: Kicking Turkey out of Nato, attacking Iran, RE-INVADING Iraq! Of course this all takes place as he further cuts income tax rates,shreds entitlements and balances the budget.
I never thought that I would be grateful to GWB for anything but it seems his successor’s similarities to him has scared off most of the Republican Party.
DDW, I didn’t watch that debate, so I didn’t realize that the question was a baiting one. I don’t know Perry’s response, but I also don’t expect much out of him.
In any event, DDW, thank you for the clarification, it is appreciated in this highly partisan atmosphere.
Perry’s response is here: http://themoderatevoice.com/135054/perry%E2%80%99s-regrettable-and-uninformed-comments-about-a-staunch-nato-ally/
Edited and added:
The link only contains excerpts from Perry’s responses. The following is the entire exchange:
BAIR: Governor Perry, since the Islamist-oriented party took over in Turkey, the murder rate of women has increased 1,400 percent there. Press freedom has declined to the level of Russia. The prime minister of Turkey has embraced Hamas and Turkey has threatened military force against both Israel and Cypress. Given Turkey’s turn, do you believe Turkey still belongs in NATO?
PERRY: Well, obviously when you have a country that is being ruled by, what many would perceive to be Islamic terrorists, when you start seeing that type of activity against their own citizens, then yes. Not only is it time for us to have a conversation about whether or not they belong to be in NATO, but it’s time for the United States, when we look at their foreign aid, to go to zero with it.
(APPLAUSE)
PERRY: And you go to zero with foreign aid for all of those countries. And it doesn’t make any difference who they are. You go to zero with that foreign aid and then you have the conversation about, do they have America’s best interest in mind? And when you have countries like Turkey that are moving far away from the country that I lived in back in the 1970?s as a pilot in the United States Air Force that was our ally, that worked with us, but today we don’t see that.
Our — our — our president, has a foreign policy that makes our allies very nervous and emboldens our enemies. And we have to have a president of the United States that clearly sends the message, whether it’s to Israel, our friend and there should be no space between the United States and Israel, period.
(APPLAUSE)
PERRY: And we need to send a powerful message to countries like Iran, and Syria and Turkey that the United States is serious and that we’re going to have to be dealt with.
I haz the sads that a presidential candidate has to answer hard questions.
Dorian, maybe that was a mean way to put it, so I apologize. But I do want to ask: you seem to think that it’s unfair to ask questions of this type. Are there specific portions of the setup that you think are factually incorrect? I know you think international knowledge and diplomacy are important qualities to look for in a president, so why would this question be unfair?
Thanks, DDW……………..
Hi roro,
Somewhere along the top of the post is the word “Satire.”
No, I don’t think the question is unfair. Actually I am delighted, because both the question and the answer — in my opinion — show the mentality of the GOP.
First, the question — fair or unfair, factually correct or not — leaves Perry with very little choice but to come up with a very anti-Turkey answer.. which he did. And in my suspicious mind, maybe Fox wanted Perry to do just that, take the bait.
Second, the question shows Perry’s lack of foreign policy knowledge because he never challenges the inaccuracies in te question.
Have to run. More, if you wish later (such as how much foreign aid Turkey gets; how much Turkey has supported the Bush administration during the Iraq war and now Obama during the Afghanistan war)
I’m kind of at a loss to figure out how people would want him to answer. “It’s not an accurate representation of the actual situation in Turkey so I won’t answer?” But then wouldn’t he of gotten bashed for that? If you look at his response it seem it is based on the accuracy of the question. An if then type of deal. “If a country is ruled by extremist, then”. While I don’t think the question accurately represents the situation if it did then the US should look at possibilities and should see where our aid is going. As for Perry being dangerous he is a get along go along type. He will not be making serious changes in anything. Paul is disconcerting on the foreign policy area and I think Obama may try and push an agenda regardless of how unpopular or unwanted but the rest are just politicians and the biggest thing they will do is appoint judges. So please stop with the overwrought hysteria.
Fox is as qualified to be considered a news organization as Perry is to be considered presidential material. How much lower can the bar go?
Haha! Ok Dorian. I shall invoke Poe’s Law as a defence for my misunderstanding that this was satire.
EE, well said…………
EEllis — I’m fairly certain (now that I know Dorian was joking) that the point is that you have to have a pretty good understanding of the issues involved to form a good answer. In fact, if he knew what the situation on the ground were, “your premise is an inaccurate representation of ___, here’s the subtlety you missed in the phrasing of your question…” would actually be a pretty good answer. The problem is that Perry doesn’t have much international knowledge, and he’s a shoot-from-the-him sort of fellow who’s publically not too fond of anything Muslim. He gave the perfect answer for him. That’s the scary thing.
Thanks, roro.
In addition, any serious presidential aspirant should know that:
The Turkish government are not Islamic terrorists
Turkey receives hardly any or no U.S. ‘foreign aid”
Turkey has been the land and air space through which a large percentage of material and logistics support for our troops in Iraq has been moving through — and an ally Perry may need for his promised re-invasion of Iraq.
Turkey has been a close ally of the U.S. in support of the war on terror. Its troops are fighting alongside our troops in Afghanistan and Turkey plays an important role in not only training, reconstruction and educational projects, but — as a Muslim country with cultural similarities — it has a unique role in that war-torn country.
Turkey has been a staunch partner in numerous multinational, international and U.N. security and peacekeeping efforts around the world and has helped finance the U.S.- and NATO-backed rebel forces that were instrumental in defeating and eventually killing Libyan despot Muammar Gaddafi.
Turkey has been a strong member of NATO for more than 50 years — the only Muslim member of NATO — and the U.S. and Turkey share membership in and cooperate on several other international organizations and strategic partnerships, military, economic, nuclear energy and cultural projects.
Turkey has been on our side putting pressure on Damascus. Pressure that may include “economic sanctions, secret activities to support the opposition and perhaps a haven along the Turkish border and a humanitarian corridor inside Syria”
Turkey has very recently agreed to deploy a forward-based early warning radar system as part of a NATO’s missile defense plan aimed chiefly at detecting and countering ballistic missile threats from Iran
I’m wondering how many enemies Rick Perry thinks we can afford to make over in that area of the world?
Absolutely, utterly fascinating point. Yes, they are asking the questions that they are answering so they can make an informed choice about which one of them can represent themselves.
It’s like that old SNL skit: “and I deserve it because I’m smart enough, and good enough, and gosh darn it, people like me!”
The fish need to get out of the fishbowl …
“I’m kind of at a loss to figure out how people would want him to answer.”
Something along the lines of “what the hell kind of question is that?” would have been sufficient.
I’ve watched a few of these debates (though not the one in question) and have noticed that the candidates are adept at either not answering the questions they don’t want to answer (by launching into talking points), giving a short, useless answer (and spewing talking points for the rest of their allotted time), and in some cases scolding the moderator for asking what they thought was a dumb question.
This was clearly a dumb question. Yet a smart politician (a creature absent from the GOP dais as of late) could have formed an answer that fed a little red meat to the base while dismissing the question at the same time. Something like:
“Well Brett I’m troubled about the developments in Turkey. They’ve always been an ally of ours, but their government needs to respect human rights, respect the right of Israel to exist, and continue to help us in the War on Terror if they want to keep on our good side. More importantly, I think we need to (fill in the rest of the 60 seconds with meaningless talking points)”
Now there…was that so hard?
Excellent answer, cjjack!
OMG- cjjack- that answer sounded just like George W. Bush during one of his press conferences! I guess he WAS smarter than Perry!
“Is that true?” should have been Romney’s reply. It’s more elegant than “Are you trying to put me on the spot about foreign policy or ask what I think about Islam?”
(That’s much healthier than what any PC nonsense about any negative remarks about Turkey or Muslims, or what many may feel about Fox.)
So much more could be said, but never mind.