~~ In Americapeople are not subject to the Government, the Government is subject to the people ~~

 (Gov. Rick Perry, on his presidential announcement speech in S.C. August 13, 2011)

The 2^nd Presidential Debate in Ames, Iowa for the Republican preliminaries is over. Winners, losers, and the first quitter are determined.

Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann won the Iowa Straw Poll slightly ahead of Ron Paul and then former Governor Tim Pawlenty who has now thrown in the towel, but one man managed to shuffle the entire debate without even being there – Governor Rick Perry (TX – R).

The Debate

Rick Perry made the smartest move possible by having his staff announce the “high possibility” of him running on Thursday, followed by watching and sitting out the debate, and then Rick Perry making the official announcement of his candidacy for president on Saturday in South Carolina.

With Chris Wallace on stage in Iowa as the igniter, the “advocate diabolic (the devil’s advocate)” the debate actually became interesting. Every good debate needs one like this.

People have different opinions on this debate, but I have to admit that I liked this one a lot better than the first debate in New Hampshire and though many of my friends (or better almost all of them) disagree with me, I liked it better because of Chris Wallace.

But let’s be honest here: What are the preliminaries and what are they good for?

As a fan of Formula 1 car racing I see the preliminaries as the qualifying, the “everybody against everybody selection” for the actual race.

And as a former soldier of the Armed Forces I know for a fact that you can’t train and prepare man/woman for the worst by playing nice.

The first debate in New Hampshire was more like a choir performance where all of the candidates showed their uttermost politeness, all had the same message and basically nothing really new was said.

For me as voter it was hard to determine which candidate would be best equipped to replace Barrack Obama in the White House.

“Minnesota Nice” is beautiful and “Texas Hospitality” is a marvelous thing, but we are preparing for the most brutal and below the
belt face off going into the 2012 election. Obama will be fighting desperately for re-election and believe me he will not play fair or nice.

Jon Stewart, an aggressive Obama supporter and radical left wing talk show host of the “Daily show” for example already started with sexual insults towards the Bachmann’s and since Obama never stepped in condemning this audacity he showed “Silent
approval”.

The election is on and the Chris Wallace “head on head fight calls” was actually nothing but a warm up for what is yet to come.

Pitting Michelle Bachmann against Tim Pawlenty on their records was an excellent move. Democrats will do the same, and worse. And for the first time the usually very confident and competent Michelle Bachmann showed signs of being “off guard” and insecure for a moment.

Well Congresswoman Bachmann better get used to it, it won’t get any easier.

Pitting Tim Pawlenty against Mitt Romney on “Romney care” is of course nothing new and also happened in New Hampshire, but here Wallace proved that he is a professional “Journalist” trained on counter warfare and challenging the contestants;

Newt Gingrich actually showed what is to be expected from a Presidential Hopeful when Chris attacked him on his records Gingrich fired back accusing him of playing “Mickey Mouse games”. Gingrich put Wallace and the media in their place and showed great fighting spirit.

Mitt Romney did the same when he challenged Wallace about the Massachusetts Constitution.

I was amazed and quite disappointed at Ron Paul when Chris Wallace started the next hot topic: Terrorism and foreign wars.

Ron Paul, cornered by his opponents threw the question in the room “who determines a Terrorist” indicating that there is no
such lawful determination.

For your information Congressman Paul: The term “Terrorist” is determined in the ICRC – International Humanitarian Law (Geneva Convention) from 1949.

This document clearly defines an “Enemy Combatant”, “Civilian” and “Terrorist” and based on that international agreement is the “Code of Conduct” also known as “U.S. Military Rules of Engagement”.

The bold moves of Chris Wallace finally caused Byron York to step forward and attack Jon Huntsman on his position of being in favor of Civil Unions.

All of those things actually made the debate interesting and put some spice in it. Very interesting was the question about Rick Perry entering the race and while all candidates played nice only Ron Paul gave a few fiery comments on the issue. But I am
afraid Congressman Paul could say: Be careful what you wish for. I am sure Perry would have given him the right answer on the terrorist question.

As a voter I expect from my candidate two things:

1)    He/She has to represent my beliefs as a fiscal Judeo-Christian conservative

2)    He/She has to be able to defend those principals

But here is the thing.

Giving election speeches in front of a crowd is easy. Politicians are trained and used to do that. As a tea party member, and fiscal conservative I can step in front of 10,000 people anytime and give a speech. I can say things to make the audience cheer or say things to get their blood boiling ready for a fight.

It is like preaching to the choir. There are only likeminded people in the crowd who believe the same things and share the same opinions.

But defending the records and the principles in an open discussion with an opponent is something completely different. Anybody who has ever been in a debate knows that.

In a debate you have to expect attacks and counter attacks, you deal with limited speaking time where you have to a) get your
message out and at the same time b) defend your record and position.

And if you think that is easy – try; I am a well trained rhetorician and I’ve been told that I’m strongly opinionated, bullheaded, stubborn and pretty good at combat rhetoric.

You have to be faster, quicker, better informed, and well prepared and never lose or show any weakness.

And here is where Rick Perry comes into play and why he overshadowed the entire debate. If you have watched Rick Perry during the gubernatorial race he has been attacked a lot of times very hard by his opponents.

But Governor Perry is good in that game. Rick Perry is a highly experienced politician with the aura of a statesman.

He always shows Texas coolness, never shows any weakness, has his records straight, is well informed, and understands the principles of “counterattack without direct attack”.

Making a “counterattack without attacking the opponent” is an Art not many master.

You have to be prepared to take an opponents comment and shove it back down his throat without being vicious or aggressive, simple by using logic and well founded information.

And that makes him a tough discussion partner; one that rules the stage.

Rick Perry does not need foul attacks or dirty games. He is a highly experienced rhetorician, he knows what he is doing and the big plus is he is humble.

The beauty of the American Republic and the U.S. Constitution is that we are all entitled to an opinion. Since Governor Perry announced his candidacy thousands of blogs and comments appeared on the internet.

Some in favor, some calling him a RINO and part of the system, some positive, some negative, and some neutral pointing out both sides.

It is not my place to tell you what to think or who to vote for that is for you to decide. The field of conservative contestants is now there and full and you can choose for yourself which candidate is your favorite one.

I already did for myself.

But one issue nobody can deny, and that was also sensed in the debate in Iowa – Governor Perry is a major factor and force in the preliminaries and all of the candidates knew that. In my opinion that is the main reason Chris Wallace had such an easy time bringing some tension into the debate.

I watched the debate twice and I am convinced because of Governor Perry the tension was there, candidates were forced to show corners and edges and Chris Wallace just picked up on it and used it.

One way or the other I am finally looking forward to the third and final debate on September
22, 2011 in Orlando Florida. This will be the debate that actually cleans the field.

Epilog

This is my 100^th Blog on WordPress, and I would like to take the opportunity to give grace.

First, I want to say thank you to my readers and followers, Facebook friends, and fellow patriots such as Ann-Marie
Murrell, Chet & Natalie Nichols, Suzanne Sharer, Heidi Kutney, Michaela Brandner, Antoniette Walker and many, many others without you I would not be here anymore. You keep me on my toes and make me want to be better with every single blog.

Thank you for your patience, your time and your compassion. You have added many comments and sometimes you have even disagreed with me, but I love, honor, and respect each and every comment.

Thank you to my son Jessy. You are the reason I fight for a better future, the light of my eye and star in my heaven.

Thanks to Annette for constantly cross reading and editing, you have done a marvelous job. I love you.

Thanks to my parents who brought me up well, showed me that a man is entitled to his opinion as long as he puts it on a foundation – This made me strong.

And last but not least – thank you my God almighty in heaven and my savior Jesus Christ for providing me with the rhetorical talent to be outspoken.

Thank you to the brave men and women of the United States Armed Forces, who gave their ultimate sacrifice in order to provide and defend the blanket of freedom, that was thought of by the Founding Fathers, and established as the United States Constitution.

Your ultimate sacrifice allows me to share my opinion no matter if I am right or wrong.

God Bless ya’ll and

GOD BLESS AMERICA

 

 

Sources:

ICRC – International Humanitarian Law (Geneva Convention)