Did I Actually Agree With Good Hair?

I am playing a bit of hooky today and just kind of hanging around. I had opportunity a couple hours back to catch Good Hair giving a speech on television. I was astounded that I actually agree with most of what he was saying this fine morning.

The topic, for the most part, was statehood for the "Palestinians." Now Perry was speaking apparently to a predominantly Jewish audience and anyone who has observed Good Hair throughout the years can point out that pandering is his strong, (perhaps his only strong), suit. It would be easy to write this off as just the latest group he panders to. I am not so sure that he was not being genuine though. He is, after all, running for the highest office in the land and not just trying to keep his figurehead job as the Governor of Texas. One would think that simple pandering would not be recommended when he is in such a position. Of course Rick is Rick and he may have just been doing what he does best.

There were very few points that Good Hair made on the "Palestinian" issue that I disagree with. Perhaps the major one is that the door is left open for some sort of recognized state of "Palestine." If I were him I would just let folk know that the very idea of statehood for the unfortunates of the region is, (as they say), a non starter. After all I just don't think that Good Hair will be getting very many Mohammedan votes anyway.

Perry also  rightfully pointed out that Israel is an allied nation and the only true democracy in the region. He pointed out the strategic importance to the United States that is Israel. He also pointed out the folly of the current administration in supporting some elements of the so called "Arab Spring." He was right. It does seem that the Obama administration has a rather naive outlook on the realities of the world. This naivety, by the way, is often a typically American trait in the realm of foreign policy. It can not be argued that leadership of this country often makes mistakes in this arena. I have thought it because we, collectively as a people, tend to seek out the good in others and act accordingly. I digress. Another topic for another time perhaps.

Now as one who knows who and what this Good Hair is, I find it rather interesting that I agree wholeheartedly with his statements today. I have hope, since he may well be the next POTUS, that he was genuine. I also wonder if he thought all of this up by himself. He did after all have a meeting with "Hair" Trump last week. A meeting of the hairs if you will.

 Say what you will about Trump but I tend to think the man "gets it."

Dr. Paul and Good Hair

In the Lone Star State we certainly have our fair share of loons, bozos, liars, and dumbasses among the political class. Hell, Dumbass Sheila Jackson Lee is enough for any state by herself. We also have Good Hair, who is perhaps the biggest bullshitter to sit on the throne in quite a while. A chameleon in cowboy boots this one. I would not put it past him to bullshit his way onto the national stage; as in the presidential nominee type setting. Don't think so but I bet it won't be from lack of trying.

Now that there is some serious discussion about Good Hair making a run for the highest office it seems that he is trying to pander to the "conservatives" in the country by becoming rather bold in a conservative "leadership" role. He backs, as I do, a "sanctuary city bill" which would hold municipalities somewhat accountable for their role in harboring illegal aliens. He has recently made noise about putting a stop to the TSA gropers; threatening them with prosecution and such. I'm not really convinced that this is a real problem or more of a bandwagon issue. I don't fly though so I have no experience with the problem. Don't like airplanes and don't like officious, badge heavy incompetents. Experienced that enough in the taxi business. But I digress.
For those of us in Texas, we know (or should know) who this Good Hair really is. He is soft on the illegal immigration issue. For an anti-Washington type; he sure is quick to point out that safeguarding the border is a "federal" responsibility. True enough, but when the fedgov does not really defend the border, then it falls to the state to take up the slack. Costly? Sure. Imperative? You bet. This Good Hair is frankly a coward on the issue.
On the same issue; Good Hair is a proponent of NAFTA and the "NAFTA Highway." Just that alone shows that he ain't "got his mind right" on what is best for Texans (or America). Just the imminent domain issue alone shows that he is not the "real deal." Why further entwine our economy with a third world, war riddled (sort of) cat box? Would we do so if Afghanistan was next door? That would be almost, (but admittedly not quite), the same thing.
Nope this Good Hair is certainly no answer to any problem that ills this great nation. Except perhaps male pattern baldness. There must be some secret behind that pretty mop he sports.

Now we come to Dr. Paul. He reps the district in which I live, and nobody will be able to ever unseat him. The job is his until he has had enough. I like Dr. Paul. He is no bullshitter for sure. He says what he means and means what he says. Unfortunately some of the things he espouses are in the realm of fantasy. Many of the beliefs that Ron Paul has are not grounded in reality. They just would not work in our diverse and complicated nation. Sure, he has some great ideas and a few may be just the ticket, but overall I am afraid that Paul's ideas would lead to chaos and weakness

One thing though about Ron Paul; he is no wishy washy pansy. He scares the Republican establishment, (and a whole lot of others), and that has to be a good thing. They sure try to destroy his credibility at every opportunity and of course that means they fear him and more importantly; his ideas.