Sept 23rd, 2011
There isn't really an issue in foreign policy that should currently concern us more than the potential insecurity of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. Except, of course, the prospect that a President Perry would have to deal with the situation. Gov. Perry has been legitimately savaged for his response to a question on that topic during last night's debate.
Kevin Drum
writes that the answer was little more than a
"Palinesque bit of word salad." I think this is unfair to
Palin. So obtuse was his response that it should end his candidacy. First of all, Perry is
wrong on the facts of our strategic arms agreements with India. Second of all, what the hell good does a
"relationship" with India do in the event that the Taliban actually gains control of one or more warheads? Lastly, trying to score points with his party's old school hawks by bringing up arms sales to Taiwan simply made no damn sense.
One of Romney's advisors is quoted by the
Weekly Standard as having described the statements as
"completely unintelligible." That didn't stop Perry's biggest backer, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback, from piling on in his defense
"You gotta have a relationship to know what’s going on. I’ve worked with the Pakistanis, and particularly in Pakistan you need a relationship, because the country’s a pretty unstable place, and it’s run by the army. You gotta know the guy that’s the head of the place."
Mkay. Except the "relationship" Perry discussed was with
India.
Team Perry, mired in stunning yokelism, has no business running an American state much less the Armed Forces.
