Vincent Ferrer/The Mirror
If you think you can change the world, remembering how you plan to do it is probably a good idea.
If not, there’s always the option of brushing off your amnesia with an “oops.”
Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry chose this method of diversion during last Wednesday’s GOP debate, uttering the informality after he attempted to list the three agencies of government he intends to cut if elected. Perry seemed to forget the third agency, despite the fact that he referenced his notes and attempted multiple times to complete his list.
This instance brings to mind an important topic of argument concerning voting, which is the voter’s dependence on scrutiny toward the personal characteristics of a candidate as opposed to only a critical analysis of the person’s political platforms.
This argument has been highly prevalent in the political sphere as of late and has included many aspects of private life. And those affected aren’t just presidential candidates.
Do Mitt Romney’s Mormon beliefs tell us anything about his ability as a leader? Do Herman Cain’s tobacco friendly advertising methods take away from his capacity as a politician? Should Anthony Weiner’s sex life have been a factor in considering his trustworthiness as an elected official?
In relation to Perry, the question is simple: can we trust a guy to run our country who can’t even remember how he plans on doing so? The arguments are varied.
Anyone who has taken Argument and Advocacy or has done any form of public speaking knows that when you trip up in front of a crowd, time seems to move much faster than your brain’s ability to get back on track. And once this happens, anything to relieve the awkward tension seems appropriate. To some, this includes saying “oops.”
Perry seemed to think his mistake was excusable. In a response to the incident, he voiced the idea that voters should be concerned with the ideas of politicians rather than their mannerisms.
Although eloquence may not be one his strengths, Perry summed the idea pretty well when he said, “We need more substance than style.” So can we forgive him for this error?
Granted, everyone makes mistakes from time to time, especially when burdened by the pressures of public speaking. However, context is key. Perry’s “oops” might have been an acceptable response to accidentally letting out a curse word or even forgetting the specific details of a foreign political issue.
But the specific ways in which he plans to fix a country in economic turmoil? When Perry said we needed “more substance than style,” he seemed to overlook the fact that his style was ridiculed only because he forgot his substance.
As an isolated incident, this instance might have not garnered the amount of attention it did; however, Perry has become known for his debate mishaps. This includes his recent eccentric recitation of his high school motto to a New Hampshire audience, creating speculation that he may have been drunk.
So should we separate Rick Perry’s personal quirks from his ability to lead? The separation of personal from political ideals is important in deciding who to vote for, but only insofar as these ideals are separated prior to scrutiny.
For example, being religious is perfectly acceptable in itself; offering a “prayer day” as the solution to a statewide drought is not. Imbibing as a form of relaxation is no grounds for negative judgement; appearing to be intoxicated at a campaign speech is. And forgetfulness is a forgivable fault, but not when it is centered in a politician’s platform.
So Rick Perry, hopefully we can follow your lead and forget that you were ever a serious candidate for president. On the off chance you actually do get voted in, I’m sure it won’t be long before you are joined by many in saying “oops”.
Leave a Reply