Some of You Tea Party Folk Think Rick Perry’s the Answer?

If you’re a Tea Party member, or you have significant sympathies with them, I’d caution you against climbing aboard Rick Perry’s TransTexasCatastrophe. The Media is doing everything possible to paint this guy as a bronc-busting, cattle-roping, Texan, but in truth, there are more than a few things you ought to know about him. He’s no friend to individual rights, except in an election season, and he’s not really the trend-setter he’d have you believe. His record on jobs isn’t actually so swift as he’d have you believe, and he’s got less in common with the average Texan than he does with the Wall Street types with whom he prefers to consort. He’s no friend of Main Street, and he’s certainly no friend to real entrepreneurs, and for all his posturing as one of us, he isn’t, and it’s been quite plain. Those of you from outside Texas can be forgiven for mistaking Perry for a conservative. It’s assumed because he’s a Republican, and he’s from Texas, he must be. Let me now explain a bit of why this isn’t the case.

Friday I heard the increasingly estimable Mark Davis claim that you shouldn’t mind that Perry converted from the Democrat Party to the Republican Party because, as he points out, Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat too. Of course, this is a lie by omission, because what Davis doesn’t mention is that it was a long stretch of years between Reagan’s conversion and his arrival in California electoral politics. This isn’t the case with Rick Perry. He was Al Gore’s Texas Campaign Manager in 1988, and following the loss, immediately reversed course and ran as a Republican. I don’t know about you, but despite Davis’ rather disingenuous interpretation of Reagan’s conversion, painting it as just alike, I’m inclined to believe he left some details out intentionally.

Rick Perry has been a regular guest on Davis’ show on WBAP in the D/FW area for years, and to consider Davis anything like an objective or unbiased voice in this stretches all credulity. Frankly, I hope Limbaugh finds somebody else to be a regular fill in, because Davis is clearly in the tank for Perry, and it runs against Limbaugh’s general premise that he will take no position in a Republican primary, except in general terms on behalf of conservatism.

You may have heard some of Perry’s more recent statements about conditions along the Texas border with Mexico, and you might be inclined to believe Mr. Perry thinks more should be done. He even tried to repair his credibility on the issue by being broadcast on a live feed from a base of operations near the border for an interview on Greta Van Susteren’s show. If you believe that stage-managed bit of theater, I’m inclined to let you know right now that he’s relatively no more conservative in real terms than George Bush, which is to say on the matter of his statist, globalist reflexes, he’s no conservative at all. I’d hate it if anybody else broke the news to you, because I believe bad news is best delivered by a friend. Check out the following video for where Rick Perry really stands on issues of the border:

I realize there’s a tendency to overstate things in the name of supporting one’s position, but it’s really no exaggeration to suggest that Perry isn’t really very close in his thinking to Tea Party Members, not when measured against what he’s been saying since October 2010, but in what he has said all along throughout his career. He’s taken money and support from La Raza, ACORN, and other groups that advocate spending tax-payer dollars for dubious programs and projects.

He’s also a crony-capitalist. If you’re like me, that’s simply something you can’t abide. I love the free market, but Governor Perry’s revolving door between his staff and corporate boardrooms is a well-established phenomenon, and frankly, if you buy into his nonsense, he’s going to wind up exploiting your good intentions too. Companies like Merck and Cintra are more his style, and his staff has reflected this over the years of his gubernatorial reign.

You’ve undoubtedly heard about the Gardasil flap, and likely been willing to dismiss it as a fluke. That would be a serious and potentially tragic mistake. The most ridiculously egregious thing he may have done in his tenure as Governor of Texas was the proposed TransTexas Corridor. You may have heard of it, but may not have any details, so let me expound on that for a moment or two. This was the project that first enlightened me to Perry’s big government answers to all things. The upshot is this: It was to be a vast network of toll roads, but more, it would have included some form of light and heavy rail, pipelines, and all manner of things. On the surface, this might sound attractive, but as with any such project, the devil lies in the details.

The plan included 4400 linear miles of a toll road network, running parallel in many cases to existing Highways and Interstates already in existence. The corridor’s right of way was to be a full 1/4 mile wide. Simple math tells you that even ignoring junctions and interchanges, this would have consumed 1100 square miles of Texas’ territory. You might argue that while it’s a lot of land, Texas is a big state. That’s all well and good if the state already owns the land, but since it doesn’t, it was going to acquire it by use of eminent domain. Again, you might argue that building roads is one function for which eminent domain ought to apply, but once you look at the rules to be applied to this project, you might well conclude otherwise. Rather than basing their offers to property owners on free market value, they instead intended to limit it to “fair market value” as determined by a panel of cronies they would gin up for the chore.

This project actually proposed bisecting county and farm roads, and even property, dead-ending what are fairly important thoroughfares for the communities they serve. More, it would have bisected school districts and even towns along its path. Again, you might think that impossible until you understand that this was to be a closed system with few exits or on-ramps, only permitting access at major Highway and Interstate junctions. This threatened to destroy many rural communities, and they rose up against it. Once the details became clear to the public, it was quickly sent back for re-work, and eventually dumped.

Here were the things they didn’t advertise, but you need to know. It was supposed to be operate by a concessionaire, Cintra, for a period of 50 years. It was going to employ tolls of roughly $0.26 per mile. A geographical understanding of the scale of Texas immediately prompts the question: “Who on Earth would voluntarily pay to enter a closed-system roadway at that cost over the huge distances in Texas, when a free parallel alternative is just a few miles away in the form of an Interstate, or Highway?” Good question, and the answer is: Almost nobody. So how did they intend to make this work? In 2004,TxDOT applied to the USDOT for a waiver so that they could charge a toll on the existing I-35. The first leg of the proposed TTC system was called TTC-35, the leg that would run from Laredo to an undetermined point on the Oklahoma border. In other words, it was a corridor to nowhere, but in order to get you to use it, they were going to toll the free Interstate and let it fall into disrepair.

Opponents at the time argued that the existing I-35 corridor could be widened, and this was met with a dismissive rejection by Perry’s Transportation Commission. They said it couldn’t be done in a cost-efficient way. Your confusion at this statement matches that of the average Texan who realizes that this couldn’t possibly be true. How hard is it to add a few lanes here and there? Yes, you’ll have some eminent domain issues, but nothing on the scale of what the TTC proposed.

They also promised it would promote economic development, but what they kept concealed for a while, until they no longer could do so under the law, was that because it was a closed system, Cintra, the corporation from Spain that would build and operate it, would also have exclusive rights to all concessions along its length. More, due to the limitations on exits and on-ramps, it could never be shown how this colossal highway system would provide any sort of economic boon to anybody, because you wouldn’t be able to access most smaller towns from along its length. I’m sure you’ll agree with me that the fact that one of Perry’s top staffers was a former Cintra VP, and the fact that one of his own staffers had gone on to work for Cintra had absolutely nothing to do with Perry’s TTC plans. Right?

Ladies and gentlemen, if you’ve fallen prey to the hype about Perry, you may be forgiven, particularly if you’re not from Texas. You’re not aware, as so many here, that Perry isn’t the fellow he’s now being portrayed to be. He’s not a friend to the Tea Party, despite his seeming 2010 conversion, because much like his conversion in 1989, this conversion also seems to be one of convenience. I will assure you, this is most definitely the case.

Perry likes to put on an act about his conservative credentials, and his sympathies with the Tea Party, but if the truth is told, he’s no more one of us than the man in the Moon. You might want to let your fellow conservatives and Tea Party patriots know it too: We’re being hustled again.

Oh, but wait, I see you’re not opposed to “vetting”, just so long as the “vetting” is all “positive”. I get it now.

Absolutely, yes, the vetting of conservatives by other conservatives is to be positive.

Answer me this ... would you rather have Perry as a senator in Congress or would you rather have Romney?

Conservatives are insane to destroy another conservative who is not their first choice. Lord knows that Perry is FAR more conservative than Scott Brown, but you were ok with Brown in order to "throw egg" on Kennedy in Massachusetts.

And interestingly you said this a few months ago:

I am supporting Palin if she runs. That being said, my advice to everyone: Don’t get worked up on ‘who’ supports ‘whom’ in the Republican Pres primaries. Support whomever you feel is the most honest and sincere in carrying out the conservative agenda once elected to office. In the end, we will need to support whomever gets the nomination if you are really worked up about the POS we have in office now.

Guess what. If Perry makes it through to the nomination. he is going to get labeled like that in a non-stop manner. You better start coming up with better argument, because I seriously doubt that America is ready for another Texas governor.

And no, nobody is going to buy into that GWB isn't really a Texan act.

Gov-bean-counter wrote this about Scott Brown, liberal Rino from Massachusetts:

Has Steele been queried about the National Party’s failure to support this candidate?

It's OK to worry about a liberal Rino, but who cares if we destroy a pro-life, pro-God, pro-gun, pro-fiscal conservative when we're arguing in favor of our favorite conservative over another conservative.

I'm appalled at the ignorance of conservatives when it comes to doing research for their enemies. If Palin becomes president, do we think that she'll hate the idea of a Rick Perry as governor of Texas or as a future senator from Texas. Heck no, she won't hate it. She'll pray for it to happen, and then she'll cuss under her breath at all those near-sighted conservatives who intentionally injured conservative candidates.

And using humor in supporting Scott Brown after his naked picture in Cosmo, you said:

Lord I hope the Brown campaign doesn't have a similar picture of Croakley. I don't think I could stand it...

Honestly, gbc, I don't think I can take more conservatives destroying conservatives thinking they're supporting their favorite conservative, but they don't attack obvious rino's, but instead they support them.

You do not shoot people on your own side, but give covering fire to those against you.

It's how one wins wars.

-"Conservatives are insane to destroy another conservative who is not their first choice."

Ok, let's keep quiet on Perry. Let's not say anything that might upset ANYONE, lest they think that we might be for the Socialist.

You guys really take the cake. Always trying to deflect from defending Perry's record by resorting to your bogus and phony argument .... 'ok, you want Perry or the Devil' - GIVE ME FREAKING BREAK! The guy's announced only 15 days ago, said he had no clue he even wanted to be President 60 days ago, and we're all supposed BOW DOWN STFU and SING 'HOSANNAH IN THE HIGHEST' the minute he announced?

Here, here's a couple of more "positive" vettings you can try on for size. It's from a couple of radical liberal marxist outlets: 'The Washington Examiner' and "Townhall.com" (tell me how that fits the template of the conservative message from the 2010 elections:

- The cowboy corporatist rides to the rescue

- Rick Perry's NAFTA Superhighway Problem

Here’s the clue, Titan. You find it ok to speak positively of OBVIOUS Rino Scot Brown winning in Massachusetts, but you attack a conservative who is pro-life, pro-gun, pro-God, and pro-fiscal sanity.

Vetting a record for George Bush, you would have come up with the same stuff.

I’m betting you voted for GW. Did you?

You miss the point, gbc. It isn’t about NOT VETTING Perry. It’s about recognizing the GOOD that is in any candidate who claims to be conservative.

He is pro-life, pro-gun, pro-God, pro-fiscal sanity, etc.

There is a LOT of good there.

Say that you don’t like the Guardasil decision, that you don’t like the trans-texas highway, that you didn’t like some of his fiscal decisions.

But, you follow it up with what was correctly done, and the man did an awful lot that was right.

Same with Palin, BAchmann, Santorum, Cain, Gingrich.

x, First of all, quit bustin on ‘gov’. You can’t diss on him based on him supporting the NON-RAT in any election. I don’t care if it was Scott Brown in drag against those commies in MA.

Here’s the deal - In the general I’ve voted for Reagan, Bush, Dole, Bush, and McCain - and as long as there is a Democrat Party on the other side of the ballot, it’s highly unlikely that this trend will change.

What does that prove in terms of vetting in the primaries?

In 2008 primaries I campaigned against McCain (and for no one in particular), and called him every name in the book. Probably like a few others around here.

It’s 12 light years before AUGUST 2012, we’re going to be fighting for who is going to be the BIG ENCHILADA for our side, and you’d better get used to it because it’s going to be a WAR in the primaries. Just like the RATs had their war in 2008 (and that didn’t seem to keep them from winning in NOV).

There was a vicious war in 1980 primaries. The guy that called Reagan’s economic plan “Voodoo Economics” wound up being chosen by Reagan to be his VP (and ‘Eastern Establishment’ dude), and that didn’t seem to keep Republicans from winning in NOV.

So, what’s the deal? Lighten up. Take the hits, or respond with something back that will make one understand better on how the issue of Perry’s action served to advance the conservative cause.

"Just curious, who do you support? You obviously hate Perry. Who is your candidate?"

What gave you the idea that I 'hate' Perry? Because I am posting quotes and actions that might run counter to the conservative philosophy that should be reflected in the person that is to be elected to lead us in the fight?

I have not chosen a "candidate" yet, because at this point in time, there is no one in the current announced "candidate" field that I SUFFICIENTLY trust based on their records as I have learned of them (relative to what I laid out).

The candidate I chose will have a demonstrated record of actually having accomplished what they campaigned on - irregardless of 'party loyalties'. Doing what is BEST for the people, and working WITH either party to accomplish what is deemed the best course of action for the citizens.

If you know of anyone that fits that bill, let me know.

I’m bustin on both of you. The big deal is what’s good for conservatism. What’s good for conservatism is that we don’t do opposition research on behalf of liberals, and we don’t do voting sector polarization on behalf of liberals. We let them do that on their own.

You gonna sit there and tell me that Sharon Angle wasn’t injured by her own side during the primary and during the election in Nevada?

There is a way to oppose one of our people that doesn’t increase their burden in the current election or one for a different office in the future.

Personally, I’d love to see a Senator Bachmann from Wisc. some day.

>> Guess what. If Perry makes it through to the nomination. he is going to get labeled like that in a non-stop manner.

Oh, of course. And I’m guessing we’ll find you right here, helping Obama’s minions push that falsehood.

So tell me... how does it feel being on the Obama team? Because, by doing your damndest to peddle the “Perry=Bush=CowboyChimp” meme, that’s exactly the team you’re playing for.

Over the years I have developed a general dislike for the Southern male politician who wears their religion on their sleeve then proceeds to engage in the same ole, same ole back room deals with cronies. Very simply it goes to character. I resent the politician who has no regard for the appearance of impropriety then hides behind a Bible, their military service or an outstanding organization like the Boy Scouts of America. I have little time for their supporters who express righteous indignation that I would begin to question the motives of such a fine individual.

I will not rehash the specifics of this race. This is just to let you know where I am coming from on this issue.

Sir, I am a far cry from Nichole Wallace or Steve Schmidt. I have no power to influence anything. I am just one person with an opinion. Thankfully we live in a country where I am still free to express that opinion. As long as I am able I will continue to express that opinion.

BTW, thank you for your service. While deployed to Iraq as a civilian there was one particular chaplain who helped me keep things together during a difficult time.

xin, Ok I’ll ‘lighten up’. I see your point in the ‘friendly fire’ perspective, and if you were truly a “chaplin’, well, I can understand where you’re coming from.

Look, it’s gonna get nasty, but here’s something that I would like for you to consider. Any “negatively” construed presentations (at least from me) that is directed against Perry (or any other Republican), will come from the “RIGHT” side of the equation (meaning what he ‘said’ or ‘did’ was not in-line with what I believe to be conservative principles). If I have called him a “phony” conservative, it’s because his demonstrated actions or words, to me and others, demonstrate that.

In the “general”, the Socialists (”Liberals” just don’t exist in the RAT party anymore, only on our side) will targe Perry (or whomever) from the LEFT side, meaning he won’t be SOCIALIST enough. Our bullets now will have NO EFFECT in the general. Trust me. History has proven that.

Unless, though, we get into PERSONAL (non-political) conduct, then all bets are off, and that would be ‘radioactive’ material, lethal in any battle field.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.