The author states that there's a catastrophe in Texas. Texas happens to be on the the few bright spots in the nation right now. No matter how hard the Anti-Perry people and Obama trash talk Texas' economy, the people will not believe it.
The author says Perry was Algore's campaign manager. That's an outright lie. That's like saying a paper pusher at the CIA is the same as an undercover agent. Now, did Perry support Gore a quarter of a century ago? Yes. Did he work for his campaign? Yes. Was he Gore's 1988 campaign manager? No.
But, let's dig deeper into Texas history, since the anti-Perry folks on here keep lumping in Algore as if this happened last year. The author wants to talk about lies by omission. Said author is just as guilty of his accusation by not stating that Texas hardcore democrat up until the late 80s. It was not out of the ordinary for there not to be an election after the primaries, b/c the republicans wouldn't run anybody. Obama likes to say that Texas has been historically Republican, but a quick bit of research for those non-Texans will notice that there have only been SIX republican governors of Texas out of the 47 governors. Bush and Perry make up 2 of them. Prior to Bush was Gov. Clements, and he was the 1st Republican governor since the 1870s. It wasn't until 2002 that the republicans controlled the Texas House. It has been since reconstruction the last time they held that power. If you wanted to get elected, you ran as a democrat.
Now, the article claims that if Texas wants to build roads, they will just eminent domain the landowner and, voila, the landowner loses land. Now, the author of this article is either ignorant of the road building process, or the author is lying. The governor doesn't just wave a wand, thus owning the land. That is not how the road building process works. The city/state/federal government will go to the landowners and try to work out a right of way agreement. This can include the landowner keeping his mineral rights, but allowing the city/state/federal gov't to access the surface. The landowner, if he agrees to the contract, will get paid for this land. If the landowner refuses, the state or federal government (in this case) would then proceed to bring suit against the landowner. The judge would then decide whether or not the government should have access for the land in exchange for paying the landowner the fair market value of the property.
An example of this is the interstate process. I have recently worked the title for property backing up to the then proposed I-30 in Fort Worth. Some landowners granted the ROW and reserved minerals. Some granted it outright. Some refused and were taken to court by the Federal Government. In one particular case the federal government was granted full right and title to the strip of land. They paid the property owner the fair market value, then deeded the property to the State of Texas. Not one time did the governor of Texas at that point wave a wand and confiscate the land. He doesn't have that power.
Now, if one has issues with building roads, then I can't do much for you, but that's how the property is obtained, and it's usually by the landowner negotiating for more money, thus negating the need for a civil suit.
Now, regarding the transportation system in Texas. For those who are against building new roads, what is the solution to the growing population of Texas? Those who drive in Houston/DFW/Austin know that there's a traffic jam problem. Those who are against Perry complain b/c a private company was going to take the brunt of the costs to build these toll roads. The alternative is to raise your taxes. But, Perry wanted wanted this plan to allow the private companies to fund it, then get reimbursed on the tolls.
Those also against the idea of building new roads in Texas claim that this will allow trucks from Mexico to drive in Texas. Here's a news flash. Mexican trucks already drive in Texas and the United States, just as trucks from Canada drive here.
As a side note, the author of this article takes shots at Mark Davis for putting some perspective into things. Was that necessary? Mark works out of Arlington, Texas on the great WBAP. Those who listen to him before Rush know that he was very fair in the 2010 primary process. He had Debra Medina and KBH on very often and challenged them, along with Perry. But, if one says one single thing positive about Perry, that makes one a "Perry Apologist" in the highest degree.
Mark just happens to be of the opinion that if the republicans of Texas didn't care about these issues, the national republicans won't, either. Per the 3 re-elections as governor, the people don't care that Perry supported Gore a quarter of a century ago. They don't care that he put together a plan to build roads in Texas. They don't care that he issued an executive order that said you didn't have to take the HPV vaccine if you didn't want to. Yes, your eyes didn't do you wrongly. Nobody forced anybody to do anything. If you didn't want to take the shot, you didn't have to take the shot.
Now, I will close for now since this post is getting quite long. I will be accused of cherry picking issues. No, I just don't feel like typing anymore. I choose not to go after all of the spaghetti that's thrown up against the wall.
You’re wasting your time responding to the anti-Perry trolls. They have their talking points and they’re sticking with them.
Well done!!!
AND...I agree with several of you. It’s not worth going after so much pure negative gook being thrown up on the wall.
"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."
Sounds like you stand, not with the "people", but with the side (Perry & Co.) who were against to the 'peoples' wishes!