Posted on 08/16/2011 9:42:18 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
Not Sarah but for Mitt or MB.
Lie!
Are you auditioning for a MSNBC job?
My patience is thin on this. The time to damage Myth is now. Romney walked through that last debate like he was the only guy up there. As we already see, Perry doesn't mind slamming Mittens and Obummer while pushing the Conservative line. How far are you comfortable letting Romney continue raising money and becoming a Juggernaut before he is stopped? The end of my comfort level has been found as of the debate. Romney must go and fast.
Amen to that! I support Rick Perry and Sarah Palin. Sarah supports Rick. Rick supports Sarah. Yet some here seem to think we must pick only one and attack the other with both barrels. It shouldn't be that way this early in the primary season, especially with Sarah still undeclared.
Discussion of the issues is productive, but vicious infighting among FReepers is not.
Al Gore was a liberal, with an ACU rating varying from 6 to 9, you cannot convince us that Al Gore was the liberal Democrat to replace President Reagan just as we were on the verge of winning the Cold War.
In 1980 Reagan won Texas with 55%, in 1984 Reagan won 64% of the Texas vote, in 1988 Bush won 56% of the state.
Perry switched parties when he saw the writing on the wall.
Wardaddy, I also recall getting into a dustup 12 years ago with Howlin, Sinkspur, and Pissant and their supporting returning Elian Gonzalez back to Castro’s gulag. They disparaged the Cuban-Americans in Miami (the very patriotic and rabidly anti-Communists and anti-Castro exiles) and lumped them along with other ‘hispanics’ who don’t appreciate America.
Thanks. My pet peeve is misinformation. I believe a lot of FReepers have misinformation about Perry. Certainly some just plain don’t like him. So be it. They’re not the intended audience. Those who want both sides of the story to better make an informed decision are.
I’m happy Perry is in the race, but we can’t try to pretend he is some truly born “right winger”.
Perry is a good establishment guy, superior to almost all of the Doles and Romneys and Fords and at least HW Bush.
On this forum we can’t just totally gloss over how moderate/liberal, even lazy and convenient many of his instincts are.
BuckeyeTexan: “It wasnt a relatively small number of cases where folks couldnt afford it.”
That’s your perception. There are plenty of studies which show the “poor” generally have all the comforts of modern society, like TVs, cell phones, cars, etc.
Whether it was a small number or not is really irrelevant when one considers the approach taken. Governor Perry professes to be a Christian. Certainly he understands the concept of charity.
How is Perry’s approach fundamentally different from Bush’s $30 billion AIDS campaign in Africa? Either one of them could have created private charitable foundations, donated their own money, and used their popularity to campaign for (voluntary) donations. Both of them probably have plenty of friends with deep pockets, right?
Remind me again of which party sees government as the solution to every problem?
LucyT: “This guy is dangerous, and we’ve been warned.”
Dangerous? I’m more concerned he’s just another establishment Republican, someone who doesn’t have the conviction or ideology to do what’s necessary. If he’s nominated, I sure hope I’m wrong, but I get the same feeling with Perry that I got from Bush.
That's exactly how three near-communist colleagues of mine feel about Perry.
They're scared to death of him because he reminds them of Bush.
I totally agree in digging in on this guy to see what he is about. I am interested in that. My main instinct on questioning some of these Perry post is because a lot of the arguments against him are the same coming from the Left for months prior to his announcement. Others are just 100% total slams with no thought involved.
I refuse to let us get to a point were we totally trashed our best hope for the ultimate goal. Destroying Romney and getting Obummer the hell out of here. BuckeyeTexan has added some context to a few of these soft spots in Perry's record, here on this thread, that make more sense then the knee jerk "Perry is a Globalist run by the Bilderberg Group".
mrkd
Having lived in Coral Gables..my two oldest born at Mercy...., Rio, Bogota, Barranquilla and Caracas..elsewhere in el mundo latino...I know the difference tween some latinos and others and generalized group behavior..I absolutely adore high bred elegant Colombian women...God's handiwork was so adept in that gene pool..
The Gonzales thing here was almost Schiavo like in it's intensity wasn't it?
I always remember Travis McGee's pic I think he posted all the time from that with the poor kid and the storm troopers...btw...it's good to know some here have an historical perspective
On Cubans I was friends with some serious ones...Brigades 2506...some Carbonells and Prunas..and so forth..serious lovers of America..I met Eduardo Betancourt at one of these...and they got him...executed in Havana after sneaking back in for counter revolutionary activities..1993
I did not see your reply earlier. You definitely get it. It is a pleasure to make your acquaintance!
I made no attempt to convince anyone that Al Gore should’ve replaced Reagan. Nor would I.
Perry supported Gore in the primaries. Gore was quickly defeated by Dukakis for the nomination. Perry did not then go all-in for Dukakis. In fact, shortly thereafter, he became a Republican.
Of course Gore had a low ACU rating in 1988. It’s a conservative rating organization. And by the way, that 1988 rating is based on Gore’s votes for the bills that were voted upon only that legislative year. It is not reflective of Gore’s overall conservative positions of pro-life, pro-gun, pro-defense, and pro-tobacco in 1988.
I’m not interested in digging into the guy as though he is a Romney or Pawlenty, or a Christie.
What catches me though is some of the obvious nonsense, like when Reagan comes under attack, and Al Gore starts getting glorified, all in the effort to rewrite a time that meant very much to me, the Reagan Revolution.
Perry’s true self is not that of a genetically born conservative, but that of a natural born Texas politician who is pure politician, he is no game changing right winger with a true conservative agenda hidden inside him.
In secret negotiations, Perry the politician will always be the number one thing on his mind.
patriot08: “We need somebody who can WIN this thing. That means somebody with cross-over appeal, which our Palen, Bachmann and Cain (no matter how much we love them) simply do not have.”
The ol’ electability argument. We should just take your word for it that “Palen” can’t win, eh?
Please explain why Hillary Clinton isn’t president. Very, very few people thought Obama was electable. What about McCain? How in the world did someone so clearly unelectable become the nominee? Wasn’t Guiliani the clear favorite?
The “electability” argument is without a doubt one of the lamest ways to try and convince people to support a candidate. What are you, some sort of fortune teller?
You want to defend the man that wanted to replace President Reagan with a President Al Gore.
Al Gore had a worse ACU rating in 1987 than 1988, his numbers were 9 in 1986, 6 in 1987, and 9 in 1988.
Quit trying to push that leftist Al Gore here.
Chunga: “That’s exactly how three near-communist colleagues of mine feel about Perry.”
So, because I have my own doubts about Perry’s conservative convictions I’m a near communist? Laughable.
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.