Posted on 10/11/2011 2:45:11 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
...LYNN SHERR: Do you feel as if the other candidates have been ganging up on in the debates?
RICK PERRY:“When you come into the fray and you’re leading in the polls, you’re going to get attacked by everyone. I get it. I’m a big boy, and I know how to play that game. “
Your critics say you’re not electable...
“Well, I disregard that. Americans are looking for somebody to stand up and tell them the truth, and I have a record to back it up. Ultimately, if I can explain my heart, my jobs record, and my philosophy to Americans, I’m pretty confident that I’ll win.”
You’re a very successful fund-raiser....The word that’s been applied to you is “cronyism.”...
“That’s the same old, tired criticism which comes when people don’t want to talk about the real issues, like how do we create jobs......"Decisions in Texas are generally legislative, with the lieutenant governor, speaker, and governor making them together. There were no unilateral decisions from my office dealing with those issues. And I’ll go back to my record. I’ve been elected three times as governor. The people obviously have confidence in me.”
Your wife, Anita Perry,....
“She’s very smart and loyal. She’s not predisposed to be a public figure since she saw how her father, a small-town doctor, had to be shared with all these other people. She’s also a great patriot. “
Some of our recent presidents have admitted to experimenting with drugs...
“No, ma’am. Not unless you call caffeine a drug. Or cold beer or whiskey.”....
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.chron.com ...
THANK you.
It’s getting government OUT of our way — freeing people to do what they do best — produce for themselves and their families.
From Perry’s speech last Friday:
“Some hold this world view that government must be central in our lives and serve as our caretaker - they seek more than equal opportunity, they seek equal outcomes. Those in the White House today don’t believe in American exceptionalism, they’d rather emulate the failed policies of Europe. But we see what their policies have led to. 14 million Americans out of work. 45 million Americans on food stamps. And according to WSJ, nearly half of Americans receive government assistance.”
McCain had so little money that he had to fire his campaign team. He travelled by himself to the early states and simply spoke with voters. That’s what Cain did in Florida and it worked.
The big money may never get behind Cain. They may wait until the general. We’ll have to see what they do.
I have some serious questions about Cain’s judgment. He was #2 on my list, but I’ve replaced him with Gingrich.
Cain’s inexperience isn’t an issue for me because he’ll surround himself with solid conservatives. He isn’t a narcissist so he’ll listen to those advisors when he needs to draw on their experience.
My issues with Cain are 1) his flip-flops on issues and 2) his endorsement of Romney.
I know you don’t find the level-playing field comment troubling but I do in light of the empowerment zones in his economic plan. I need a lot more detail before I come to any conclusion on it though.
Perry supporters have been put through the wringer at FR. (So have Palin’s.) I think you should consider their treatment when analyzing their posts. When you’re continually insulted and attacked, it’s difficult to keep things in perspective. It’s natural to be defensive and it’s natural to lash out. It’s been pretty one-sided here against Perry supporters. We don’t need a purge and we don’t need to alienate other FReepers. We need all hands on deck to defeat Romney & Obama. (JMHO)
Coward. You make an attack on Cain and won't even back it up with your own explanation of why you feel that way. BAWK, BAWK, BAWAACK!
The comment in and of itself is not the issue. I agree we need to examine the entirety of Cain's positions. But that is not what CW was doing. She was trying to turn a neutral quote into an attack.
Perry supporters have been put through the wringer at FR.
So that allows them to make a claim against Cain without backing it up?
(So have Palin’s.) I think you should consider their treatment when analyzing their posts.
Yeah, they complained nonstop about how Perry was being treated. And now they are unleashing the same tactics against Cain.
When you’re continually insulted and attacked, it’s difficult to keep things in perspective.
When you engage in the very tactics that you have earlier decried, it's called hypocrisy.
It’s natural to be defensive and it’s natural to lash out. It’s been pretty one-sided here against Perry supporters. We don’t need a purge and we don’t need to alienate other FReepers. We need all hands on deck to defeat Romney & Obama. (JMHO)
We need basic standards to be followed on FR. If you make a claim, back it up with a link. If you claim a quote implies something about a candidate, you should be willing to explain why. Otherwise, FR becomes a cesspool for political hacks.
I am not interested in purging Perry supporters. I am interested in the worst of the trolls being pulled to the curb - and that applies across the board for the supporters of all candidates who refuse to follow basic standards of veracity.
His answer about crony capitalism is extremely troubling. Yes that IS the real issue. That’s a huge problem hindering this country. And the fact that he doesn’t want to address it, saying “That’s the same old, tired criticism which comes when people don’t want to talk about the real issues...” is a deal breaker for me. There should be NO corporate welfare, NO pay for play, no favoritism. I’m really disappointed with this answer.
Cindie
I’m not sure why this post is important? It’s an opinion and delivered without any snarkiness. And, it’s a principled stance, whether you agree with it or not so shouldn’t it be okay to express it? What does posting an opinion from another thread have to do with this one? For most people here it’s Cain or Perry. Both sides have logical reasons their favorite is the only one that can win. There has to be discussion.
Cindie
Thank you for the link. I’m going to listen later (after Rush, of course) to hear it in context.
Cindie
Well, it appears a Perry talking point was delivered to their astroturf group. And CW is blindly parroting that talking point, as she has steadfastly refused to explain exactly why it is redistributionist.
Most definitely not. However, supporters regularly post things about Perry and Palin that are not backed up by facts or evidence. Why allow one but not the other? Ideally, neither should be allowed.
One anti-Perry person posted a link to a court ruling about a contract arbitration agreement between Muslim parties in news/activism, edited the title to imply that Texas had a legal Sharia Court and included information about Perry's "relationship" with Khan in an attempt to tie Rick Perry to a Sharia court that didn't even exist. Perry has no authority over contract law. The "court" was a panel of three imams chosen by the parties to the contract. It was as dishonest as dishonest gets. Was the thread pulled? Nope. It was moved to chat.
Yeah, they complained nonstop about how Perry was being treated. And now they are unleashing the same tactics against Cain.
I was referring to the treatment of Perry supporters themselves not Perry. Perry is a candidate and needs to be vetted. So does Cain. I don't see anything wrong with posting information about candidates and expressing an opinion about the subject matter.
When you engage in the very tactics that you have earlier decried, it's called hypocrisy.
Yes, it is and it shouldn't be tolerated. It is also hypocritical to condemn personal attacks on one group and say nothing about the same on others. It's natural for things to get heated in a political discussion and the mods shouldn't have to be babysitters but I have seen personal attacks launched that should not be allowed.
We need basic standards to be followed on FR. If you make a claim, back it up with a link. If you claim a quote implies something about a candidate, you should be willing to explain why. Otherwise, FR becomes a cesspool for political hacks.
I couldn't agree more. We absolutely need that. The problem I see is that with several mods, who have different personalities, that standard is not enforced equally by all. Mods are human; they're subject to emotional decisions. We have to recognize that and accept it. But there doesn't seem to be a standard enforced by all mods. I don't believe JR will hand down such a rule. He seems to prefer to allow FReepers to work it out amongst themselves and get involved only when absolutely necessary. I respect that.
I am interested in the worst of the trolls being pulled to the curb -and that applies across the board for the supporters of all candidates who refuse to follow basic standards of veracity.
Well, I wish you were a mod! Seems like you'd be fair and balanced. I don't see the worst anti-Perry trolls being pulled to the curb. It sure seems one-sided. I tried to raise the level of discourse and gave up. The vitriol was offensive. I mostly stay off these threads because of the unchecked vitriol.
And as I recall, the Perry supporters had ample opportunity to on that thread to call it out as BS.
Jim can't pull all threads where veracity is contested. What he can do is allow folks to debate the issue and call out posters who do not adhere to basic standards of veracity, while pulling claims that are blatant whoppers that cannot be explained as differences of opinions over the underlying facts.
But that does not change the underlying standard. If you make a claim of fact, back it up. If you state an opinion, you should be willing to support that opinion as well.
That would depend on the context. If he’s talking about the imbalance when government gets involved in the private sector (over regulation, pay to play, etc) then he’s absolutely right. It hurts small businesses the most. In the sense that no one’s getting party favors it does even it out since we all start at the same place and can go as far as their ambition & passion takes them.
I’m a small farmer. Take NAIS (National Animal Identification System), the legislation would require every single small farmer to pay a fee for each an every animal we have. Large factory farms can get a single ID for large groups of animals. Even people who keep one or two chickens in their backyards will be affected. So in essence, this legislation, because of the burdens placed on small farmers, gives corporate farms an advantage. That’s not a level playing field.
I don’t want to take anything from them! Their operations also keep people employed and they probably started at the same place I’m at. I just want to be left alone to earn my living. Now logic would tell you the best way to handle this would be to exempt farms XYZ size and smaller. To the factory farms this legislation is helpful because it helps them track their very large operations. I buy meat birds every year and replace some of my layers as well. I breed my milk goats every year. That means each individual kid has to have it’s own ID (fee paid by me) even if I’m planning on selling it on Craigslist within a month.
Thus, context is important.
Cindie
Thank you for your points.
My points go to the philosophy of, what is the purpose of government? Due to government over regulations, litigation and taxation — layers of government and enforcement and punishment — free enterprise and our economy is dying under the weight. If someone feels that they can be helped by government making this better — they will find that it only gets worse.
The purpose of government is NOT to make things equal and balanced — that is socialism. Less government is more freedom and money in the pockets of the producers.
MAKING anything work though government means MORE government and more taxes, regulations, litigation, legislation and control. Why should government decide? Why would we want to give them that power?
No of course not and I wouldn't ask him or the mods to do that. In that particular case though, the veracity of the claims should not have ever been up for debate.
What he can do is allow folks to debate the issue and call out posters who do not adhere to basic standards of veracity,
IMO that is the way he manages FR. I appreciated the way he handled the eligibility (birther) threads.
while pulling claims that are blatant whoppers that cannot be explained as differences of opinions over the underlying facts.
That thread was a blatant whopper. There can be no difference of opinion about whether or not Rick Perry has anything to do with a court ruling on contract law - he doesn't. There can be no difference of opinion about whether or not Texas has a sharia court - it doesn't.
I reported abuse on it and freepmailed him about it. He or a mod moved it but they obviously didn't see it as dishonest. I accepted the decision and didn't hold a grudge about it. So I hope it doesn't sound like I'm harping, whining, or complaining. My intent was to use it as an example of basic standards not being applied across the board.
I’m actually glad we have such a wide field. With Palin out Cain & Perry are the ones who can win the nomination (I don’t think Romney can). I really wish I knew why Cain has such animosity to Perry. I think they’d make an unbeatable teams with complementary knowledge & experience.
Cindie
Kemp and Bennet were big into “empowerment zones.” It is a Corporate welfare program where businesses are paid to set up in the ghettos and special education programs and job training programs (that don’t work) and hiring and education preferences are put in place to aid those who are welfare reciepents. It did not work and it corrupted business with welfare. Businesses fail in crime ridden ghettos with or without government welfare schemes.
Rinos think they are clever if they use our money to spread the wealth to business in the name of “creating jobs” or ending welfare. They call it “capitalism” and it proves they “have a heart.” It is really fascism and it corrupts and destroys free enterprise. Like the ‘big hearted’ program of Clinton to get banks to give people with no money house loans. It’s the bailouts of banks, GM and GE as long if they, in turn, use their money to prop up the politically correct corrupt socialist polticans and their commie foundations.
Caincare is mentioned here: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2011/10/05/Herman-Cain-21-Things-You-Dont-Know-About-Him.aspx#page1
I can't respond now - laughing uncontrollably - seen you're in *Pennsylvania* - heaven knows that state gets no "tax payers [sic] monies"!
Actually, my name is Angie. Thankyouverymuch.
IF you would actually READ my replies on this thread you’ll see exactly where I stand , as of ** right now **.
Only ONE of the current GOP candidates will be the pubbie nominee. As I said before , that’s who I’ll vote for in the general election.
You may think what you want about any candidate and Im entitled to the same. But you didnt answer my question did you ? Nice try.
Let it be and move on please.
And you call others spammers..give it a break.
Well when you are ready to repsond to the fact millions have been sent to Perry to address the border over many years...and that he's had plenty of time to secure the border....then I'd be interested. Otherwise playing the card you just did is a tactic...and one which will not work 'as a diversion' from the above stated. That's a liberal tactic ta boot!
Well, Angie, if you are concerned about securing our border and not electing another panderer to illegals like La Raza Rick, you’ll support our Conservative front runner, Herman Cain.
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.