Posted on 08/12/2011 9:56:32 AM PDT by Brices Crossroads
Rick Perry is rapidly becoming known as a politician who talks a good game, but whose actions belie his words. Last year, he waved the bloody shirt of secession, which horrified the New York Times...until they dug deeper and found that Perry wasn't just talking about seceding. He was aiming to hook up with Mexico in order to fulfill his "shared with [Mexican President] Vincente Fox for open borders." Seriously, though, Perry is becoming a caricature of himself. He first waved the tenth Amendment on gay marriage and abortion, first supporting the interpretations that states should be responsible for defining marriage and related issues, and in a flip-flop worthy of Mitt Romney, came out in favor of a federal constitutional amendment to ban both.
Perry's open borders positions tell us that he is not a conservative. His political pan-gyrations on gay marriage, abortion, and the Tenth Amendment suggest he is not reliable there either, but would trim his sails at the slightest pressure.
Well, he must be good on something. How would he handle judicial appointments, for example. Bear in mind that in Texas, in contrast to states such as Alaska (where a Commission presents the Governor with three choices from which he or she MUST select a Judge), the Texas Governor has pretty much unfettered control of the appointments process to fill judicial vacancies. In a conservative state like Texas, it would be easy to remake the courts in a conservative mold. In fact, it would almost follow de facto, since the appointed justices must face election state wide. No doubt Perry will try to take credit for the relatively conservative state of the Texas judiciary as he has done with the Texas economy when the relative health of both has been more in spite of, than because of, Rick Perry.
I have not done an exhaustive study of Perry's judicial appointments, although undoubtedly conservatives in Texas would have done so. I found one particular judicial appointment, the subsequent election, and Perry's reaction to it to be most instructive about his orientation toward strong judicial conservatives.
In 2001, one of Perry's first selections to succeed the staunchly conservative Greg Abbot (who had been elected Attorney General) was Xavier Rodriguez, a self-described moderate. In trying to move the Texas Supreme Court to the left, he drew the ire of conservatives in Texas. An up and coming young conservative, Steven Wayne Smith stepped forward to challenge Rodriguez. Smith, who was superbly qualified, had argued and won the landmark 1996 case of Hopwood v. Texas which successfully challenged affirmative action at the University of Texas Law School. In effect, he was a hero to conservatives in Texas and an anathema to the Establishment. The Establishment, including Perry and John Cornyn, no doubt detested Smith for dismantling affirmative action at the UT Law School. But when Smith stepped forward to challenge a self proclaimed moderate appointment of Perry, who happened to be Hispanic, that was the last straw. Perry and his cronies in the Establishment did all they could to stop Smith but he prevailed over Rodriguez easily and was in stalled as a justice of the Texas Supreme Court.
In 2004, Perry encouraged a challenger to run against Smith. The Establishment lined up with Cornyn and Perry on one side and the Texas Eagle Forum,Kent Hance and Ward Connerly on the other. This time the Establishment prevailed and Smith was defeated. He attempted a comeback in 2006, but Perry recruited another challenger, less conservative than Smith, and he lost by less than 1%.
Perry's actions, and his vindictive crusade against an up and coming conservative legal superstar, suggest that a Perry Presidency would be more likely to yield David Souters and Harriet Miers than Antonin Scalias and Clarence Thomases. When it comes to Rick Perry, the message to the Federalist Society and constitutional conservatives is caveat emptor.
Or maybe it’s because he’s Governor of the 15th largest economy. The Corridor project is dead, so I don’t understand harping on it.
Ignore post #79. I thought I was reading from another poster..
bttt - thanks for the info.
We all have the right, and with certainty the respossibility to vet these candidates. I for one want to know the good and the bad and all in between. Some of it will fall along the wayside, some will likely stand shoulder to shoulder with other candidates....but I want to know.
I have a serious problem woth Perry’s stand on the border issues...and I have read the posts of those supporting him and am still unconvinced that when push comes to shove he will vote for whatever the moment dictates to him his politically necessary....but his history isn’t at all encouraging. He does not approve of closed borders. So that’s a strike against him for my vote.
Further, and I’m still researching, why is it he is chumming up with Imans....encouraging students learn about Islam etc. This is definately a most serious issues to me. Further he is just seemingly too cozy with Islamic leadership....puts a very bad taste in my mouth. I will not vote for those who cater to the Islamic agenda.
I think it's mostly the Palin crowd, but there's a whole different group of people who are getting pretty nasty about it. I got called some nasty names last night by some non-Palin people for suggesting that Perry might be a good candidate, so there's something else going on.
It's funny to see people dredging up quotes from 2001, Bilderberg, and the Trans-Texas Corridor as if they've just stumbled on some new super secret insider information. He's been our Governor for over a decade, so there's not anything Perry attackers are pulling out that we haven't already heard before.
I've never been a huge fan, but I think he might be the right guy at the right time to beat Obama if he can make the right policy shifts. I've never called him anything but a politician, but he very well may make a good President.
On the other hand, he could be a lousy President. But if Freepers here would rather elect Obama because of Gardisil and the Trans-Texas Corridor, then go right ahead. I'm voting for Perry if he gets the nod.
Don't be fooled by the 'open borders' quote that is making the rounds. If you read it in context as I posted it above, it means something entirely different.
Has it escaped everyone's memory that Perry confronted President Obama on the airport tarmac in Austin and tried to personally deliver a letter asking for help on border security? There's a lot of disinformation out there:
http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2010/08/10/obama-declines-accept-rick-perrys-letter
Gov. Rick Perry's meeting at the Austin airport with President Barack Obama on border security lasted a mere 34 seconds, and Perry had to hand a letter on the issue to presidential adviser Valerie Jarrett because Obama declined to personally accept it.
That did not dissuade the governor from inviting Obama to come back to Texas and tour the border with him to get a first hand look at what Perry describes as the threat from Mexican drug cartels.
"Look, he's got the letter. I suspect he'll read it. I hope he responds to it," Perry said. "This is way past partisanship or politics."
Perry said Obama's decision to send 1,200 troops to the entire border with Mexico was inadequate, particularly since only 286 are coming to Texas.
Perry said he would like a substantial meeting with Obama to discuss the need for 1,000 National Guard troops until 3,000 Border Patrol agents can be trained to take over.
"We need a substantial amount of boots on the ground. We need the technology in the air. The predator drones. The other technologies we've talked about: night vision equipment, cameras, motion-detecting equipment," Perry said.
The governor said immigration reform is "a waste of effort until you secure the border."
Just because I love you, I’m gonna let you slide on this one and put it in the pro column for Perry, But I got to tell ya...THIS:
“The first award was presented to Israeli President Shimon Peres.”
pretty much negates the award altogether. I thought they should have hung peres years and years ago for treason.
I'm a big fan of Palin, but with Perry in the race, I don't believe she's running. Also, and from what I've read, Palin has been highly supportive of Perry.
but there's a whole different group of people who are getting pretty nasty about it.
This is what I don't understand. Perry just entered the race and these same people claim they only want to vet the candidate and that there's nothing wrong with debating the pros and cons. Can't argue with that except that the vitriol from these same folks belies their claims that this is all about debate and objective vetting. It isn't, and you're right about there being something more. People are going to do what they're going to do but, in my opinion, it makes anything they say worthy of suspicion and that only makes the truth all that harder to find.
The end result is that any Perry thread posted will be negative or dominated by these same folks. And who wants to put up with that crap?
I want to win in 2012 and I want to do it with the most conservative candidate possible, but I also want someone who can defeat the Marxist with a $1 billion war chest. Getting caught up in defunct highway projects, the dispensing of vaccines, Bildabetterburger, hair styles and one court appointee is exactly what the liberals would like us to do. I'm far too serious about taking our country back from those intent on destroying it to get wound up in a bunch of BS like that. It's good to know that there are others who see it the same way.
Well, consider this. Imam Aga Khan is NOT Imam Sayyid Ali Khamenei of Iran. He is a businessman out of Bahrain who does business with Exxon/Mobil of Texas which has helped us keep our gasoline prices in Texas lower than most every body elses since about forever.
Number two, Imam Aga Khan has used his development company to establish houses of education and allows women to participate because he believes the more educated women are, the more respect they will get in the Islamic world. He uses his wealth to build health service for his people. He’s also established micro-finance institutions for women in Northern Pakistan which they have had in Bahrain for years.
If, and I say, IF, very cynically, there is something of a more ‘moderate’ Islam, Imam Khan is representative of it. Simply because he’s a businessman first, before he’s an Imam.
Rick Perry is the Governor of our state, they were building a mosque in Houston which is in his state and invited him. Had he turned them down, what would that have accomplished. If he stood up dissed all of Islam while he was there what would that have accomplished, especially in the face of what this lone Imam is trying to do within his world to make a more prosperous and educated population in it, instead of an ignorant bunch of people mired only in their dogma. This Imam, whose programs Perry had visited, and Governor Perry both know that business is what makes a capitalist world go round.
Then you simply aren't paying attention. Most of the people I've read supporting Perry, including myself, acknowledge he has flaws. You can hardly be unaware of them with some of the attacks that have been hurled.
He's no Reagan and he's not an ideal conservative but he's certainly more conservative than Romney and he may be the best chance to beat Obama.
But go right ahead with your dishonesty. It's typical of the haters.
Yes, I read his speech praising Imam Aga Khan, NOT ISLAM. And this is my response to YOU as well:
Well, consider this. Imam Aga Khan is NOT Imam Sayyid Ali Khamenei of Iran. He is a businessman out of Bahrain who does business with Exxon/Mobil of Texas which has helped us keep our gasoline prices in Texas lower than most every body elses since about forever.
Number two, Imam Aga Khan has used his development company to establish houses of education and allows women to participate because he believes the more educated women are, the more respect they will get in the Islamic world. He uses his wealth to build health service for his people. He’s also established micro-finance institutions for women in Northern Pakistan which they have had in Bahrain for years.
If, and I say, IF, very cynically, there is something of a more ‘moderate’ Islam, Imam Khan is representative of it. Simply because he’s a businessman first, before he’s an Imam.
Rick Perry is the Governor of our state, they were building a mosque in Houston which is in his state and invited him. Had he turned them down, what would that have accomplished. If he stood up dissed all of Islam while he was there what would that have accomplished, especially in the face of what this lone Imam is trying to do within his world to make a more prosperous and educated population in it, instead of an ignorant bunch of people mired only in their dogma. This Imam, whose programs Perry had visited, and Governor Perry both know that business is what makes a capitalist world go round.
Nobody in Texas has a problem with our Governor acting like a LEADER in his role as an international host. Why does a person In Virginia?
He didn’t say anything about accepting Sharia or anything.
Read more better. There is a history with Perry and aga khan..and others... that goes way back. Before the mosque. And it begs the question. Why would Perry make the kind of refutable statements about islam’s wonderful contributions in the building of America which are blatantly false, provably and indeniably false. See, there is where the wheels go off the track. You can DO business. Why pander at the expense of your country’s history? Especially where it concerns islam?
Many of us share in your wanting to win this country back from the boy Marxist and his progressive minions.
I too feel Gov. Perry has the best chance to accomplish just that but, it will take a concerted effort from ALL Conservative voters and then some.
He claims all sorts of people from Texas are giving him the inside dope, and that I'm an idiot for even contemplating support for him.
Maybe these people legitimately do think Perry is pro-illegal immigration and a big government liberal, I don't know. He's a politician for sure, but nothing like what's being parroted around here.
This is getting ridiculous. Who is feeding you this stuff? Is your goal in spreading trash about Perry to get another GOP candidate elected, or do they truly believe this stuff up in Pennsylvania?
So you've turned Muzzie, or just dhimmi?
So far, I am still doing research on Perry. I think he is a good politician. That said, being a politician, if that is all you are, is not my preferred prerequisite.
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.