Posted on 10/14/2011 9:38:01 AM PDT by smokingfrog
You’d better listen to the interview yourself. Santorum clearly mentions “the Perry people, too”.
I’ve listened to it twice...I never heard it...tell me where it is on the video?
2:35
And yet you left it untouched knowing full well it's a LIE. And further, you either typed in the comment or copied it knowing FULL WELL Romney is the one pulling this garbage.
The people in Neveda (repubic establishment) are the ones that said it was the Romney campaign. Santorum slipped in, under his breath I might add, a sleazy tactic, 'Perry's "people" too I might add' for the sole purpose of connecting Perry's name to the low life Romney. It is so obvious. If true and believable, Levin would have picked up on it because he is not particularly fond of Perry. A whole 1.5 seconds and you are allowing a misleading headline to go unchallenged.
You’re right. It’s much more effective to repeat the exact same words, but with bold type.
You need to buy tinfoil stock. A lot of it.
Instead of screaming in hysteric at anyone who challenges your emotion based Perry-bot dogmas, answer the questions.
Who got in the race last after it was clear Romney was not going to get any appreciable support from Tea Party Conservatives?
Who got in the race after it seem Tea Party heroine Bachmann was going to upset Romney’s ride to the nomination?
Who does the GOP Establishment see as their back up card if Romney fails?
Who has long standing intimate ties with the Liberal GOP Establishment?
The answer is Rick Perry.
Bill Kristol to a NY Time Reporter telling him how the GOP Establishment plans to deal with “the Tea party mutiny”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2792217/posts?page=3
Kristol told me just after Perry entered the race, a development that essentially ended [the more radical Michele] Bachmann’s brief ascent. Establishment Republicans may prefer Romney to Perry, but their assumption is that either man can be counted on to steer the party back toward the broad center next fall, effectively disarming the Tea Party mutiny.
Wonder who Perry will be VP with?
Odd how that question never gets asked of Perry.
Could it be because everyone knows Perry is the GOP Establishment mole in the race to split the Tea Party/Conservative vote and hand the nomination to Romney?
Could it be because they know the ticket the GOP Machine is setting up is “Romney/Perry 2012? Think about it. Romney has the money, Perry has the idolatrous worship from the social Conservatives.
Could that be why the Perry camp is knowingly lying about Cain’s solidly Conservative record on both social and fiscal issues? Because they know full well Perry’s record can not stand close scrutiny?
What does anyone really know about Perry other then the nice words and platitudes he puts in his speeches? Looks like Perry is just Bush 3.0 another tough talking social conservative who will go to DC and be yet another good little GOP crony capitalist water boy.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/274042/perry-and-giuliani-katrina-trinko
Rick Perry is a Texan who boasts about how he shot a coyote during a morning jog. Rudy Giuliani is a New Yorker who has appeared before crowds in full drag as “Rudia.”
When it comes to political “romances,” Perry and Giuliani rank high on the list of odd couples. Perry’s endorsement of Giuliani’s 2008 presidential run came as shock to many in the GOP, who wondered why such a robust social conservative was the first (and ultimately, only) Republican governor to endorse a candidate who is openly pro-abortion and favors gay rights. But that endorsement was no one-time incident, nor a flash in the pan. For over a decade, Perry and Giuliani have supported one another through a series of races, with endorsements, public statements, and fundraising assistance. Different they may be, but they are nothing if not committed
s far back as 1999, Perry served as the honorary Texas chairman of Giuliani’s New York senatorial campaign. (The Texans for Giuliani invitation to a $1,000 per plate luncheon that Perry hosted employed this message: “We Texans need to ask ourselves how helpful do we think Hillary Rodham Clinton would be to the Republican presidential hopeful George W. Bush if he were to become president?”) In both 2002 and 2006, Giuliani returned the favor, endorsing Perry’s gubernatorial runs. In the 2006 race — a difficult one for Perry, who would ultimately eke out a win with 39 percent of the vote, just enough to catapult him over the other candidates in the four-person race — Giuliani’s endorsement was well-utilized and undoubtedly useful. In addition to a radio spot featuring America’s mayor, the Perry campaign sent out a fundraising letter touting Giuliani’s endorsement of Perry as a “strong and determined leader.”
In 2005, Giuliani joined Texas law firm Bracewell & Patterson (re-named Bracewell & Giuliani), strengthening his ties to the Lone Star State — and to affluent Texas Republicans ripe for fundraising appeals. Two years later, he sought out Perry’s endorsement for his 2008 presidential run. He got it.
A Perry aide paraphrased how Perry explained his support for Giuliani this way: “We don’t agree on social issues, but Mayor Giuliani provided leadership during a time of crisis for the country.” To Perry, Giuliani was a figure who had stellar national-security credentials, a key issue for him.
After citing the importance of the War on Terror, Perry publicly explained his Giuliani endorsement by pointing to the former mayor of New York’s track record: “What I look for is results, and Rudy Giuliani is the individual who will give us the results that will make America safer, that will move our economy forward, that will put strict constructionists on the Supreme Court, that covers a host of issues that are important to me and I think a lot of my colleagues and Americans as well,” he enthusiastically told Fox News host Brian Kilmeade in fall, 2007.
In that interview, Perry brushed off the ideological differences between the two men. He noted that he and Giuliani had discussed some of the issues that divided them, and spent an “inordinate amount of time together over the course of the last six weeks talking about issues both on the phone and face to face.” Those discussion satisfied Perry. According to the Dallas Morning News, Perry told reporters that Giuliani had “assured [Perry] that in nominating Supreme Court justices and on other important issues, a Giuliani administration would serve the conservative cause.”
Perry’s pre-emptive attempt to acknowledge that — and explain why — he had endorsed a candidate whose views on social issues differed so markedly from his own did not soften the surprise. In the aftermath of the announcement, much of the media coverage centered on speculation that Perry was aiming at the second slot on the ticket. Perry shot that down forcefully, saying bluntly he wouldn’t consider the vice presidency, but rumors abounded nonetheless. The Dallas Morning News reported that the Perry political camp saw little choice other than Giuliani since “Mr. Thompson’s campaign has sputtered and Sen. John McCain of Arizona is a long-shot.” (The relationship between Romney and Perry, if not outright hostile, had been at least complicated since an incident at the 2002 Olympics where the Boy Scouts were not allowed to participate, something for which Perry criticized Romney.) But the disbelief persisted: In comparison to Perry, “Giuliani comes across like Michael Moore,” wrote Austin American-Statesman columnist John Kelso, comparing the duo to “Dick Cheney touring with the Dixie Chicks.”
Despite the controversy, Perry did not downplay his endorsement but instead became a more vocal supporter of Giuliani. He campaigned for him in South Carolina, and that fall went on a four-day sweep through Iowa. Talking to voters at a roundtable in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Perry made his pitch for Giuliani by striking a pragmatic tone: “ You can have your purist candidate,” he argued. But “if they can’t win, you just wasted your time.” The voters were not convinced. A Dallas Morning News headline summed up Perry’s success in Iowa: “Perry Wins over Voters — But Not for Giuliani. Iowans Like Messenger More than His Message.”
In December, Perry added to the tension with a slip of the tongue. Defending Giuliani’s pro-abortion stance by citing his promise to support strict constructionist judges, the Houston Chronicle reported Perry saying, “Then the issue becomes very, very clear to me from the standpoint of who I want to support, and it is Mike Huckabee.” When questioned about what he had just said, Perry immediately called the Huckabee mention an “error.” But it lead to another round of publicity: The Austin American-Statesman headline said Perry had “defended” his Huckabee mention as “un-Freudian,” planting an idea in voters’ minds unlikely to cheer the Giuliani campaign.
As Giuliani’s campaign fell into disarray, Perry kept fighting, doing a five-stop sweep in January through Florida introducing Giuliani at rallies. But it wasn’t enough, and, when the Guiliani campaign impoloded at the height of the 2008 primary season, Perry found himself without a candidate. In February, he endorsed McCain, employing unsentimental language: “He and I may not agree on every issue,” Perry said when announcing the new endorsement, according to the Dallas Morning News.
Guiliani’s presidential ambitions may have evaporated in the Florida sunshine, but his friendship with Rick Perry continues to this day. In the 2010 gubernatorial primary, Giuliani backed Perry over the more socially moderate Kay Bailey Hutchinson, even going so far as to go to Texas to campaign for his friend. And the two don’t limit their conversation exclusively to politics: Perry told a Dallas audience last year that Giuliani had offered to bet him a pair of Texas cowboy boots that the New York Yankees would beat the Texas Rangers in the upcoming round of playoffs leading up to the World Series. (Perry must have received his boots: The Rangers won the series, 4–2.)
Now, with the 2012 primary drawing near, and both men considered possible candidates, their comity remains. “Rick has got a great record, probably one of the strongest records of any governor in America, and one of the longest running governorships. Rick is a good friend,” Giuliani told CNN this July. Dave Carney, a top political adviser to Perry, told the Washington Post that same month that “Rudy would be an awesome asset to any campaign. Of course candidates matter to voters, but folks of the mayor’s stature bring lot of value added to any effort.”
And so the bromance continues.
Unless Santorum has some evidence to show that the Perry people are collaborating with the Romney campaign to push up the date of the Nevada primary, he is the one being dishonest, not me.
The implication is they are acting independently for their own reasons.
You, intentionally or not, perpetrated this lie by posting a misleading headline without any evidence or without any comment to put it into context.
I'm not aware that there is a requirement here on FR for the poster to state whether or not they agree or disagree with everything they post here...
If Nevada does decide to have an early primary and all of the GOP candidates boycott except for Romney, Perry & Paul it could be very interesting. The fact that Perry has said he would not boycott shows me he's not afraid to go head to head with Romney. If Romney loses in Nevada, it would look very bad for him. In 2008, Ron Paul came in second in Nevada's GOP caucus. This is a big risk for Perry. He could just play it safe and boycott like everyone else.
It’s not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing sf. Only an ignorant person would not see how misleading and untrue that headline is. You do not strike me as ignorant of the facts.
Perry, with all of his warts, still deserves an honest assessment of his performance and habits. Voters and potential supporters deserve to have the facts presented honestly. That headline disparages Rick Perry and connects him with the sham Romney is pulling and it’s not right.
FR guidelines don’t require an agreement or disagreement but I think it does require Honesty and truthfulness.
Your hypothetical is extremely interesting and really makes me think and ponder about it. It is a gamble but Gov Perry doesn’t strike me as one who backs down from a gamble or a challenge.
Better watch it though, the conspiracy kooks will attempt to say Perry isn’t boycotting because he wants Romney to get the nomination. *rolling my eyes until they almost get stuck*
You make fun of the bigger Conservatives. You are an idiot.
“Who got in the race after it seem Tea Party heroine Bachmann was going to upset Romney’s ride to the nomination?”
Perry got in the race the same day that Bachmann won the Iowa straw poll. It just didn’t seem very classy (regardless of who won that straw poll). He could have waited a couple of days.
I think Mark Levin likes Santorum and Bachmann best, but he likes a couple of others, too.
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.