Posted on 07/26/2009 3:33:01 PM PDT by GoldStandard
Maybe I’m confused.
I thought the governor of Texas was Rick Perry.
But he’s starting to sound like another R.P.: Ron Paul.
The more Perry talks about tea parties, states’ rights, limited government and defying Washington, the more he seems to be playing for the 70,000 Texas voters who backed Paul, a Republican U.S. representative, for president.
Paul’s former state campaign manager is now running against Perry for governor. She agreed.
"It’s awfully ironic, isn’t it?" Wharton Republican Debra Medina said Friday, laughing over the phone from Austin.
"The governor is great at blowing smoke. He knows how to talk conservative values and principles. Then when he gets elected, he goes right back to big-government principles."
(Excerpt) Read more at star-telegram.com ...
One thing I noticed about Ron Paul. He constantly attack Republicans ill intentions, but never the Democrats.
That maybe true but where is Paul quoted in this article? The article of this article is making the comparison and offers no quotes of Paul attacking The Aggie.
Rick is a RINO.
And you want a brain dead senator as gov?
As opposed to what? .... A brain dead gov?.... Not much choice between the two is there. But as people say the Gov. of Texas has very little power so it probably makes little to no difference if that is our choice.
They both suck horseapples thru straws... I’ll vote for the baseball dude.....
Please don’t tell me you are even considering voting KBH? You really, really want to bring her useless crap to Austin?
If Ron paul is to be considered the future of he Republican Party, be prepared for decades of dictatorial Democrat control.
The Paulistinians still haven’t realized that no matter how much they stacked online polls, voters rejected his whiny campaign and anti-war rhetoric en masse.
He failed as a Libertarian in 1988 and failed again as a Republcian in 2008.
It’s your overall message America rejects and trying to highjack the GOP will just relegate the GOP further down the morass of insignificance, just as the Libertarian party currently is.
If you like losing elections, just keep promoting Ron Paul and driving even more people away.
As opposed to what?...
You have it right.
Perry is not anyones conservative. But it has been proven that when hearded, granted he is kind of like hearding cats, but he has proved to me that he can be hearded.
He has been able to read what the people of Texas do not want. When we respond.
Maybe someone that we can heard, although difficult at times, might just be better than the other choices being offered to us.
We might want to push hard for a special session to get this 10th Amendment decloration passed. Before it is to late.
Just to test his “Texas Gritt”.
You really, really want to bring her useless crap to Austin?
You really, really want to keep the useless crap in Austin that is already there?
Over KBH? ANYDAY!
I couldn't find anything about previously held offices or political experience on her. Until I see something that indicates she has some kind of support outside of a few bloggers, I have to consider her a vanity candidate.
Ping
You know the RINOs are in trouble when they’re imitating the libertarians.
And here I thought America as a whole rejected the pro-war McCain in November 2008.
“obama, perry, pelosi, reid, gibbs”
I don’t think it’s fair to put Perry in that company.
He use to be a Lib but, we’ve had years to work on him.
well, I hope your right. Sometimes he shows flashes of genius, other times..... yikes!
we’ll see
While McCain was rejected by many, Paul and his whiney message was rejected by a much larger majority much earlier on.
As much as many of us despised McCain, Paul didn’t even make the show in the primaries, in spite of so much stacking of online polls.
You really should think out your replies before inserting your virtual foot in your virtual mouth.
Comments from Perry on the stimuli money:
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/2009/07/27/0727perry_edit.html
Nah, that'd be you.
More people rejected McCain (with a vote for Obama, Barr, Baldwin, etc.) than rejected Paul.
The words braindead and in denial come to mind.
How many delegates did Paul obtain? 35 or so?
But, you go ahead and continue feeling you won, your boy is still toast!
Perhaps that fence-straddling anti-American rhetoric he spewed just doesn’t set well with voters. Otherwise, he would have the nomination, wouldn’t he?
You just fool yourself.
Last time I checked, the Reps didn’t do so well with George Bush -copy McCain.
Bush was a liberal. People wanted “change” so much they stupidly voted for someone even more liberal.
Most Reps are NOT conservative. See, there is only ONE standard for conservatism: You either follow the letter of the law of the Constitution, or you don’t.
However, when Reps HAVE acted conservatively, they have been smashingly popular. See Ronald Reagan.
The Constitution does not delegate the powers the Federal government to have a central bank, so it is unconstituional.
ONLY Ron Paul has called for an end to the Fed.
The Constitution does not delegate powers to the federal government to be involved in education.
ONLY Ron Paul has called to end the Dept. of Education.
The Constitution does not delegate powers to the federal government to regulate alcohol, tobacco, or firearms.
ONLY Ron Paul has called to end the ATF.
Need I go on?????
Most members of the Republican party are NOT conservative. They are merely another big government party of a slightly different stripe.
FREEDOM. You don’t need to be so scared of it.
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.