The Case for Rick Perry

5/27/2011 | anon

[Flightdeck]

Consider Barack Obama out for a stiff morning run, battling hills with his little Portuguese water dog. Halfway through his daily route, danger strikes. Secret Service nowhere in sight, a coyote charges Bo, beloved pet of Sasha and Malia. Before the coyote’s jaws can tear Bo's throat open, Obama levels his laser-sighted .380 Ruger. One shot, one kill. Heart still thumping from exertion, Barack re-holsters his weapon, checks his watch, and digs in for the final climb of the trail, a hard day’s work ahead.

What's that? You have trouble seeing Obama as a strong, competent leader with the ability to execute (pun intended)? Does this make Texas Governor Rick Perry--who saved his daughter's pet Labrador in this precise way--a better choice for President? No. Well kind of, but let's go with no for now.

Now picture Barack Obama , captain of industry, receiving his advance copy of the Labor Bureau's employment report in the Oval Office. He reviews the numbers carefully. After digesting the extraordinary number of private-sector jobs created, free-falling unemployment, and ballooning economic growth, Obama finally reclines his leather chair. The numbers are great, but Obama is disappointed, knowing that less government intrusion could have made them even better.

Yeah, neither can I. I have an easier time picturing Stephen Hawking in a Dallas Cowboys uniform, intercepting a Tom Brady slant pass over the middle. And now you may understand why Rick Perry is a better choice for President of the United States. The economy is the most important factor in our country's long-term health, with direct influence on medical care, immigration, national security, and defense.

As governor of Texas for over ten years, Rick Perry has presided over a state that has strengthened national equity and weathered a global economic recession extremely well. Dare I compare Texas to Jackie Earle Haley's character in the Bad News Bears--the chain-smoking 'Kelly' who brought talent to a bunch of underachievers? In a border state with monumental state personnel (and entitlement) requirements, the success of Texas is no accident. Along with state legislatures, Perry deserves credit for specific decisions that removed burdens on growth, and for vetoing others that sought to impose them. Perhaps the most passionate topic debated in the midst of the 2010 elections was the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, i.e. Obamacare. Unlike the front-running Republican candidate from Massachusetts, Governor Perry chose the fiscally conservative path to reducing patient costs while increasing the quality of their care. In a controversial stand which cost political capital, Perry sponsored a Texas state amendment limiting doctor malpractice liability. The amendment has been credited for decreasing malpractice insurance rates by greater than 21% plus renewal rebates, as reported by the New York Times. The result was an increase in doctors that doubled population increase in Texas, and initiation of care in previously neglected rural areas. Comparison of conservative medical reforms to the Obamacare prototype in Massachusetts is stark, which is principally responsible for a $20 billion state debt and skyrocketing individual premiums. And if you're pissing off the trial lawyers, you must be doing something right.

Conservative tax policy in Texas is an easy win. Texas has no state income tax, despite multiple democrat attempts to create one. Pending the 2010 numbers, Texas contributes more federal tax revenue than any other state, with the possible exception of California. More importantly, state tax policy frees Texas base equity to grow, which can now be compared as a peer to the economies of Canada, India, and England. Perry wasn't elected three times in a historically democratic state (yes, look it up), by ignoring the link between self-sufficiency and quality of life. The minimum tax and limited government policies supported by the Perry Administration can be directly linked to the job creation that currently defines Texas as a bulls eye for employers.

Texas balanced its budget, as required, on May 26. This fact should evoke both shrugs of disinterest and stunned gasps of surprise. Those of us who consider our children’s future with every waking decision will shrug, because balancing a household budget is no less necessary than having gas in the tank before driving them to school. Yet we also gasp, because there exists a strange genus of humans who are not required to fill up their tank: homo sapiens politicians. Real pain was required to balance the Texas budget, make no mistake. This pain has never been felt by federal politicians, Barack Obama for instance, who have had zero experience governing under responsible balanced budget amendments.

Pain is also required to run steep hills marked by dead coyotes with hollow points in their heads, but we exercise because our long-term health demands it. The United States can only avoid the analogous heart attack by undergoing immediate fiscal exercise. Perry and the Republican legislature deserve legitimate credit for observing discipline that has eluded their federal counterparts, and ensuring the future health of the state, in stark contrast to the suicidal spending policies of Obama, Reid, and Pelosi et al. Unlike California, Texas-based companies and citizens have enjoyed relatively minimal interference, leading to a pilgrimage of Californians to Austin, Fort Worth, Houston, and San Antonio. Their journey sheds a high-tax, entrepreneur-stifling environment for one of freedom to succeed or fail on their own terms.

Conservative Republicans may appreciate this performance, yet be quick to protest certain pedigree flaws. Most notably, Rick Perry ran for office as a democrat in 1984, and campaigned for Al Gore in 1988 before switching to Republican in 1989. He was 39 years old when he switched, certainly mature enough to recognize his grotesque lapse of judgment. I believe I was eleven, plus or minus a week, when my firm political philosophy was resolved. The demographic political map at the time surely played a role in Perry's initial political identity, and while it is always smart to cast a suspicious eye, Perry's record rejects the typical party-switcher mold. Perry is pro-life, and pushed a non-trivial campaign against elective abortion in Texas with results. Perry also respects and ratified the sanctity of heterosexual marriage, through words and deed. Importantly, Governor Perry has vetoed legislation that didn't sustain conservative policies more than any single Texas governor, save one, in the state's history. It is worth noting that Perry has forcefully rejected the politics of Gore and the left over many years. The perfect conservative candidate? No. But a good one, in my humble opinion. I leave the voter with two thoughts when considering a Presidential candidate:

1) The economic policies of Texas, when generalized, will liberate the inherent productivity of the USA.

2) Rick Perry Is Not Barack Obama.

[Mr. Jeeves]

The RNC's case for Rick Perry:

1) He's a Republican. Our voters only care about the (R).

2) He has good hair for television.

3) He's as tall as Obama.

4) He's from Texas, so all those Southern rubes will stay on board.

5) He'll do what our banker patrons need done. :)

[re_nortex]

Inside that red cover is still the same old Rat!!!

Since you were exiled in Massachusetts (or Mass-a-TWO-chets as pronounced by the Idiot in Chief, Hussein), how do you think would Rick Perry be perceived there? Most of us in Texas consider him a RINO at best. But what about outside of Texas?

[Sarajevo]

The only way I would vote for Perry is if it came down to a race between him and the current denizen of the WH. Of course, I expect that we would see his beloved NAFTA superhighway project come into fruition soon after.

Perry is a stinking RINO.

[ZULU]

See:

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/04/30/rick-perry-no-arizona-style-immigration-law-for-texas-thanks/

[mountainbunny]

Which of those offended you so badly?

Vaccines offend me not at all.

What offends me so badly is that Rick Perry went around the legislature, went around the law, went around the parents, and went around doctors, and signed an executive order that every girl in Texas of a certain age would get this vaccine.

Perry didn't ask the elected officials to do it legislatively.

Perry didn't ask doctors to vouch for it.

Perry did it on his own, because he knows how to parent and make decisions better than parents. Right? After all, parents are just placeholders until the government is ready to use the little workers we're raising, right?

Just like the liberals who know best how our kids should eat, when they should be in school and what they should think while there, what they should watch on TV, etc.

Except that Perry's decision was immediately dangerous to any child who had a bad reaction. Which has happened. But it's all about the collective good, right?

My children are some of the most vaccinated kids on the planet due to travel and health issues. They have all of the suggested ones and most of the voluntary ones.

But my children are vaccinated because their father (my husband) and I decided that it was best. Not because some idiot nanny statist on a power trip decided it for us.

Sorry, but I don't snap to attention and hand over my God given right to parent my own children simply because some guy with no medical training but who owes a big favor to Merck because they donated to his campaign, says so.

Frankly, I'm surprised that you think I should. Here are the results for Rick Perry executive order Gardasil if you need confirmation:

http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=rick+perry+executive+order+gardasil&btnG=Google+Search

P.S. It turns out that the oeople of Texas didn't want what Perry was trying to cram down their throat, since the legislature outlawed his executive order.

[presently no screen name]

he keeps on serving his entire terms as Governor.

Because he can't rise to anything higher and a sign of a career politician. I was rooting for him in his last election - that's doesn't mean anything considering his opponent. He's in a 'not good' but 'better than' category. But that's all the GOP delivers to keep conservatism out.

One claiming leadership with a closed mouth and fearful of the media during this socialist administration doesn't work and can't expect to be taken seriously by voters.

He can claim himself as a candidate all he wants and tell us how wonderful he is but he already missed the chance to prove he has what it takes and hoping no one noticed.

You take the test first and then are graded. He wants his passing grade as some privilege due him. Voters decide if a non fighter/closed mouth against commie socialism represents them.

[mountainbunny]

I don’t know that I can say that I would “never” pull the lever for him, but until I hear a lot more about him, especially in light of the fact that the Gardasil thing was an executive order, I could not right now support him.

I wrote earlier that he signed it, as if it were a bill. It was not. It was an executive order, i.e., he came up with it himself.

Here is a link to results: http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=rick+perry+executive+order+gardasil&btnG=Google+Search

The idea that Perry thinks he knows best and can do an end run around families, parents, doctors, and the elected legislature of the state of Texas makes me deeply uneasy.

It’s too easy to abuse power in the Executive branch. I don’t know that I want to vote for someone who has already exhibited a tendency to grab power he doesn’t have a right to and run with it.

[panaxanax]

“just wanted to make sure you were not under the impression he support Algore in 2000...”

Thanks. I knew that. The question was rhetorical to bring the issue to light.

[Qwackertoo]

I’d rather have Perry than Romney. Not so sure how another TX Gov will go over so soon after GWB.

[Flightdeck]

First of all, you disgrace yourself (and indirectly, FreeRepublic) by using an ethnic slur. Second, it was pointed out in the article that the coyote story doesn’t affect his presidential qualification. It was obviously meant to highlight one of the differences between him and Obama.

[panaxanax]

“Reagan was a union president and was governor as a Democrat.”

It’s a good idea to check your facts before you post, my FRiend.

However, you are correct when you say that he was ONCE a Democrat & he was President of the Screen Actors Guild. When the Dems started moving towards Socialism, Ronald Reagan dropped them like a hot rock.

http://governors.library.ca.gov/33-reagan.html

[panaxanax]

Read your ping before I read the rest of the thread. No harm intended by my previous post to you.

I worked for this magnificent gentleman and American Patriot on his campaign while I was in college in So. California.

[thackney]

No harm done, my foolishness was first.

[WVNan]

Actually, Perry would be the only person I would be willing to vote for if he won the primary. But, I’m counting on Sarah. I don’t see a “winner” among the also rans.

[11th Commandment]

Yellow Dogs were the Southern Democrats.. Let no one fool the American people, the Blue Dogs of today are not the yellow dogs of 1930 - 1990. The all died or joined the GOP.

[hocndoc]

Yes it is. With the millions of girls involved, a given number of events will happen within 30 days of any point in time.

“In the 32 reports confirmed, there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine and some reports indicated a cause of death unrelated to vaccination.”

“There has been no indication that Gardasil increases the rate of GBS in girls and women above the rate expected in the general population, whether or not they were vaccinated.”

“Most of these people had a risk of getting blood clots, such as taking oral contraceptives (the birth control pill), smoking, obesity, and other risk factors. “

[Leto]

Don’t have a big opinion on Perry (Cain/Palin/Bachmann) are my faves, but let’s remember that Ronald Reagan was a democrat and Union President before he became a conservative.

[Arrowhead1952]

As my neighbor said, anything including Perry is better than what is in the white hut now.

[Dr. Sivana]

Yes it is. With the millions of girls involved, a given number of events will happen within 30 days of any point in time.

I'm sorry, but 30-50 healthy teenage girls dropping dead, even out of millions is suspicious. Once you eliminate car crashes, suicides and drug ODs, the number of deaths from a medical issue is as low as it gets. Like with the abortion-breast cancer link, I would not put it past the preople who draw conclusions to purposefully misread the patterns, even as they have to admit the deaths. Besides the deaths, many, many more get other unpleasant damage from this drug.

And of course, the girls who are not misbehaving are at no significant risk of HPV. The ones who are misbehaving are likely on the oral contraceptives that can be a contributing factor to the complications.

In any event, even if you think that this vaccine provides a genuine benefit, there are enough adverse indicators that demonstrate that it belongs nowhere NEAR being a universal requirement, especially when its effects were not widely tested. Those who want it can ask for it and pay for it.

This ain't tuberculosis, polio or smallpox. I am so glad the Texas legislature slapped Gov. Perry down.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Don’t have a big opinion on Perry (Cain/Palin/Bachmann) are my faves, but let’s remember that Ronald Reagan was a democrat and Union President before he became a conservative.

No, he was always a conservative. He was a conservative when he was President of the Screen Actors Guild and he was a conservative as a Democrat. Back then there were more conservative Democrats than Republicans. As the Democrats became more and more liberal many conservatives switched parties. Since then Republicans have become even more conservative and the Democrats even more liberal.