Posted on 05/27/2011 11:11:59 AM PDT by 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 coyotes 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 days 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 childrens 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.
See, I have no problem at all with referring to the southern border counties as ‘Criminal Alien Invader’ country. But don’t pretend we’re stone-cold idiots and say ‘wetback’ is behavioral. And don’t delude yourself into thinking throwing slurs and 20-pt fonts around makes a factless opinion any more persuasive.
What follows is an example drawn from personal life experience (of which, I may well have more than the two of you combined...). It is indeed a caveat against (you two) Perry enthusiasts falling into the same error that I experienced.
(As an aid to illustrating the experience/reality, I have done you the courtesy of literally "drawing you a [pair of] picture[s]"...)
~~~~~~~~~~
When we lived in MA, I was a personal friend of Scott Brown and Gail and their two daughters. I was also one of Scott's early supporters and campaigners who helped put him into the MA legislature.
Against the backdrop of MA liberalism, (and with "Chappaquiddick Teddy" as my US Senator and "Bahney Fwank" as my US rep) Scott shone as a relatively bright conservative "star":
When Kennedy passed on to his eternal sentence, I was one of the first to personally encourage Scott to go for Kenedy's vacant Senate Seat.
When he won it, that placed him in focus against the backdrop of true, Tea Party style conservatism:
...and Scott's liberal flaws became painfully obvious. (BTW, the three "stars" in the two images are the exact, same vector graphic objects. Only the fill color of the square changed.)
Suffice it to say that I no longer support Scott Brown for any national office, (and I am blissfully detached from the liberal hellhole that is Massachusetts politics.)
~~~~~~~~~~
Now that I live in (and am politically active in) rural/small-town Texas, I am similarly able to view Perry against the true conservative backdrop of solidly conservative, patriotic Texans, and...
Life lesson: Compared to Øbozo, the leftist Criminal Alien Invader, or Austin / academic liberalism, Perry looks pretty good. Compared to real Texas conservatism, Perry looks little better than what remains on your boots after a trip across the cowlot. (Just the fact that little Ricky bought his very first votes -- and has never stopped -- should make you stop and think...)
~~~~~~~~~
There is no way I will support Perry for any office (or in the primary). Should the Convention (G_d forbid!) select him as the Republican standard bearer, I will compare him to both his liberal opponents, and to genuine conservative standards -- and then decide if I can hold my nose long enough to vote to put another Scott Brown into Federal office.
(The graphics are far from optimized, but you have received more of my time and effort than you warrant. Furthermore, I am 'way over my domain's filespace limit -- so the above grapics may vanish soon...)
So, just rescind Article 8, para. 7-a [however, that one-fourth (1/4) of such net revenue from the motor fuel tax shall be allocated to the Available School Fund;] from the Texas State Constitution. That should free up plenty of funds without resorting to selling public infrastructure to foreign companies. (Of course, the passage of HB1112 by the Texas Senate on 11 May 2011 virtually guarantees that all Texas infrastructure is for sale)
The chicken pox vaccine is an example of a vaccine that is not truly ethical: made from a human cell line derived from an abortion and only justifiable economically if it keeps mom and dad in the workplace. (and I’ve seen two toddlers with shingles after the vaccine.)
Speaking of Canada, here’s an excellent review with discussion about the documentation on adverse events —controls vs. subjects
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1950172/?tool=pubmed
Right, and how do the schools get funded? Of course if we could shatter the death grip on our government by the teacher unions things could improve but...good luck with that.
That's called property taxes (which are onerous), and the Texas State Lottery (a tax on stupidity).
Don't even get me started on school funding in Texas. The way I see it, school district superintendants could lose 2/3 of their cushy pay checks and still be in the 6-figure range.
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.