Isn't that the argument used whenever Perry's conservative credentials are questioned?
Perry is not mentioned anywhere in this article.
>> Well Sarah Palin says its a victory so all debate is now closed. <<
..Isn’t that the argument used whenever Perry’s conservative credentials are questioned? “ <<<
I think no one appreciates the couple of huge bloopers made by Rick Perry over the course of ten years of governance over Texas, where he wondered off the reservation for ruthlessly fiscal reasons and for falling for the line of a misguided aide hooked in with a pharma company. However, over those ten years he has made a far better conservative than many who claim the moniker and he’s done it with far fewer errors over all. He, as a former democrat, has transformed Texas to all conservative governance weilding power that has stuck, and which makes Texas Exhibit A for why he would make a hell of a fine president. No one else even begins to offer up that degree of accomplishment. If he runs well he can curb Romney and will be poised to curb Obama. It’s seems to be coming down to either Perry or Romney early. Sarah is simply not going to run.
Isn't that the argument used whenever Perry's conservative credentials are questioned?
No. When Perry is questioned (on every Perry thread) there is argument, back and forth, and the Perry opponents usually outnumber the Perry supporters.
For many months, since the topic of a potential Sarah Palin Presidential run has existed, any questioning of Sarah Palin's desirability as the GOP candidate is always met with a chorus of:
"PDS! PDS! PDS! PDS! PDS!"