Posted on 08/17/2011 9:24:25 PM PDT by TBP
Rick Perry has counted on the staunch support of Texas conservatives during his two decades of statewide triumphs in Texas. He’s an anti-tax, anti-spending, anti-regulation, anti-Washington stalwart.
Richard A. Viguerie, chairman of ConservativeHQ.com and a leader on the right since the days of Ronald Reagan, called Perry a “committed conservative” whose presidential announcement “brought a wave of relief to conservatives.”
Then why are some conservative bloggers and activists warning others on the political right about a Perry presidential candidacy?
“Before Republicans start salivating too heavily, it is important to examine Perry closely,” says conservative talk-show host David Zublick. “His conservative bona fides leave much to be desired.”
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.chron.com ...
Which is unprincipled and wrong of Ron Paul.
Yes, Ron Paul is wrong on that. (Not the first time, or the last.) Check Michelle Malkin’s column on the subject, which I linked. The “opt out” was a fig leaf. But that is one of numerous issues on which Perry has completely flip-flopped. He has to do the same tightrope walk on immigration that Romney has to do on healthcare.
His fan club is gauging how conservative he is based on his empty rhetoric (which is grade A, even over the top sometimes) not his record.
I WISH he was the solid conservative some people think. The facts paint another picture. I don’t feel like playing the fool this time like I did with W.
Drones.
Nope. Pretty sure that's you. Same swagger. Same tough talk. It's you.
Don't be shy. Take a bow:
Manipulate how you like. The vaccine was added to the TX vaccine list for the purpose of preventing cervical cancer. You think Rick Perry gives a rats patootie who gets herpes — or whatever other funk is going around? You’re nuts. It was to prevent cancer. That’s it, nothing more. And there is ZERO EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY. Good lucky manufacturing THAT evicence to the contrary. (And don’t mistake my inability to respond over the next few days. Have at it. I’ll be back.)
Ok. I’ll bite, Winifred. Give me a minute to check the link to see the abomination........
Smile! You're on Candid Camera!
Talk to ya next week, Wini!
Did she announce?
I take it this is in response to what Israeli tactics he implemented. Perry took a trip to Israel (paid by taxpayers?), and that is all he came back with?
Yep, practically invisible like this one yesterday:
Gov.Sarah Palin talks with Megyn Kelly
I heard she was on Greta too, but I haven't seen that one yet.
Neither do I. Nor do I trust Perry and his so-called mea culpa that he only did it "for the children". He was in bed with the Merck lobby. Merck finally had to end its lobbying of state legislatures for mandatory Gardasil vaccines. India has halted its Gardasil program because of deaths and NZ is pushing for the same. This was nothing more than getting as many human lab rats as they could to test on (see excerpt below from the article posted at #157). It would take about 60 years for the true outcome of the test of this vaccine anyway. When drug companies and the CDC force their children and grandchildren to be the only subjects for their tests, and after 60 years can say there are no risks and it actually works, then we can revisit the need for the general public to participate.
This is not the first time Dr. Harper revealed the fact that Merck never tested Gardasil for safety in young girls. During a 2007 interview with KPC News.com, she said giving the vaccine to girls as young as 11 years-old “is a great big public health experiment.”
No, she hasn't, but that's no indication that she's not running. Did you think the same thing about Perry before he announced? Did you say, "He's not running."? I doubt it.
In your previous post you said,
Sarah Palin isn’t running. She’s not showing a single sign that she’s getting ready to jump in. She has merged with the background up to this point.
Her appearance at the Iowa State Fair and her interview there with Sean Hannity, plus the Newsweek article, show your statement to be little more than sour grumbling.
She hasn't "merged with the background". Far from it. And for those who are paying attention, she's showing all sorts of signs that she's running.
I almost had to laugh when the poster said, "she's merged into the background." Palin's awful busy for someone who's disappeared from public view, and who "isn't running".
She really ought to stop all that, and just go fishing or something, ya know?
“Sour grumbling”? What have I said that is “sour”? Nothing. I simply said that Sarah shows no signs of getting into the presidential race. The facts seem to have made YOU the “sour” one.
Feel free not to post to me if you can’t be civil.
Go back and read your post.
"Sarah Palin isn’t running. She’s not showing a single sign that she’s getting ready to jump in. She has merged with the background up to this point."
Those comments are a mirror image of what her detractors and her opposition say in the press and on Free Republic, every day.
Feel free not to post to me if you can’t be civil.
I wasn't uncivil to you. I merely pointed out that your comment sounded like the sour grumbling about Palin that I hear on this website every day.
Bother someone else. I Drey on?
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.