Posted on 09/02/2011 6:15:36 AM PDT by Clairity
Most campaigns have to spend time and money putting together a research file on damaging statements their rivals have made. In Rick Perry's case, Maggie and I write this morning, the Texan has done much of his opponents' work for them:
Rick Perry describes Social Security as a "violent" attack on core American values. He says Sarah Palin may have been right that the Affordable Care Act created death panels. He says it was "unprincipled" to establish the Department of Homeland Security.
That's not the provocative, distorted language of a 2012 attack ad - at least, not yet. Rather, those are words right out of the Texas governor’s 2010 book, "Fed Up!", a slim volume that may be one of the biggest gifts ever given to the opponents of a presidential candidate....
Small chunks of "Fed Up!" have already entered the political bloodstream, such as Perry's description of Social Security as a "Ponzi scheme" and his talk of repealing the 16th Amendment, which permits a national income tax.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Link to the other article this one is referring to with more details about Perry's book:
Perry book a treasure trove for foes by Maggie Haberman and Alexander Burns
Perry ping
Excerpts from Rick Perry's “Fed Up!”
“We are fed up with being overtaxed and overregulated. We are tired of being told how much salt we can put on our food, what windows we can buy for our house, what kinds of cars we can drive, what kinds of guns we can own, what kinds of prayers we are allowed to say and where we can say them, what political speech we are allowed to use to elect candidates, what kind of energy we can use, what kind of food we can grow, what doctor we can see, and countless other restrictions on our right to live as we see fit.”
“I do think George (W. Bush) is basically a conservative man who believes in God, in the greatness of America, in the protection of life, and in protecting our nation from our enemies ... (but) he turned a blind eye to undisciplined domestic spending while he focused on ensuring funding for a very important war against the perpetrators of terror.”
Exactly right and they will NEVER realize that because they are statists! Just like the ones Rick Perry spoke of in the VERY SAME BOOK they are bemoaning here!
“The statists believe in a powerful, activist central government that advances a radical secular agenda in the name of compassion. They hide behind misguided notions of empathy and push token talking points about fighting for the little guy, all the while empowering the federal government to coercively and blatantly undermine state, local, and self-governance.” pg. 320
“The truth is, I don’t care what party the statist is in. The fact of the matter is, it is the statist, and those who support or enable him, who is the problem. For too long he has undermined this country by empowering the national government at the expense of liberty. An America defined by the statist in Washington is an America doomed to fail.” pg. 338 (both quotes from Perry, Rick; (2010-11-15). Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington.
Exactly! You’ve hit the nail on the head!
Good! I hope Perry’s opposition uses the book so much that most Americans will be able to quote chapter and verse! The more people hear the more they’ll like. Only Inside the Beltway establishment elites would find any of those comments to be anything even approaching offensive. Real people will love them!
That is an argument he wins hands down.
They'll hit him on wanting to end Social Security. That'll be more effective.
He needs a well defined response in order to blunt the fallout -- to the extent that it can be blunted.
I think he's been testing some responses: "Don't want to end it for those currently or about to receive it...thinking about future generations of workers...blah, blah, blah." But those are weak at best and will just lead to additional questions. He's kind of painted himself into a corner on this one and a few other as well.
Voters haven't understood this in elections past. Democrats scored points building arguments on the ridiculous premise that Social Security was sustainable. Those days are over. A majority won't buy that crap anymore.
Even if I'm wrong about that, Republicans have to tell the truth about Social Security and let the chips fall where they may. If the electorate falls for the Dem-agoguery again the nation is doomed. Republicans have to plant their flag, make their stand and fight the fight we need to have. Either the Dems get a mandate for decline or the GOP gets a mandate to do what needs to be done to avoid it.
Perry has planted his flag exactly the right strategic spot. It's time to rally ‘round.
IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
This “Fed Up!” book sounds very good! I’ll have to get a copy and read it.
Exactly. If we're going to take TRILLIONS out of the federal budget, it MUST include taking on the the "third rail" issues of Social Security and Medicare entitlement spending. And in fact, Governor Perry is not the only one who supports this: Dem, GOP Senators demand Social Security reform.
There is no doubt that Social Security needs to change, almost as much as Medicare and Medicaid need to. But making statements and promoting changes that would do away with it altogether is only going to frighten then electorate. Especially those who rely on the programs. Perry is on record as saying that Social Security should never have been implemented in the first place. He is on record as wanting to repeal the 16th Amendment. It’s hard to reconcile those with a claim that Perry really wants to protect it rather than end it.
“It’s hard to reconcile those with a claim that Perry really wants to protect it rather than end it.”
But of course we have to end it. That’s the whole point. We can’t have a system of social insurance that guarantees everyone a “decent” retirement. Such a guarantee fatally undermines everything that made our society successful. It has to change. We can have a welfare program for the poor, elderly and otherwise. We can ensure that nobody starves of freezes to death, but we can’t have social insurance. Period. If the electorate can’t grasp that reality, we are doomed.
Perry is trying to sell the public on the one thing it really has to buy if we are ever to return to our former glory or any approximation thereof. This isn’t a vulnerability in a candidate, it’s a prerequisite.
That's going to thrill those who depend on it, or who will soon depend on it then.
So what’s your point? You can’t be all things to all people. Either we win a mandate for the changes we need to survive or we don’t. You can’t win a mandate for change if you don’t ask for one. The GOP candidate has to ask and let the chips fall where they may. If that’s not a winning strategy, so be it. Turn out the lights, the party’s over. There is absolutely no percentage in trying to perpetuate the Social Security fraud for political gain.
My point? My point is that Perry is going to be asked why he's against Social Security and Medicare. And why he's advocated positions that would end both of them. And what he would suggest in their stead. And I suggest he come up with some reasonable answers other than 'Read my book' because his book doesn't have any.
Of course Perry will have to make specific proposals — in six or eight months. There’s plenty of time for that. But whatever he proposes will have to change Social Security and the rest of the New Deal/Great Society welfare state into something unrecognizable and much more benign. Any candidate who can’t propose and defend such change isn’t worth the effort associated with going to the polls.
Perry’s book explains quite clearly that Social Security and Medicare are destroying us. That’s exactly what America needs to hear. Making that case is the necessary first step in digging ourselves out of the hole we find ourselves in.
You seem to think Perry should drop into a defensive crouch and try to explain that he really loves Social Security and wants to save it for future generations. That lie has run its course and trying to get it around the track one more time would be a terrible mistake. One way or another the welfare state is going to be dismantled. Nothing good can come of trying to hide that fact from the electorate.
Perry doesn’t have to look for ways to mitigate the political fallout from his critique of the welfare state. He needs to stick to his guns, which seems to be his plan.
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.