Posted on 09/13/2011 1:59:52 PM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
When Rick Perry joked last night that the $5,000 he had received from Merck wasn’t enough to buy him off, the line failed to charm the audience as he’d expected. Turns out, the line also significantly low-balled how much he’d received from Merck. “Merck PAC—the company’s D.C.-based political action committee—has given Perry $28,500 since 2001, according to Texas Ethics Commission filings. The bulk of that money came prior to 2007,” the Los Angeles Times reports today. Even so, that doesn’t make Merck one of Perry’s top donors: the LA Times notes that he’s received over the years donations totaling more than six figures from over 200 sources.
That $2850. per year. OMG...THE HORROR, THE HORROR.
Is there no end to his strategic fund raising abilities?
Surely he has been chosen by God for such times as these.
Ya know I appreciate the New York Tiomes, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, and other liberal newspapers and Media for all of these fine investigative reports on Rick Perry
But where were they 2 1/2 years ago when Obama needed investigating? Where are they now when Obama needs investigating. We still don’t know Obma grades in college, his thesis, How he got toPakistan and we don’t know about his affairs with his room mate when he was in college.
They don’t mind digging for dirt against Republicans, but they are mute about our Muslim in Chief.
He raised over $39,000,000 for the 2010 campaign, and some are trying to smear him over $2850/year.
It’s ridiculous, and Sarah Palin is being dishonest accusing Perry of crony capitalism.
I am with you
How could anyone who values honest reporting write that
there are many things perry is guilty of. This is not one
Let's all support crony capitalism (as long as a "Republican" is doing it). Party before ideals!
I think Perry should get into the used car business or get in to the lucrative undertaker profession, either one would suit him fine...jmho
they over paid.
Once they've gotten everyone in the GOP to believe that Perry's "the guy to beat," then they drag out lots of facts, insinuations, and/or other stats (real or made up) about the guy, and he'll sink.
Then they will compare the "real Rick Perry" against the "unreal Barack Obama" and Perry will not overwhelm the public, let alone conservatives!
The MSM usually does the above one week or 24 hrs prior to the General Election, however the true Rick Perry will come out and hopefully, all of our "friends" here on FR will not become fighting mad when others just don't think of him as "their guy" (I don't have a "guy or gal" as a favorite, I just refuse to jump on the one that all of the newest "buzz" is about!)
For instance, I never would have thought of myself as thinking seriously about Rick Santorum but the more I hear the guy talk, the better I like him. Everyone will say, "but he can't get elected." I'm so tired of hearing this old saw that it's becoming the "lie told a thousand times becomes the truth!"
Sorry, at this point, the only two people on that stage who would fit that category (to me, however) would be Jon (John Kerry twin, with less charm) Huntsman and Ron Paul (I know Paul has lots of friends here but the guy's really a Libertarian and I'm not that.)
So, that goes all the way back to ‘01.. How much of that is for the Gardasil issue? Not that I care, but it is to make a point.
How many times are you hacks going to post this?
The Gardisil issue is an issue but not a deal killer.
I think it’s good that a politician doesn’t know how much any given corporation donates.
Don’t forget the campaign fund is the politician’s retirement benefit. They get to keep everything that has not been used during the campaign. If a politician gets LOTS of donations and has little competition, he does not have to use much from his campaign chest so he gets to pocket quite a bit of money when he is ready to leave public office. My US representative retired with $4 million. I’ll bet that someone in Perry’s position to help his donors will be retiring with a lot more than that.
Sarah Palin smeared Rick Perry and his integrity without any proof.
When the media did that to Palin, I was outraged. Now that Palin is a part of the media, apparently her supporters have selective outrage at baseless smears.
She just got the words wrong. Should be as Rush said, “quid pro quo”.
I myself accused Obama of the very same over the swine flu vaccine. I would wager most here would agree.
No, pandering to La Raza and open borders is the deal killer.
If Katrina Trinko was a good or fair journalist she would show the contributions year by year instead of making the reader wonder. This article creates HASH!
I have always admired Rick Santorum.
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.