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.
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.
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!
As perry detractors have explained to me ad nauseum, it’s not just that you get a donation, it’s whether the donation comes right before the action. So Perry was correct to only take into account the donations that happened in close proximity of the action he took.
What’s worse about this whole argument is that Merck stopped lobbying for these vaccine mandates after the uproar. They went another route, one of advertising and getting federal programs to finance the drug. Those programs were implemented in a lot of states, including Alaska during Palin’s term. While they were paid for by taxpayer dollars, they were strictly voluntary, so you didn’t have to “opt-out” of them.
The “I can’t be bought for $5,000” line was terrible. You immediately thought-so you need more than $5,000 dollars?
much like capitalism, Perry is the worst candidate... except for all the rest.
I believe that he understated the amount, not underestimated. But regardless, assuming that the $30 million in campaign funds collected is correct, the Merck amount is less than one-tenth of one percent. I doubt that that makes them that influential of a contributor.
Anyone else notice the facial expressions, demeanor, and behavior of Perry?
It scary similar to Bush and they were just discussing this on KFI Los Angeles and several others mentioned this last night, right here
It was a conflict of interest for Perry to take one penny from Merck while he was pushing their agenda.
Perry says his price is over $5000, knowing he received more than that amount, so this makes an honest skeptic wonder what his price is.