Posted on 09/15/2011 1:10:30 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Who might that be?
His appearance at Liberty University had been scheduled for a couple of months. A lot of headlines were written to make it sound like he retreated to Liberty and only talked about his faith, where he licked his wounds from being bruised in the Florida debate, yada-yada-yada. It's very good convocation and he tells the students some good things for them to take with them. Then the other link up there about "roar" is about the talk he gave the same day at the Virginia Republican Party (where there was a mob of press) and then he traveled to NYC and ate dinner with Donald Trump.
Read Post #22.
Either one of those, “spiritual or anti intellectual” works for me. Being both is better than being one or the other.
I am jaded and cynical about politicians, but I was moved!
That is just another version of the elite premise of libtards where religious people are too stupid to think and make decisions for themselves so they are unfit for freedom and need big government to tell them what to do. And libtards will be happy to be in charge of that big government.
The Left hates it that Perry tells them this is bogus. And just today:
If I have any problem with a “social conservative” appeal, it is that I find toooo, toooo many “social conservatives” wowed by that appeal from politicians and tooo, tooo willing to ignore that (a)it is not enough and (b) there are equally, or to put it another way - more universal - issues of Liberty that a mere “social conservative appeal” alone can conveniently ignore - at our common peril.
GWBush did very well in his “appeal” to “social conservatives” but governed in some areas no different than any other big government President; and not because he had a Congress that forced him to but by his own choices.
And, I am well aware that a large portion of social conservatives among the public are less than fully informed on the foundations of American political conservatism itself and many would not be entirely opposed to government efforts in favor of “social conservatism” that were no less co0ntrary to our common Liberty than are many measures that Liberals/Progressives/Marxists attempt today.
In a nutshell, I am looking for a “true Conservative” and if that person also has respect for and an abiding Constitutional understanding of our religious Liberties as well, I would find that more important than their own personal identification as a “social conservative”.
I want a President who governs as a Conservative - across the board, not one who simply speaks appealingly to this or that conservative interest group.
In that he is not really a conservative, but an "economic conservative" (RiNO) who is fully engaged with and mortgaged to big-bucks political supporters in Texas who have an Open Borders agenda because their business models rely on keeping wages dirt-cheap, flooding the labor market with rivers of illegal-immigrant labor.
This kind of capitalism is crony-capitalist because of a) the relationship between individual pols and their backers (money dictates the laws) and b) the use the backers make of government to plump up their annual results (busting wages, reducing their taxes, shutting out competition, etc.).
The track record of these big-business backers shows up in Texas state politics. Their agenda gets transacted, but the social-conservative agenda gets stiffed, and Perry and his lieutenant-governor cooperate with the RiNO speaker of the Texas house in making sure conservative legislation dies. They recently redistricted Texas's state reps, and the plan calls for pairing off the eight most conservative Republicans against one another and guarantees the Democrats will gain seats in the next election.
Rick Perry, despite the huge social and law-enforcement, education, and health problems created by crowds of illegal immigrants in jails, schools, and hospital ER waiting rooms, is solid in his Open Borders record, and his recent politicking to the contrary is a Potemkin-village false front designed to fool conservative voters.
This FR thread examined the recent debate and the debaters' performances and positions. The original poster has a noted (and commented-on) bias in favor of Ron Paul but is generally fair overall:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2777825/posts
Perry's Democrat-friendly, culture-hostile record on immigration, going back as far as 2001 and some things he said then, is explored in this FR thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2778074/posts
and also here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2777469/posts
Hope that gives you a good start on framing your picture of the issues that surround Rick Perry's primary candidacy.
lentulusgracchus calls anyone who isn’t his candidate a “rino.”
The Left is beside themselves -- going into overdrive because they just found out that over 60% of the GOP base agree with Rick Perry on social security.
It was good. Each speech has something from one before (there is overlap) but then they all have something new that grabs you. That part you mention, was what came out and touched me in that talk.
[Thee] Who might that be?
Why, we can pick from one of three genuine conservatives in the contest, Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann, and Sarah Palin. Palin hasn't declared yet (which you will point out gleefully), but she will. She's just waiting for the crowd to thin out, and the Media to expose their principal avenues and modes of attack, before she subjects herself to campaign rules.
Until then, she's having a good time running without having to play by CBS's rules.
Meanwhile, she gets to watch the river of hate poured out on Michele and say, "there but for the grace of God go I" .... and learn what the LSM are likely to do when she herself declares.
I still like Michele a lot, Herman I know less about but am impressed that so many FReepers speak so warmly about his practicality and lack of affectation -- and yet he brings some pretty serious real-world guns to the Tea Party agenda, chops he earned while being a Fedhead. In many ways he'd be very difficult for LSM Oppo to attack, and a special problem for the Chicago Boys.
I also have admiration for Rick Santorum's personal qualities, he has Senate experience, and he also has valuable personal experience of being hung out to dry and destroyed politically by Karl Rove, Manor Bush, and the homosexual PAC's. But for right now he isn't ready IMHO to make a comeback.
Uh, no. See my last to humblegunner.
I prefer Sarah Palin, but I'm only sticky when it comes to pretend-conservative, Judas-horse RiNO's like Rick Perry.
Alan Keyes said months ago the RiNO's would pull this, of using a pseudo-conservative to force conservatives to support Miltown Romney. Keyes thought Palin would be the Judas horse; but it looks like Perry's the one instead.
Run, run, run all the other conservatives out of the race ..... then do a deal and accept the VP nod on a Romney ticket, trapping the people who went for Perry in the primaries.
The only matter left in doubt about the RiNOs' play is whether they forsake Romney for Rick -- I say they'll stay with Romney, and use Rick as above. There is great cultural resentment among RiNOdom against Southerners like Perry -- Poppy Bush regarded Perry for years as little better than a not-so-reformed Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan. But then, Poppy despises all white Southerners as little better than trailer trash, who aren't fifth-generation RNC country-clubbers.
Really....
***********************
"Average" or "mediocre".
"Moderate"?
WFBjr could only wish he was as grand an intellectual--"I'm not against half naked girls,not as often as I'd like to be!" (so profound).
You could also see why he didn’t go wild at Monday’s debate with the out and out lies of his record. He is using Ronald Reagan’s playbook. Perry sticks to the truth...he is amazed to hear so called Christian spew out lie after lie. He sizes them up...and if they are stupid enough to lie then he sizes them up with their lying rhetoric.
Who forced you to click the link and read the thread?
FWIW, Perry is unapologetically pro life, 2A, and States Rights, and speaks the truth about social security. Can’t say that about all our recent GOP Presidents.
I’m not seeing a lot of equivocating on positions like SS even when it would be convenient.
Are you willing to vote for a human being with flaws and frailties?
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.