Posted on 09/23/2011 4:42:52 PM PDT by Kaslin
Politics: Despite the "gotcha" sniping at Thursday's debate, Republicans need to keep their eyes on the prize. The target for 2012 is not Santorum, Cain, Bachmann, Romney or Perry. It's the current White House occupant.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry must have felt a bit like Gen. Custer at Little Big Horn at the Orlando debate, a made-for-TV contrivance in which those who have a real chance to be president must take pokes and jabs from those who don't.
We appreciate this may be a necessary evil in which front-runners without stamina — the Ed Muskies and Rudy Giulianis, for example — are weeded out.
Still, we must understand that while the goal is the nomination, the prize is the White House. Lost in the brouhaha over tuition for illegal aliens and mandated vaccines is the fact we simply can't afford four more years of President Obama.
Perry has given awkward responses. How can he debate the president, the whispers ask. Sound-bite debates in which you thrust and parry (no pun intended) with eight other candidates, as well as the pundits, are one thing. Comparing your job-creating pro-growth record in a booming state to the record of the arguably worst president in American history is something else.
Those former and nongovernors without a 1,200-mile border with Mexico may criticize, and perhaps justifiably, Perry's embrace of a college tuition break for illegal aliens. We've opposed it too in the past.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
I looked into it.
Congress gave the federal government authority to override environmental restrictions to build the fence. Nevertheless, in 2007, President Bush and Governor Perry agreed to course for the fence that stayed a significant distance from the river in the Brownsville area, due to concerns of the state of Texas (i.e., the Perry administration) that a riverside construction could cause the course of the river to be affected during flooding.
So Gov. Perry pushed the fence away from the river, and then his supporters claim that the fence won’t be effective away from the river. Nice try.
I am.
I don’t see why Romney is the automatic fall-back guy if Perry crashes and burns.
I've taken a second and third look at Santorum, Cain, Bachmann and others. The all have shortcomings and they are all presently well out of the front ranks.
Romney is not the "fall-back guy" for me and I expect he's not for many other conservatives. I won't vote for him in my State's primary.
But the plain fact of the matter is that he has skill and preparation and funding. He is at the front and will likely remain there throughout the primaries. If you don't want Romney and you don't want Perry then you've got some explaining to do. Who's it going to be and how do you expect them to get there?
These questions should be obvious to everyone.
No one is saying that. Perry's been attacked from all sides in three debates in two weeks. Some of his opponents are not asked their views, they're asked why his views are wrong. When does Romney get his turn? When do the others?
If every debate is about destroying one candidate, how is that vetting or battle-testing the field?
Um, these questions ARE obvious to everyone (except maybe the person who says they "should be" obvious to everyone?). In fact, they are EXACTLY what we're all talking about here.
Romney is not the "fall-back guy" for me and I expect he's not for many other conservatives. I won't vote for him in my State's primary.
So, if you won't vote for Romney and you aren't happy with Perry, which seemed obvious, and unless you aren't going to vote at all in your primary, it seems obvious you will have to consider voting in the primary for one of the other candidates.
And, yes, it's obvious that they ALL have short-comings. Happens every time!
Even living in San Diego, I find that news report disturbing.
Yep.
But none of these behind-the-scenes shenanigans are determinative. What I mean is: these attacks by the Loggie underminers are unavoidable, but that doesn’t mean they are unwinnable.
I have not been a Santorum supporter, though I’ve always liked the man as much as he was on my radar screen.
However, the Romney/Perry offering isn’t working — at least not very well — for the base, for different reasons. Since the point of a robust primary is to shake this stuff out, seems to me it’s worth pushing back a little on the assumption sometimes out there that we only have Romney and Perry from which to choose.
It’s true we may very well end up with either Romney or Perry as the GOP nominee, which I will be the first in line to vote for in the general.
But in the meantime, before the first primary vote has even been taken, I don’t think there should be a rush to proceed as though we only have two viable candidates.
Clearly, Romney & Perry are the top tier right now. But it’s early — unless a lot of primary voters think it isn’t!
True, but Bachman, Santorum, and Romney will never admit it before a large audience.
Perry was decimated by the in-state tuition for illegals debate last night, in particular, his response that people who did not agree with this were “heartless.”
Very true.
I agree. Romney is okay and I would vote for him instead of Obama, but I see Romney as a man that Rove and others in the Ruling Class are trying to jam down our throats -- just like they did with McCain and Dole.
But what is that but "A Wall"? And what is a "Wall" except a "barrier" meant to keep illegals from entering our country? And why can't people understand that those of us wanting a "Wall" simply use it as a common term for one of many methods for protecting our border from incursion? Beefing up the border patrol? Sure. Putting real meat into our current immigration laws by enforcing them, going after those who employ illegals and some form of barrier to at the least minimize the potential for incursion will go a long way.
Most of all, once the carrot is removed, there will be little reason for the incursion, and little reason for those already here to stay. And by "carrot" I include work, health and education benefits, potential amnesty, and any chance of becoming an American citizen. Unless you come here through lawful means we don't want ya.
Vote for whomever you so choose. Just know that a vote for a 3rd party, a write-in, or not voting at all in the general election will only help 0bama.
Spin it however you want. Refusing to vote for Perry in Nov 2012 (even if his "hard hearted" comments hurt your feelings) HELPS 0BAMA. Period.
My solution is simple: Let's all vote for Cain in the primary!
Not so much "said" as "didn't do" ...... the Administration reached out to Arlen Specter when he was in trouble politically, to give him practical help and support. The Administration political people went to Sen. Santorum and asked him to support Specter, which Santorum most reluctantly did. Then when Santorum got into trouble with his displeased base, who were sitting on their hands, the Administration refused to extend support but left him twisting in the wind instead. I read the homosexuals' online gloats over Santorum on Election Night when he was defeated -- they were even gloating over his little girl's tears (she was all of six) as she cried for her daddy during his concession speech.
Election ping
WTF - are we supposed to? Like are we supposed to go after someone's Catholicism, Judaism, or as a Baptist, Evangelical -
You expose yourself - and it ain't pretty.
As in most anything “Federal” we are left with little in value yet at great cost. Thus, the wall you describe. Unfortunate but to be expected. Yet I have no doubt some method of barrier can be effective in minimizing incursion; whether Perry agrees or not. But as I noted that’s just one piece of the puzzle. Our first decision has to be a rejection in kind of any, ANY, carrot given to these people. Then proceed from there. And a reduction in state education expenses is a carrot. They’re here illegally. They don’t deserve it. And for those who say “The children benefit; not the parents” I say WRONG! The parents benefit because that’s one reason they’re here to begin with. It simply coddles to their expectations.
Stop it, dammit. Stop coddling them.
I like Santorum, but I don’t think that he can get past the gay lobby in the media.
I forget what it was that Santorum said that set off the gays. I know that it was about the Texas case and state’s rights. At the time, I thought that his comments were very astute and brave, but I can’t remember what they were.
We, the rank and file have had our fill with business as usual. We want real change and not just letters after a name. And that change just scares the living crap out of RINOs everywhere including around here, afreaid they will lose their gravy train ride and control of the purse strings.
I'd like to 'double down' on your sentiment here.
Considering we haven't even tried to build the fence in Texas it amuses me when all the so called experts condemn it as not going to work because.... . Makes one wonder where they got all that expert knowledge from.
Could it be that Palin scares them should she jump in the race!? Me thinks so.
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.