Posted on 10/01/2011 1:40:24 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Voters encountered a confident and combative Rick Perry last night at the first New Hampshire town-hall meeting of the Texas governor's presidential campaign.
After uneven debate performances, Perry didn't hesitate as he took questions from voters about job creation, Social Security and global warming at the Adams Memorial Opera House in Derry. Throughout, he pitched himself as the Republican candidate who presents the clearest contrast to President Obama.
"We need a nominee for the Republican Party that is a clear contrast with Barack Obama," Perry said. "Ronald Reagan said it pretty good when he said 'Now is the time for bright colors, not pale pastels,' and let me tell you I am that bright color."
Perry needed little prompting to repeat his earlier characterization of Social Security as a Ponzi scheme, a description that rival Mitt Romney has seized upon. When state Rep. Al Baldasaro, a Londonderry Republican, praised Perry as the "only candidate that has stood up" and used the comparison, Perry said the government must reform the program so it will be there for younger generations.
"If we have not addressed this issue of Social Security it will not be there for them," he said. "And that is in essence the description and the characterization of a Ponzi scheme, for them to pay into it and those that are in first get the money and those that are in last don't get it."
He advocated allowing states to opt out of Social Security and create their own programs. Perry also said states should receive block grants to pay for Medicaid.
"Washington, D.C., has to get a lesson," he said. "And the lesson is all wisdom does not emanate out of Washington, D.C. They need to let the states be greatly more involved in how our Medicaid populations are taken care of."
When Cindy Brasier, a 56-year-old from Salem, asked if she would lose a portion of her Social Security benefits under his plan, Perry assured her that she would receive her payments in full. He said a new program should be created for people who are still young but said he doesn't know what age should be the cut-off.
Earlier, state Rep. Phyllis Katsakiores, a Republican from Derry, told Perry seniors are having a hard time, in part because their Social Security benefits have not risen in recent years. Perry responded that the government could help seniors by bringing down energy costs. That could be done by reducing environmental regulations that stifle domestic energy production, he said.
"Allow those energy sectors to compete against each other, and that will drive down the cost of these seniors' expenses because they're on fixed income," he said. "Everything that we can do to drive down those fixed costs for our seniors citizens."
One man challenged Perry about his skepticism of global warming. The man charged that Perry had ducked a question in a previous debate when moderators had asked him what sources served as his evidence.
"I'm ready for you this time," Perry said, prompting a laugh. He went on to say that in recent weeks a "Nobel laureate of some acclaim," whom he did not name, had decided there is no definite proof that global warming has been caused by humans. The audience applauded.
"For us to take a snapshot in time and say what is going on in this country today and the climate change that is going on is man's fault and we need to jeopardize America's economy," he said. "I'm not afraid to say I'm a skeptic."
Perry said that Texas substantially reduced its levels of certain greenhouse gases during the decade after 2000.
When the questioner tried to interject, Perry responded, "Hold on, I got the mic here. You got your question, and I'm going to answer." But he let the man speak again afterward.
Throughout the meeting, Perry spoke of the need to foster a strong economic climate by lowering taxes, limiting regulation and erecting barriers to frivolous lawsuits. He also got into the discussion about whether New Hampshire should adopt a right-to-work law, which would prevent unions from charging fees to non-members. The state Legislature passed the legislation, but it was vetoed by Gov. John Lynch. Perry told the crowd last night that New Hampshire could become one of the most competitive states if it adopted the policy.
"Right-to-work is not anti-union bill, it is a pro-jobs bill," Perry said. "And our friends who have chosen to be in unions, they'll have more access to more jobs."
The town hall was moderated by John Stephen, the 2010 Republican gubernatorial candidate, who selected the questioners. Perry took questions for a little more than half an hour. He kicked off the meeting by signing an anti-tax pledge before Tom Thomson, the son of former governor Meldrim Thomson.
LOL, LB!
I only live about 10-15 miles from the ballpark and didn’t know that!! The local TV announcers never use the name Ameriquest. ....I thought it was still called the Ballpark in Arlington! ..........Guess I’m gettin’ old.
It’s easy for any AMERICAN to see what’s NOT being done on your border. The fact we are being invaded says it all...the fact Texas has enabled this invasion is apparent to all.
Americans are through with the febble attempts Perry spews about “securing” his investments on your border. We want the border fenced and armed by men to shoot when necessary. Period...it is not hard to understand that except by those who somehow think their state does not have to comply with the nations desires.
You guys want it both ways...to continue to use cheap labor...appeal to your hispanic population , which is fast outnumbering your own....and make claim to being a “healty” state for employment and all the nonesense that’s spilled over these threads to support Perry and his Globalist ambitions.
I will not do so and fight to retain our nations sovernity...we are not Mexiamerica....We are the United States of America....Texas needs to get on board with that and stop the destruction to your state and to the nation. Or sell yourselfs out, which you are doing, to Mexico and become their northern Frontier.
No, Perry is not at all responsible for the political career of Al Gore and his continued rise to power in the ‘eco-elite’. Perry endorsed Gore as the southern Democrat in the 1988 race, back when Gore had a prolife record and more moderate image but Gore’s candidacy went nowhere, and Perry had pretty much given up on the Democrats when they nominated Dukakis and he switched to Republican party. No, Perry did NOT ‘assist’ the Gore campaign, that has been debunked; endorsing is all he did.
The eco-elite have been in power since the 1970s, getting the EPA to do nutty things, an EPA created under Nixon, and attacking opponents (remember James Watt) along the way.
“Do you deny Gore is a major reason for the current EPA power, regulaions and problems in America?”
Easily deniable. Sure, Gore has beaten the drum for Glboal Warming ... but, wait, under Clinton/Gore they didnt even pass the Kyoto accord!!! Did you not notice that? GWB got the blame for not doing what Clinton/Gore didnt do either.
President GHWBush passed 1990 clean air act, that did more to tighten regulations than anything under Clinton. Clinton had a ‘gas tax’ idea that got reduced to a 5cent/gallon idea, that helped the GOP win in 1994. In the end, we saw more regulations added under GHWBush than Clinton / Gore.
Fast forward to NOW, and Obama and EPA is running riot. More dangerous now than ever. Obama and his minions, not gore, doing that.
Meanwhile Gore and the global warming conspiracy is collapsing. Gore HIMSELF has done almost NOTHING to advance real environmentalist laws. Not for lack of trying, but Gore has been a failure.
Rather it has been other people, including RINO Republicans advocating and passing these laws, who have done more harm than Gore.
Case in point: McCain, Romney, Pawlenty, Gingrich, all have jumped on partially or fully at some point the global warming bandwagon. All have now stepped off, but note: Perry never jumped on it. And since 1990, when Perry beat liberal Democrat Jim Hightower, Perry has been the opponent of eco-extremists and leftists on this and other matter.
That is what it's' called...Ameriquest has been out for a couple of years, but of course Loman wakes up to a new and different world every day....the boy ain't right!
Thats what I was thinking, his veto would have been just a
symbolic and futile act
Mike
Good question alice — good comments.
Bump!
Thanks Quickgun.
I don’t “huff” or “puff” but Perry will win Texas.
Did you stay up last night formulating that, what is it — a question? I’ve read it twice now here and on another thread and darned if it just makes absolutely no sense to me at all. None. Period.
What in the world are you saying? And why?
So if something is wrong, but “only” effects one percent of the student population, it’s okay? I’ll bet NAMBLA would love to hear that!
...the fact Texas has enabled this invasion is apparent...
Texas has spent over $400 million already in trying to secure the border, since Bush and Obama both refused to put sufficient resources on-site to do so. Texas is burning taxpayers’ dollars to keep law enforcement personnel and equipment in the border area to support the Border Patrol, who are outnumbered by the aliens.
Thanks for confirming that I’m not too badly addlepated in my old age, RVN! I don’t recall Tom Grieve or any of the local TV sports guys using the Ameriquest name.
That's my point. So, one step at a time;
1.)Perry, nor any other Republican, will win CA, will they?
2.)They won't win CA because the illegals have corrupted the election process at all levels. B-1 Bob Dornan's loss many years back signaled the end of any Republican win.
3.) Prior to that time, CA had a Rick Perry-like approach to illegals, and no one thought that CA could be lost. After all, how could illegals take over the whole state? With the help of'compassionate conservatives', that's how. Now it's gone.
4.)Texas is next in line to be lost to Republicans with a Rick Perry like 'compassionate conservatism' approach.
5.)So, to prove that it really won't matter that TX goes solid Blue, Perry needs to assure everyone that it doesn't matter that he won't get a single TX electoral vote.
6.)And then show us how to win without CA AND without TX.
>>Guess I’m gettin’ old.
The kleptocractic pigs in the Farm House are counting on that FRiend.
Best wake up and start paying attention whilst we can still pee in their cheery O’s ;-)
First, thanks for teaching me it isn’t ‘here, here’. 8>;
I’m amazed at the energy being applied against Romney’s only foil, so far, on FR.
“Do you deny Gore is a major reason for the current EPA power, regulations and problems in America?”
“Easily deniable. Sure, Gore has beaten the drum for Glboal Warming ... but, wait, under Clinton/Gore they didnt even pass the Kyoto accord!!! Did you not notice that? GWB got the blame for not doing what Clinton/Gore didnt do either.”
Aside from your other incorrect and ill-considered post points, are you honestly expecting people to buy that Gore, through his actions like movies, speeches to congress, books, TV, CARBON CREDIT SCAM/CCX/CARBON TAX and others did not contribute mightily and ifluence ....
Forget it. Not worth the time. Perhaps you didn’t keep up on world events over the last 20 years, but some here did.
I am also amazed..
If one strongly supports another candidate...fine... but the vitriol and misrepresentations against Perry and Texas are indeed disturbing..
I mostly scroll by some of the regular Perry slammers..No matter how many times corrections are made with quotes and links..the same slams are being posted.
If one doesn’t like Perry ...that’s fine..Let’s just keep it honest and fair.
LOL...:oP
Our Constitution certainly says just that and our populace would hope to expect the co-operative effort of the Governors rather than working against the security of this nation as Perry has done...you’ve seen the stats throughout the threads of what he’s opposed time and time again.
Why don’t you post the millions annually the US tax payers send to Perry for the border.... and while you’re at it account for the so called 4oo million Perry put toward the border...where did it go and how much?
>>>>..I thought it was still called the Ballpark in Arlington!
>>That is what it’s’ called...
No super genius, today it’s called Rangers Ballpark in Arlington
"It was known until May 7, 2004, as The Ballpark in Arlington when Ameriquest bought the naming rights to the ballpark and renamed it Ameriquest Field in Arlington."
I hope your “intel” was more accurate back when you and your ACME “bucket” were in the air.
FAIL.
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.