Posted on 10/14/2011 11:28:13 AM PDT by Clairity
Rich Lowrie, the Ohio wealth manager credited with crafting Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan, was a Romney supporter back in 2008.
Lowrie and his wife, Rhonda, each donated the $2,300 legal maximum to Romney's campaign that year, according to research from the Center for Responsive Politics:
This year, Lowrie has not donated to Romney, according to the Center's research, but he's only given $500 to Cain thus far in the campaign.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Paul's campaign asked supporters to celebrate the Texas congressman's Aug. 20 birthday with a donation — and they gave him $1.6 million on that day alone. It's a pattern for Paul, who can seemingly turn on the money spigot when he needs to; his loyal libertarian backers have delivered like that on five occasions, to the tune of a million or more at a time
By your logic, I suppose everybody should drop out and support Paul. The only reason they are staying in must be to split the vote and keep Paul down.
Love the way your project your own failing onto everyone else Clarity. Care to address the facts instead of continuing this smear about Cain?
So how much is the Perry Campaign paying you for your mindless campaign bot postings?
Who got in the race last after it was clear Romney was not going to get any appreciable support from Tea Party Conservatives?
Who got in the race after it seem Tea Party heroine Bachmann was going to upset Romney’s ride to the nomination?
Who does the GOP Establishment see as their back up card if Romney fails?
Who has long standing intimate ties with the Liberal GOP Establishment?
The answer is Rick Perry.
Bill Kristol to a NY Time Reporter telling him how the GOP Establishment plans to deal with “the Tea party mutiny”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2792217/posts?page=3
Kristol told me just after Perry entered the race, a development that essentially ended [the more radical Michele] Bachmann’s brief ascent. Establishment Republicans may prefer Romney to Perry, but their assumption is that either man can be counted on to steer the party back toward the broad center next fall, effectively disarming the Tea Party mutiny.
Wonder who Perry will be VP with?
Odd how that question never gets asked of Perry.
Could it be because everyone knows Perry is the GOP Establishment mole in the race to split the Tea Party/Conservative vote and hand the nomination to Romney?
Could it be because they know the ticket the GOP Machine is setting up is “Romney/Perry 2012? Think about it. Romney has the money, Perry has the idolatrous worship from the social Conservatives.
Could that be why the Perry camp is knowingly lying about Cain’s solidly Conservative record on both social and fiscal issues? Because they know full well Perry’s record can not stand close scrutiny?
What does anyone really know about Perry other then the nice words and platitudes he puts in his speeches? Looks like Perry is just Bush 3.0 another tough talking social conservative who will go to DC and be yet another good little GOP crony capitalist water boy.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/274042/perry-and-giuliani-katrina-trinko
Rick Perry is a Texan who boasts about how he shot a coyote during a morning jog. Rudy Giuliani is a New Yorker who has appeared before crowds in full drag as “Rudia.”
When it comes to political “romances,” Perry and Giuliani rank high on the list of odd couples. Perry’s endorsement of Giuliani’s 2008 presidential run came as shock to many in the GOP, who wondered why such a robust social conservative was the first (and ultimately, only) Republican governor to endorse a candidate who is openly pro-abortion and favors gay rights. But that endorsement was no one-time incident, nor a flash in the pan. For over a decade, Perry and Giuliani have supported one another through a series of races, with endorsements, public statements, and fundraising assistance. Different they may be, but they are nothing if not committed
s far back as 1999, Perry served as the honorary Texas chairman of Giuliani’s New York senatorial campaign. (The Texans for Giuliani invitation to a $1,000 per plate luncheon that Perry hosted employed this message: “We Texans need to ask ourselves how helpful do we think Hillary Rodham Clinton would be to the Republican presidential hopeful George W. Bush if he were to become president?”) In both 2002 and 2006, Giuliani returned the favor, endorsing Perry’s gubernatorial runs. In the 2006 race — a difficult one for Perry, who would ultimately eke out a win with 39 percent of the vote, just enough to catapult him over the other candidates in the four-person race — Giuliani’s endorsement was well-utilized and undoubtedly useful. In addition to a radio spot featuring America’s mayor, the Perry campaign sent out a fundraising letter touting Giuliani’s endorsement of Perry as a “strong and determined leader.”
In 2005, Giuliani joined Texas law firm Bracewell & Patterson (re-named Bracewell & Giuliani), strengthening his ties to the Lone Star State — and to affluent Texas Republicans ripe for fundraising appeals. Two years later, he sought out Perry’s endorsement for his 2008 presidential run. He got it.
A Perry aide paraphrased how Perry explained his support for Giuliani this way: “We don’t agree on social issues, but Mayor Giuliani provided leadership during a time of crisis for the country.” To Perry, Giuliani was a figure who had stellar national-security credentials, a key issue for him.
After citing the importance of the War on Terror, Perry publicly explained his Giuliani endorsement by pointing to the former mayor of New York’s track record: “What I look for is results, and Rudy Giuliani is the individual who will give us the results that will make America safer, that will move our economy forward, that will put strict constructionists on the Supreme Court, that covers a host of issues that are important to me and I think a lot of my colleagues and Americans as well,” he enthusiastically told Fox News host Brian Kilmeade in fall, 2007.
In that interview, Perry brushed off the ideological differences between the two men. He noted that he and Giuliani had discussed some of the issues that divided them, and spent an “inordinate amount of time together over the course of the last six weeks talking about issues both on the phone and face to face.” Those discussion satisfied Perry. According to the Dallas Morning News, Perry told reporters that Giuliani had “assured [Perry] that in nominating Supreme Court justices and on other important issues, a Giuliani administration would serve the conservative cause.”
Perry’s pre-emptive attempt to acknowledge that — and explain why — he had endorsed a candidate whose views on social issues differed so markedly from his own did not soften the surprise. In the aftermath of the announcement, much of the media coverage centered on speculation that Perry was aiming at the second slot on the ticket. Perry shot that down forcefully, saying bluntly he wouldn’t consider the vice presidency, but rumors abounded nonetheless. The Dallas Morning News reported that the Perry political camp saw little choice other than Giuliani since “Mr. Thompson’s campaign has sputtered and Sen. John McCain of Arizona is a long-shot.” (The relationship between Romney and Perry, if not outright hostile, had been at least complicated since an incident at the 2002 Olympics where the Boy Scouts were not allowed to participate, something for which Perry criticized Romney.) But the disbelief persisted: In comparison to Perry, “Giuliani comes across like Michael Moore,” wrote Austin American-Statesman columnist John Kelso, comparing the duo to “Dick Cheney touring with the Dixie Chicks.”
Despite the controversy, Perry did not downplay his endorsement but instead became a more vocal supporter of Giuliani. He campaigned for him in South Carolina, and that fall went on a four-day sweep through Iowa. Talking to voters at a roundtable in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Perry made his pitch for Giuliani by striking a pragmatic tone: “ You can have your purist candidate,” he argued. But “if they can’t win, you just wasted your time.” The voters were not convinced. A Dallas Morning News headline summed up Perry’s success in Iowa: “Perry Wins over Voters — But Not for Giuliani. Iowans Like Messenger More than His Message.”
In December, Perry added to the tension with a slip of the tongue. Defending Giuliani’s pro-abortion stance by citing his promise to support strict constructionist judges, the Houston Chronicle reported Perry saying, “Then the issue becomes very, very clear to me from the standpoint of who I want to support, and it is Mike Huckabee.” When questioned about what he had just said, Perry immediately called the Huckabee mention an “error.” But it lead to another round of publicity: The Austin American-Statesman headline said Perry had “defended” his Huckabee mention as “un-Freudian,” planting an idea in voters’ minds unlikely to cheer the Giuliani campaign.
As Giuliani’s campaign fell into disarray, Perry kept fighting, doing a five-stop sweep in January through Florida introducing Giuliani at rallies. But it wasn’t enough, and, when the Guiliani campaign impoloded at the height of the 2008 primary season, Perry found himself without a candidate. In February, he endorsed McCain, employing unsentimental language: “He and I may not agree on every issue,” Perry said when announcing the new endorsement, according to the Dallas Morning News.
Guiliani’s presidential ambitions may have evaporated in the Florida sunshine, but his friendship with Rick Perry continues to this day. In the 2010 gubernatorial primary, Giuliani backed Perry over the more socially moderate Kay Bailey Hutchinson, even going so far as to go to Texas to campaign for his friend. And the two don’t limit their conversation exclusively to politics: Perry told a Dallas audience last year that Giuliani had offered to bet him a pair of Texas cowboy boots that the New York Yankees would beat the Texas Rangers in the upcoming round of playoffs leading up to the World Series. (Perry must have received his boots: The Rangers won the series, 4–2.)
Now, with the 2012 primary drawing near, and both men considered possible candidates, their comity remains. “Rick has got a great record, probably one of the strongest records of any governor in America, and one of the longest running governorships. Rick is a good friend,” Giuliani told CNN this July. Dave Carney, a top political adviser to Perry, told the Washington Post that same month that “Rudy would be an awesome asset to any campaign. Of course candidates matter to voters, but folks of the mayor’s stature bring lot of value added to any effort.”
And so the bromance continues.
LOL
No, really.
LOLOL
Try harder.
It’s pretty obvious to anyone who will open their eyes:
“Even Herman Cain seems to like Romney. He’s dividing and conquering his foes, ensuring they’ll never gang up on him. And it helps that there is no consensus counter point - no McCain - in this race.”
http://swampland.time.com/2011/10/14/lessons-of-08-romneys-rivals-could-collude/
As if choosing Mitt over Mac in 2008, should concern anybody??
Good Grief!
FR Posters don’t want you supporting ANYBODY! EVER!
I hope you’ll take it like a man when Perry drops out.
I don’t think Cain is trying to split the vote; I think he wants to be VP, because when push comes to shove, he really doesn’t have enough political or governing experience to be President. We all criticized the Dems for supporting Obama despite his lack of experience, but even Obama had more political experience than Cain, since he had gone through several campaigns and won local and state office.
Granted, he won office through treachery and deceit and the support of the moneyed, but he knew how the process worked. However, he had no governing experience, and the only way he seems to believe it works is if he says what he wants and we have to do it. Unfortunately, he’s been pretty successful because we have never had anybody who simply disregarded US procedure and we weren’t ready for it.
But Cain has no experience of any kind, except as a businessman, and that’s a whole different ballgame. I think that people are looking for a savior now that Palin is out of the game, which IMHO is something that is extremely unhealthy (and which is what got Obama elected). But at some point reality will set in, and then I think Cain will simply hand over his endorsement to Romney in exchange for being VP.
You are pathetic. Really.
If Ron Paul weren’t such a kook on some issues, he may have a chance. He is half sense, half insanity.
Cain is the boy (can we say ‘boy’ any more?) of the week, doncha know?
Unfrackingtouchable.
Still waiting for you to address the facts, not just scream in hysteric denial when the truth about your Perry idol worship is made clear. See unlike YOU I don’t just make up things. I give you links to actually sources and facts.
Answer the questions.
Who got in the race last after it was clear Romney was not going to get any appreciable support from Tea Party Conservatives?
Who got in the race after it seem Tea Party heroine Bachmann was going to upset Romney’s ride to the nomination?
Who does the GOP Establishment see as their back up card if Romney fails?
Who has long standing intimate ties with the Liberal GOP Establishment?
The answer is Rick Perry.
Bill Kristol to a NY Time Reporter telling him how the GOP Establishment plans to deal with “the Tea party mutiny”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2792217/posts?page=3
Kristol told me just after Perry entered the race, a development that essentially ended [the more radical Michele] Bachmann’s brief ascent. Establishment Republicans may prefer Romney to Perry, but their assumption is that either man can be counted on to steer the party back toward the broad center next fall, effectively disarming the Tea Party mutiny.
Wonder who Perry will be VP with?
Odd how that question never gets asked of Perry.
Could it be because everyone knows Perry is the GOP Establishment mole in the race to split the Tea Party/Conservative vote and hand the nomination to Romney?
Could it be because they know the ticket the GOP Machine is setting up is “Romney/Perry 2012? Think about it. Romney has the money, Perry has the idolatrous worship from the social Conservatives.
Could that be why the Perry camp is knowingly lying about Cain’s solidly Conservative record on both social and fiscal issues? Because they know full well Perry’s record can not stand close scrutiny?
What does anyone really know about Perry other then the nice words and platitudes he puts in his speeches? Looks like Perry is just Bush 3.0 another tough talking social conservative who will go to DC and be yet another good little GOP crony capitalist water boy.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/274042/perry-and-giuliani-katrina-trinko
Rick Perry is a Texan who boasts about how he shot a coyote during a morning jog. Rudy Giuliani is a New Yorker who has appeared before crowds in full drag as “Rudia.”
When it comes to political “romances,” Perry and Giuliani rank high on the list of odd couples. Perry’s endorsement of Giuliani’s 2008 presidential run came as shock to many in the GOP, who wondered why such a robust social conservative was the first (and ultimately, only) Republican governor to endorse a candidate who is openly pro-abortion and favors gay rights. But that endorsement was no one-time incident, nor a flash in the pan. For over a decade, Perry and Giuliani have supported one another through a series of races, with endorsements, public statements, and fundraising assistance. Different they may be, but they are nothing if not committed
s far back as 1999, Perry served as the honorary Texas chairman of Giuliani’s New York senatorial campaign. (The Texans for Giuliani invitation to a $1,000 per plate luncheon that Perry hosted employed this message: “We Texans need to ask ourselves how helpful do we think Hillary Rodham Clinton would be to the Republican presidential hopeful George W. Bush if he were to become president?”) In both 2002 and 2006, Giuliani returned the favor, endorsing Perry’s gubernatorial runs. In the 2006 race — a difficult one for Perry, who would ultimately eke out a win with 39 percent of the vote, just enough to catapult him over the other candidates in the four-person race — Giuliani’s endorsement was well-utilized and undoubtedly useful. In addition to a radio spot featuring America’s mayor, the Perry campaign sent out a fundraising letter touting Giuliani’s endorsement of Perry as a “strong and determined leader.”
In 2005, Giuliani joined Texas law firm Bracewell & Patterson (re-named Bracewell & Giuliani), strengthening his ties to the Lone Star State — and to affluent Texas Republicans ripe for fundraising appeals. Two years later, he sought out Perry’s endorsement for his 2008 presidential run. He got it.
A Perry aide paraphrased how Perry explained his support for Giuliani this way: “We don’t agree on social issues, but Mayor Giuliani provided leadership during a time of crisis for the country.” To Perry, Giuliani was a figure who had stellar national-security credentials, a key issue for him.
After citing the importance of the War on Terror, Perry publicly explained his Giuliani endorsement by pointing to the former mayor of New York’s track record: “What I look for is results, and Rudy Giuliani is the individual who will give us the results that will make America safer, that will move our economy forward, that will put strict constructionists on the Supreme Court, that covers a host of issues that are important to me and I think a lot of my colleagues and Americans as well,” he enthusiastically told Fox News host Brian Kilmeade in fall, 2007.
In that interview, Perry brushed off the ideological differences between the two men. He noted that he and Giuliani had discussed some of the issues that divided them, and spent an “inordinate amount of time together over the course of the last six weeks talking about issues both on the phone and face to face.” Those discussion satisfied Perry. According to the Dallas Morning News, Perry told reporters that Giuliani had “assured [Perry] that in nominating Supreme Court justices and on other important issues, a Giuliani administration would serve the conservative cause.”
Perry’s pre-emptive attempt to acknowledge that — and explain why — he had endorsed a candidate whose views on social issues differed so markedly from his own did not soften the surprise. In the aftermath of the announcement, much of the media coverage centered on speculation that Perry was aiming at the second slot on the ticket. Perry shot that down forcefully, saying bluntly he wouldn’t consider the vice presidency, but rumors abounded nonetheless. The Dallas Morning News reported that the Perry political camp saw little choice other than Giuliani since “Mr. Thompson’s campaign has sputtered and Sen. John McCain of Arizona is a long-shot.” (The relationship between Romney and Perry, if not outright hostile, had been at least complicated since an incident at the 2002 Olympics where the Boy Scouts were not allowed to participate, something for which Perry criticized Romney.) But the disbelief persisted: In comparison to Perry, “Giuliani comes across like Michael Moore,” wrote Austin American-Statesman columnist John Kelso, comparing the duo to “Dick Cheney touring with the Dixie Chicks.”
Despite the controversy, Perry did not downplay his endorsement but instead became a more vocal supporter of Giuliani. He campaigned for him in South Carolina, and that fall went on a four-day sweep through Iowa. Talking to voters at a roundtable in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Perry made his pitch for Giuliani by striking a pragmatic tone: “ You can have your purist candidate,” he argued. But “if they can’t win, you just wasted your time.” The voters were not convinced. A Dallas Morning News headline summed up Perry’s success in Iowa: “Perry Wins over Voters — But Not for Giuliani. Iowans Like Messenger More than His Message.”
In December, Perry added to the tension with a slip of the tongue. Defending Giuliani’s pro-abortion stance by citing his promise to support strict constructionist judges, the Houston Chronicle reported Perry saying, “Then the issue becomes very, very clear to me from the standpoint of who I want to support, and it is Mike Huckabee.” When questioned about what he had just said, Perry immediately called the Huckabee mention an “error.” But it lead to another round of publicity: The Austin American-Statesman headline said Perry had “defended” his Huckabee mention as “un-Freudian,” planting an idea in voters’ minds unlikely to cheer the Giuliani campaign.
As Giuliani’s campaign fell into disarray, Perry kept fighting, doing a five-stop sweep in January through Florida introducing Giuliani at rallies. But it wasn’t enough, and, when the Guiliani campaign impoloded at the height of the 2008 primary season, Perry found himself without a candidate. In February, he endorsed McCain, employing unsentimental language: “He and I may not agree on every issue,” Perry said when announcing the new endorsement, according to the Dallas Morning News.
Guiliani’s presidential ambitions may have evaporated in the Florida sunshine, but his friendship with Rick Perry continues to this day. In the 2010 gubernatorial primary, Giuliani backed Perry over the more socially moderate Kay Bailey Hutchinson, even going so far as to go to Texas to campaign for his friend. And the two don’t limit their conversation exclusively to politics: Perry told a Dallas audience last year that Giuliani had offered to bet him a pair of Texas cowboy boots that the New York Yankees would beat the Texas Rangers in the upcoming round of playoffs leading up to the World Series. (Perry must have received his boots: The Rangers won the series, 4–2.)
Now, with the 2012 primary drawing near, and both men considered possible candidates, their comity remains. “Rick has got a great record, probably one of the strongest records of any governor in America, and one of the longest running governorships. Rick is a good friend,” Giuliani told CNN this July. Dave Carney, a top political adviser to Perry, told the Washington Post that same month that “Rudy would be an awesome asset to any campaign. Of course candidates matter to voters, but folks of the mayor’s stature bring lot of value added to any effort.”
And so the bromance continues.
No matter how loudly or longly you scream a lie, the truth always gets out in the end.
So keep screaming, the truth about Perry still will not go away.
heh... if that happens, it's going to get real interesting around here... I give it about a 50% chance of occurring.
Actually, I’d probably have to take Rudy over Mitt.
Find it interesting that noted Obama propagandist Ben Smith at Politico is joining in with the Perry smear attack on Cain.
Could it be the 0bama team is deathly afraid of facing Cain and while not in the least afraid of Perry?
Why else would the 0 team at Politico being joining in with the Perrybots?
He also said Iran is not a threat.
Your choice of candidate(s) exposes you as someone who should be ignored.
If that was the case then I applaud Mr. Cain for believing enough in his chances to spend $500,000 of his own money on the camapaign. That seems like a pretty major commitment from someone who just wants to be Romney's VP.
Things have changed considerably since last quarter? I doubt whether another $500,000 of Mr. Cain's personal funds will be neccessary in the 4th quarter. Things have also changed considerably since 2008.
Mr. Cain has been working his butt off in the last few weeks. He has given dozens of interviews on nearly every major network. I think he has been on FOX alone a dozen times. I have no intention of attacking Gov. Perry, he may have the most money, but he has practically been in hiding playing it safe. He may still become the winning candidate, but that does not seem like a winning tactic.
Unfortunately the big money comes from corporations who expect to get something in return for their support. The people who supported Obama have received billions in grants and loans. Personally I am more comfortable with a candidate who isn't completely tied down by corporate strings.
Your dozens of anti-Cain threads are starting to get tiresome. Gov. Perry would probably be my second choice of those who have a real chance to get the nomination, but your efforts are managing to alienate me and a lot of others here. I do not think that your divisive threads and posts are helpful to those of us who want to make sure that Obama won't be reelected.
I am certain that you will have some snarky remark to defend yourself. I am fairly sure that you are in too deep to take an objective look at your own actions. But I question the real value of your efforts here to our side.
Granted, he won office through treachery and deceit and the support of the moneyed
<><><<><><
Is there some other way of getting elected?
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.