Posted on 12/18/2011 2:16:30 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
MASON CITY — Calling the Obama presidency “an experiment that failed,” Texas Gov. Rick Perry pledged Saturday night to bring government spending under control and reduce the role of the federal government in people’s lives.
“Are you better off today than you were $4 trillion ago?” he asked a crowd of about 100 at a town hall meeting at The Music Man Square.
He said most of the problems the country faces stem from out-of-control government spending, too many taxes and too much regulation of business.
Perry said American jobs are not going overseas because of cheap labor abroad, as many people think.
“The main reason manufacturing left the United States is because it became so difficult to do business in the U.S. because of all the regulations and taxes,” he said.
“The EPA is my favorite federal agency to dislike,” said Perry.
He said new John Deere tractors built in eastern Iowa will cost $20,000 more next year because of new equipment required by the EPA. “It’s a great example of federal overreach,” said Perry.
“I want to make government as inconsequential as possible in your lives,” he said.
Perry is a strong advocate of securing the border with Mexico, using local law enforcement, National Guard troops, aviation support and fast response teams.
“When I am president, we will shut down that border within one year,” he said.
He stressed his experience as governor of Texas for 11 years and as a Washington outsider as things that distinguish him from most of the other Republican challengers.
“Who is most prepared? Who has the vision? Who has the experience? Who is most likely not to be absorbed by what goes on in Washington?” he asked.
“I’m the one outsider, the only one who has been fighting Washington from usurping the power of the states.”
Other Perry points:
• Congress should be a part-time job with members coming back to jobs in their districts when Congress is not in session.
• There should be a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced federal budget.
• There should be a 20 percent federal flat tax.
• He will veto any bill that has “earmarks” — money for pet projects — attached to it.
• He favors the proposed oil pipeline from Canada. “I’m an all-of-the above energy guy,” said Perry.
He said the framers of the Constitution and signers of the Declaration of Independence did not envision the oppressive country America has become.
“Our freedoms and liberties have become smaller and smaller. I’m not sure our founding fathers would recognize this country as it is today,” said Perry.
He said as a young man and as governor, he never intended to run for president but is committed to serving the country.
He quoted the Old Testament book of Isaiah, chapter 6, verse 8: “Here I am. Send me.”
Read more: http://globegazette.com/news/local/perry-the-obama-experiment-failed/article_ab430d50-2934-11e1-b726-0019bb2963f4.html#ixzz1gsZq8Eun
“...if states want to fund local business, that’s fine but keep the Feds out of it.”
“...Government tampering with free enterprise and trying to central plan it all.”
I sense a contradiction here. Why is it ok for a State Government to tamper with free enterprise, central plan it all, and take from one to fund another local business, as long as the Federal Government is kept out of it?
I want them BOTH kept of of it - and by the way, so does the constitution.
That's a winning line for him, and he's the only candidate who can pull it off.
He is saying that, as president, he will stay out of state business. He’s not saying that he approves of what a state might do to subsidize business.
For example, California can be California and if it goes over a cliff, it goes over it alonw.
Feds out.
The media and their backers will elect the next president in this country, and Perry is not their choice. If you think you have a say in the matter, you are outnumbered by idiots who will vote for whoever the TV tells them to vote for. Sixty years of social engineering has brought us to this.
“Perry understands this little notion of “Freedom” “
From the Post you just responded to: “ if states want to fund local business, that’s fine but keep the Feds out of it.”
So then, Perry understands the notion of Freedom from the power of the Federal Government, but not Freedom from the power of the individual State Governments?
I want them BOTH kept of of it - and by the way, so does the constitution.
Then you and your neighbors have absolute control over that. That is why our forefathers intended that "government" closest to the people (ie state and local) are best because it will reflect what the people want.
I’m sure Perry understands that government shouldn’t be involved in private enterprise, but as president he also understands that it’s not his job to tell a state how to do things.
He understands individual rights.
He just places states rights over The Fed.
Here in Texas we believe in Local Gov.
Beyond that its up to the individual.
“I’m sure Perry understands that government shouldn’t be involved in private enterprise,...”
From his record, on the state level, that is not at all clear.
Nice try but no dice.
Gov. Rick Perry has been very clear on this. States have the right to invest in local business but keep Fed money and their regulations out of it.
That’s a problem. Individuals in North America have historically written contitutions for the express purpose of preventing governments at all levels, even those closest to the people, from exercising absolute control; from reflecting the will of the majority.
I like Rick.
So, the individual States have the right to loot one local business to give to another, but the Feds do not.
That is what you are saying. You just use the word “invest” to diguise your true meaning.
Yes, I know that Gov. Perry has been very clear on this.
“He is saying that, as president, he will stay out of state business. He’s not saying that he approves of what a state might do to subsidize business.
For example, California can be California and if it goes over a cliff, it goes over it alonw.”
That’s a problem, because when states go over a cliff, they take other states with them, mainly because we have a common currency. When a state “subsidizes business”, in reality they steal from some individuals to give to other individuals. The individual, or groups of individuals, must be protected from this injustice, this tyranny of the majority, at the State and local level as well as at the federal level.
The federal government was set up to be limited in scope and focus. States, however, are unlimited in their scope and focus, as long as they are limiting themselves to their own particular affairs.
So, California can be extremely intrusive if it wants to be, but it cannot tell Georgia that it must be also extremely intrusive.
So yes, though you might believe that states also shouldn’t be involved in interfering with private enterprise, they are allowed to do so.
And since Rick Perry is running for the top dog position, he can have an opinion as to how the federal government should conduct its affairs, but outside his responsibility if being governor of Texas, he cannot have an opinion as to how a state should conduct business, otherwise he just becomes a conservative clone of Obama, the Boy-king.
There would be some collateral damage when a state goes under, to be sure. But the states that end up damaged should have been limiting their exposure as much as possible. The fact that any state can damage another whenit goes under is probably a violation of the Founding Father’s intents for the country.
Rooting for Rick so I don’t have to settle for Newt - keep up the good works.
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.