Posted on 09/22/2011 9:10:58 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Mitt Romney is an incredibly vulnerable Republican candidate, from his numerous policy reversals to his championing of the Massachusetts health care law that served as the basis from Obamacare. But for him to lose, somebody else has to beat him. And like Tim Pawlenty before him, Texas Gov. Rick Perry is blowing his chances to exploit Romney’s weaknesses.
The defining moment in this debate may well have been the point at which Perry went on the attack against Romney for being a flip flopper. As I noted earlier, there’s a long file to choose from. And Perry had clearly rehearsed such an attack – you can tell he was starting to go through the list of issues Romney had reversed on, and even used the “for it before he was against” phrasing, a not-so-subtle reference to the infamous Massachusetts flip flopper, Sen. John Kerry. But the exchange came toward the end of the debate, and as has been his habit, Perry began to fade as the debate wore on. During this particular answer, he wrestled for words and stammered. He couldn’t finish his sentences. If you weren’t a political junkie who knew all of the background, you’d have no idea what Perry was mumbling about. And Romney's smooth response made him come off as more steady and reassuring, even though on substance, Perry should have owned him.
The rest of the debate was hit or miss for Perry. But when he received an admittedly difficult question about what he would do if he got a 3 a.m. phone call informing him that Pakistan’s nukes had been taken over by Islamists, he struggled. He ended up giving an incoherent answer that was more of an information dump of random stuff he had been briefed on about the region. It was not very reassuring for those of us who are waiting to see if Perry can prove his dissenters wrong and come off as someone substantive, capable of beating President Obama, and of running the country competently.
Romney remains vulnerable. And unlike Pawlenty, Perry is starting from a stronger position in the polls, so he certainly has a good chance of ultimately winning. However, he’s going to have to step up his game by showing a better grasp of the issues, more stamina in these debates, and by being able to take apart Romney’s endless contradictions. In short, Perry has not blown it, but he is blowing it.
Patience. Palin will be in. She’s been smart to let Perry get exposed before she gets all the attention.
Perry will never be elected president, regardless of how much your fling your arms around and demand it. I believe many others are quickly coming to this conclusion.
Good. Seems Palin is winning before she’s even officially gotten in.
When he does that disappearing act, big-hearted Rick gets down to the real business of governance----enriching himself.
When Senor Ricardo released his "holdings" the other day, he sure left OUT a LOT----like for instance, that one of his multi-million dollar "political committees" paid for family trips all over the world. And what about his wife's "holdings?" She also worked for Texas government----for a non-profit that received "grants" from her husband, the Governor's, office. Just a coincidence, I'm sure (/snix).
=====================================
So how many political/personal slush funds does Senor Ricky have? This is what we know to date----could be many many more.
<><> “Texans for Rick Perry” committee is a $102 million slush fund he uses at will. Some PAC mega-donors paid in $100,000 each in order to influence Perry's official actions. Gov Perry paid for posh family trips to the Bahamas, Amsterdam, Madrid out of campaign contributions from his “Texans for Rick Perry” committee.
<><> Perry's "Make Us Great Again PAC" raised millions to flood Iowa, and other early voting states, with ads promoting their boy.
<><> At the time he was saying he WAS NOT running for president last year, Ricky's Super-Pac raised $55 million for a presidential race---in $2500 max per person/ $5000 max per corporate PAC contributions. Perry organizers would not say what the Perry presidential groups has raised to date.
<><> Perry bragged at the Tea Party debate that he raised $33 million for reelection that year and that he was "offended" at the inference that he could be "bought" with Gardisil mfg Merck's $5000 campaign donation.
<><> The $295 million Texas Enterprise Fund doles out millions of tax dollars to Perry supporters who then kick-backed to his campaign coffers. TESF also gave $20 million to Countrywide Mtge---the crooks at the heart of the US financial meltdown---- Ricky said the $20 million was to (cough) "create jobs."
<><> Perry raised funds for the Republican Governors' Association, and, in turn, Perry's 2006 campaign received two $500,000 checks from the RGA that he did not disclose as election law requires.
<><> His wife Anita Perry's $60,000-a-year salary at the Austin "nonprofit" "Texas Association Against Sexual Assault" comes indirectly from Gov. Perry's political donors, state contractors and companies that do business with the state or have issues before the Legislature. Of 37 major donors during Anita Perry's tenure as fundraiser, ONLY three have NO ties to the governor or state business. Anita Perry is paid from the "nonprofit" money pool that includes political contributions. TAAS also receives grants from state agencies AND the governor's office. Donating to the TAASA seems to be another way Perry dreamed up for those with an interest in state government to influence Perry. State grants to the "non-profit" could be easily laundered especially w/ Mrs P at the helm.
<><> One report called “The Governor’s Gusher,” documents 100 wealthy donors who “have sought corporate welfare, relaxed regulatory rules or other government favors” in exchange for their political largess in Texas gubernatorial races. A disturbing number of these profiteers made a fortune off government handouts or by bending or breaking regulatory rules.
<><> The $200 million Texas Emergency Technology Fund was created at Perry's behest in 2005 to act as a kind of public-sector venture capital firm, largely to provide funding for tech start-ups in Texas. Since then, the fund has committed nearly $200 million tax dollars to fund 133 companies. Mr. Perry told a group of CEOs in May that the fund's "strategic investments are what's helping us keep groundbreaking innovations in the state." A select few including Perry enjoy ultimate decision-making power over the fund's investments. Dallas Morning News found that some $16 million from the tech fund went to firms in which major Perry contributors were either investors or officers, and $27 million from the fund went to companies founded or advised by six advisory board members. The tangle of interests surrounding the fund has raised eyebrows throughout the state, especially among conservatives who think the fund is a misplaced use of taxpayer dollars to start with.
<><> Perry also has a pot of "inaugural committee" monies (bet that comes in handy).
<><> And so on and so forth, ad infinitum, ad nauseaum.
=============================================
Ricky's come a long, long way. It was only yesterday, farm boy Rick sold Bibles door-to-door to get money to buy a car. Perry's hopes to become a veterinarian were dashed when he flunked animal science in college. Then Ricky got into $$$Texa$ politic$-----and hi$ money worrie$ vani$hed. Now he travels to campaign stops in a sleek corporate jet, and has hundreds of millions of dollars at his disposal........over and above the paltry amount in his blind trust that he "allowed" voters to see.
Rick Perry=Fred Thompson II
Why don’t you think the conservative party in 2012 won’t win it all?
You have pointed out many times, and very well, the similarities between Perry and W.
That’s why Perry should not be nominated.
Whoever thought this guy could overcome his immigration record was smoking the evidence. Good grief.
From what I saw tonight and at the last debate, Perry is going to fade fast. Santorum is going to emerge as the one who can deliver a KO to Romney.
I’ve never considered Santorum someone who could actually win, but he’s clearly got the chops. He’s relaxed. He knows what he knows. And, unlike Perry, he’s had years of explaining his positions to groups and on talk radio and, if he gets more debate time, it looks like he’ll be able to run circles around Romney.
I was for Rick Petty until now. But his doubling down on his immigration stance has totally turned me off.
I agree with you that Perry is blowing it and likely will blow it all the way.
That said, I don’t agree that that makes Romney the prohibitive favorite.
Why did Perry rocket so high when he entered the race? Because people are looking for an alternative to Romney.
They’re still looking for an alternative to Romney.
What saw on that stage was that Santorum could be the one who emerges and KO’s Romney. Santorum seemed completely comfortable that he would be able to cut through Romney’s b.s. if given half the chance.
I’m beginning to think Santorum can beat Obama. His answers have been outstanding in both debates and, more importantly, they have been effortless.
Santorum is sort of like all the good stuff about Gingrich without the baggage.
We’ve just got to get beyond this phase where the debates are spread out over 8-9 candidates.
That’s one of the reasons I found myself, for the first time, gravitating toward Santorum.
He’s well worth watching and I think he could whup Romney if those two went head-to-head in a real debate.
Perry’s problem is not his debating skills. It’s his record.
His record is not going to fly with a lot of people, and not just around these parts.
It hasn’t been too long ago that Perry had back surgery. Maybe he just felt like garbage.
But it’s wildly wrong to dismiss the importance of political junkies. They are the ones making the small donations that add up and volunteering to make phone calls.
Debates are important because of how they shape the views and actions of the base.
With the poor economy being the #1 issue and government spending/government waste being a big part of that, how can any conservative stand on a platform that includes doling out moneys to illegals?
As to the “having no heart” side of the matter, isn’t that the liberal defense of all the other social programs that run amok in federal budget battles?
Also on the vaccine thing when he said "What about 'opt out' do parents not get?"
Thing is we have quite enough "arrogant and condescending" in the White House now.
So what?
If Romney dropped out tomorrow, that doesn’t guarantee that Perry wins the nom.
This was concerning.
It also seemed a little desperate.
I came away from the debate thinking Rick Santorum could take on Romney once the field thins a little and he gets more time.
I hope Rush plays some of Santorum's answer on-air tomorrow. They were worth hearing again.
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.