Posted on 09/23/2011 9:16:39 AM PDT by RobaWho
Everyone here in Palinville who looks forward to good hard competition will be relieved to know that Gov. Rick Perry was NOT drunk at last night’s debate, all appearances to the contrary. It’s just that before taking the stage he inexplicably chose to receive a Gardasil shot, one of whose known side effects is mental slowness.
I heard about the whole pre-debate immunization from Michele Bachmann’s Twitter.I could be wrong on that. It’s just the information I received.
But enough about my opinion of Perry’s debate performance, let’s hear Dan Riehl’s …
(Excerpt) Read more at conservatives4palin.com ...
“Newt who flat out said zero is a socialist”
Newt nailed it.
Newt’s brain, Perry’s experience, Romney’s executive look & suit, Cain’s freshness, Bachmann’s passion, ...
gotta get it in one candidate tho...
“How exactly was a non-millionaire, chief family breadwinner, one married to a union oil field worker and Mom with 5 children, supposed to personally pay out millions (she didn’t have) in legal fees”
The way other folks have done it is through a legal defense fund. Palin has a lot of supporters who would have contributed to that.
According to Rick Perry's OWN intrepretion of the 10th amendment (not MY interpretation, by the way), the 10th amendment stands for "States Rights", and the federal government has NO say over anything NOT directly referenced in the Constitution, instead we should "send it back to the states" to deal with and completely wash our hands out of it.
"Protect the border" is NOT listed as a federal responsibility in the constitution (yes, it does say the feds shall "protect states against invasion", but it also says feds shall ensure that NO person is "deprived of life" and that hasn't stopped the "States Rights!!!" crowd from insisting the feds can do nothing to regulate abortion, whereas states can legalize abortion for any and all circumstances)
Going by Perry's own logic then, "states rights" means its the responsibility of the Texas government to secure the border, not the Feds.
As Rick says, you either believe in "states rights" or you don't. He seems to think states have the "right" to do ANYTHING they want aside from securing their own border. He can't have it both ways.
Cute argument, but you can’t be taken seriously when you say ...
“”Protect the border” is NOT listed as a federal responsibility in the constitution”
...
‘provide for the common defense’ surely includes our boundaries and borders!
in fact, in a speech, Rick Perry himself stated that as one responsibility of the Federal Government.
your argument reminds me of those liberals who think ‘conservative small government’ equates to Somalia. Cute misdirection.
Amen! Awesome post. Thanks.
Guess that's why Perry backtracked on his comments that NY state legalizing gay marriage is "fine"
Perry fans don't seem too happy when Perry's defition of "states rights" to applied to other situations.
The Feds have been suing AZ for the last 10 years?? Geez, I didn’t know that!
Furthermore his stance on illegals (with the exception of tuition) is the same as Sarah Palin's.
I swear I remember seeing you on threads where Palin was being raked over the coals. I don't recall hearing you complain about that.
Huh? Palin already beats Perry hands down in every one of those categories. What's she gonna do - slam it in reverse?
Perry was on the Hannity show today, and doubled down on what he said about in state tuition for the children of illegals.
This, after the enormous embarrassment of last night.
He truly does not 'get it'.
Reagan was a great man, but he was a man. Not a god. I think he'd be the first to ask us to not treat him that way.
The comparisons that some have made between Palin and Reagan are entirely apt. They share a great many personality traits, and the track of their lives and accomplishments are on the same vector.
Palin is also completely candid about the fact that she has purposely followed in his footsteps. It shouldn't surprise anyone that she does and says things reminiscent of that great man.
Her nearly unprecedented popularity with the public is a strong indicator that she's learned well from her mentor.
Feds have been doing nothing in the past 10 yrs..bet you knew that
“Her nearly unprecedented popularity with the public...”
You had a semi-good rant going there until this...yikes.
You had a semi-good rant going there until this...yikes.
Name anyone who can draw a larger, more enthusiastic audience than Sarah Palin, or who has/had a coast to coast ground team of volunteers already organized prior to their entry into the primary?
Since we're only discussing popularity here, which of the declared candidates has sold more copies of a single book than she has? Which of them is so popular, that they were offered their own mini series on television? Who among them was more highly sought after for their endorsement during the 2010 midterms? Care to compare Sarah's Google hits to any other Republican politician currently running? How about number of Facebook fans? According to CafePress, Palin's gear outsells the rest of the field, combined (I've got the chart if you want to see it).
Few things about Palin are as unquestionable, as her popularity.
That’s a different slant. I agree. She’s a big celebrity. Lady Gaga has 43 million Facebook fans. Michelle Obama has 6 million. People love ‘em !
I thought you mean popular as a politician. My mistake.
Are you always such a snarky sourpuss? You know full well that I was drawing comparisons between Palin's popularity, and that of the declared candidates, because you more or less challenged me to.
You cocked your eyebrow when I said that Palin has a nearly unprecedented level of popularity with the public. I proved that she does. Now rebut what I said, or stand corrected.
Most everyone has been turning a blind eye for well over 10 years. At least Arizona is willing to step up to the plate and take it on the chin from the Feds.
States do define marriage law, that’s why saving traditional marriage has been a state-by-state battle.
If your point is that it was boneheaded for Perry say its ‘fine’ for New York to pass gay marriage - when he is opposed to gay marriage - agreed, but New York and all states indeed have the right to (re)define marriage in law.
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.