So political measures and actions which reveal that a candidate might not possess the mettle and character to be the real conservative leader you RickBots claim Perry to be is only valid to you if it is “new”… Convenient. Exactly what is the expiration date on an issue of character? Perry has proven that he is willing to forego conservative principles to accomplish political goals. He is the reason that Kinky Friedman was a viable gubernatorial candidate, and his support is so thin in Texas that he barely garnered 40% of the vote in the last 2 elections. He is the Republican equivalent of what you’d get if you crossed Bill Clinton with Al Gore – hardly the dream candidate you seem to think he is.

It was only in 2006 Perry received only 39% of the vote. He fared much better against liberal Bill White, as there was no other choice. He managed to stave off a challenge from Debra Medina after she muffed an appearance on Glenn Beck’s radio show regarding a 9-11 conspiracy question. The point is that Texas conservatives have been seeking an alternative to Perry since his first term. Yes, he is in an unprecedented third term, but he is nowhere near as popular as was GW Bush, and he will make a worse president than Bush. He has done nothing on illegal immigration in a key border state, and he has even more dubious ties than libs used to criticize Bush over. He knows how to sound conservative, and that is what he has been doing – playing up to the tea party base. And boy, does he have you folks outside the state hoodwinked… Other than lip service, why don’t you show me anything in Perry’s record that proves he is the candidate you profess him to be?

Because I have so much regard for the power of political pundits to tell us who is and isnt electable…
So I issue you a challenge to tell me why I should develop your type of passion for a Perry presidency, and this is what you come back with? No, you don’t sound like an Obama zombie or a Paulbot at all…
Yes, there is a new species of political zombie amidst the republican field – the Rickbots.
To answer your weak counter, anyone in the field should and could beat Obama – even Ron Paul. That is all the more reason to vote in the most conservative candidate possible. As a Texan, I’m telling you – I know conservatives, and I know Rick Perry. Rick Perry is a master at sounding conservative, but his true conservative traits are fleeting.
That is why I issued the challenge, which still stands, that you show me anything he’s done outside of lip service that proves he has earned a tea party nomination.

http://michellemalkin.com/2011/08/18/plumbing-the-rest-of-the-perry-record/

1) Soft on illegal immigration

2) Prone to crony capitalism

3) Nanny state liberal tendencies

(In the aftermath of the Gardasil debacle, his “apology” was couched in terms that he had “erred on the side of life…” – because we’re the government, and we can do it better than you can.)

4) He is a willing practitioner of corporate welfare (see Boeing and Merck, just to name a couple, and look up the Texas Enterprise Fund, and the Texas Emerging Technology Fund, where Perry gained the power to spend taxpayer money to pick winners and losers, and to entice businesses to move to Texas via payoffs. Principled leadership.)

5) Perry has helped erode private property rights through the Trans-Texas Corridor – his own “Eminent Domain” big government land grab.

“The downfall of the Republican majority in Congress in 2006 was the perception that conservatives had gone to Washington and become ensnared by lobbyists, donors and special interests who used the federal government and taxpayers? money as a piggy bank. Republicans should examine candidates? records and see not only if they have successfully created jobs but how they have done so, what the appropriate model is for the relationship between government and the private sector and whether that model is one we should adopt in Washington.” – Jennifer Rubin

This is exactly what we get with Rick Perry – the same kind of Republican we voted out en masse in 2006.

7) He panders to LaRaza, a radical Hispanic organization that supports granting amnesty to all Hispanics living illegally in the US.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=1093408

Finally, 8) Grover Norquist, who is a close associate and advisor to Rick Perry, and who is known for some dubious ties to jihadi-friendly muslim organizations. Grover Norquist is to Rick Perry as William Ayers is to Barack Obama.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/08/perrys_problematic_pals.html

Now, perhaps this is not enough for you to disqualify him as a candidate, but certainly you could agree that there are better options in the current field, with more on the way?

Compared to this record, anyone is looking good with the exception of Romney or Paul. I would take any one of Bachmann, Cain, Palin, Santorum, Ryan or even Christie over my current Governor, Rick Perry. One positive result of the failed Obama presidency is that we have an opportunity to elect a real conservative to the presidency. If we waste this opportunity by electing Rick Perry, prepare for another one-term presidency, to be followed by another left wing-nut liberal. America cannot afford that – we need at least two terms to undo the damage wrought by Obama. We won’t get that from Perry. He is the Republican Obama, paying lip service to the base, but no substantial record to back it. When the luster wears off and you get to know the politician, you will be even more unenchanted with Perry than are Blacks with Obama.

TALK. Perry is nothing more than a front man for the office. He is telegenic, but he has done nothing to fix the problems he inherited (eg. illegal immigration, property taxes), and he has done nothing which contributed to the Texas success story regarding jobs. Even he had the sense to admit that.

You mention that he has not been perfect, and that he can beat Obama, “warts and all…” What are his warts? How has he not been perfect? Aside from vague, banal quips about not being perfect, what are his flaws as a candidate?

Every candidate must be vetted, lest we prove ourselves as ignorant as the democrats. Failure to make an informed, intelligent choice now will lead to a quick exit from the White House – assuming we get there in the first place. I have seen Perry in a debate, and of all the candidates, he is the one I fear most going against Obama.

On January 4, 2010, Perry participated in a debate against KBH and Debra Medina. Median absolutely wiped the floor with Perry.

At one point, a 19 yr-old college student asked a question regarding the Texas Advance Directives Act (Texas Futile Care Law), which gives hospital panels the right to deny life-sustaining care to patients whose causes they deem futile if the patient is unable to transfer to another facility within 10 days of being notified of the panel’s decision. The panel had developed a habit of deciding cases to be futile, even when the patient was conscious, could request care for his/her needs and even had the ability to pay (can you say DEATH PANEL?). Texas was the ONLY STATE with such a law at that time.

Perry first tried to give a pat conservative talking point, saying he “always stands by the side of life,” and that “you do everything you can to keep those patients alive…” He was then asked if he would repeal the law, and he looked as though someone had just slapped him in the face. He stuttered and stammered, finally agreeing that he would repeal the law. The 19 yr old student them informed Perry that the law was passed in 1999, when Perry was Lt. Governor. Perry responded that he was not aware of that!

You can see the video here – begin watching at 3:25:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJcrCwG82Ng

The only reason Perry survived that primary is that the vote against him was split between the RINO, KBH, and the independent, Medina, whom many chose not to vote for due to their evaluation of her “electability” after she was ambushed on the Glenn Beck radio show with a question about 9-11 conspiracy theories. Perry barely garnered 48% of the vote, even after Medina fell by over 10 points.

Just as Debra Medina stated, it has now been 10 years with Perry as Gov, and nothing has been done about illegal immigration, abortion or property taxes – all issues to which Perry paid lip service.

Oh, and the Texas Futile Care Law? No changes. Lip service – no action.

Where did I call the guy a terrorist? Seems to me you are guilty of fitting your own description. Apparently you do not understand analogies?

Norquist : Perry as Ayers : Obama

That is about the relationship – it does not mean that Norquist has blown up buildings personally.

Although, if you accept the Bush Doctrine, those who aid terrorists are considered hostile to the US. Does Norquist dangerously flirt with that line? You bet.

Just as you are flirting with the line of respectability, as we are admonished on this site. “Be respectful, or be banned.” To make your point, you have to make a comment about being dropped on my head as a baby? Is that really the discourse we want to cultivate, especially given that we are supposed to be on the same side? I am for vetting ALL candidates, sir, not just the ones I do not like. I hope that, in the end, we want the same thing – a Conservative President. In the end, I will support the nominee, as I know that Obama must be defeated. But if I am right that Perry, Romney, McCain all belong in the same category, then this is the time to address it, as painful as it might be to your emotional ties to your candidate.

I have lived in Texas under the governorship of Rick Perry for his entire tenure, and I can tell you, he is far more popular outside the state than he is within it. There is a reason for that. Maybe you should do more listening.

so if you catch a thief with his hand in the till, and he pulls it out, I guess you would think he is an ok guy and let him run the store, right?

Perry has back-tracked only when it became absolutely necessary. It is the things he tries to do, and worse – what he gets away with – that let you know his conservative core is not what you think it is.

Everything you say is true about Texas. Perry was gov, so he musta did it, right? Please, state your case. What did Perry do to stimulate job growth and the economy in Texas?

Oh, wait – you mean the Texas Emerging Technology Fund and the Texas Enterprise Fund? The taxpayer funds used to bribe businesses into relocating here, which garnered Perry over 1/2 Million in donations, which he rewarded with Million and multi-million $ contracts?

Yeah, that brings business to a state I guess, but principled Conservative leadership? Not so much. Again, like Michelle Malkin suggests, we need to evaluate if these are the principles we want to see in the White House representing Conservative America. If this is what we elect, expect a redux of 2006, only to include Republicans being swept from office in the Executive AND Legislative branches.

At least you have admitted that you are okay with Republicans having our own version of Bill Clinton, Al Gore and Barack Obama, all rolled into one. As long as he has an R by his name…

AFTER a debate has taken place, has not been vetted at all, and is grossly more popular outside of the conservative state he governs than he is within that state, yet he still manages to enter the race at number one, yes, it is imperative to do some truth-telling.
Too many of you have already made a quite ill-informed decision to nominate this man for prez, and you don’t know the first thing about him.
He has made a career out of lip service, and you guys are buying it, hook, line and sinker.

All hat and no cattle, which is exactly what is being said about Rick Perry.

I understand you think that things that have happened in Rick Perry’s last 2 terms are “outdated and found wanting,” but I don’t think that most Conservatives will feel that way.

Intelligent Conservatives don’t get sold out on a candidate until he or she has been thoroughly vetted.

I could care less about “the regulars” – what I care about is that we pick the best candidate. If Perry is not your first, second or third choice, then we are in agreement. He is better than the remaining alternatives, if by that you mean Romney, Paul or Obama.

Woof.

Again, ANYONE BUT PAUL, ROMNEY OR PERRY.

I do not pick candidates based on who pundits tell me is electable. If we had done that in 1980, Reagan would not have won the nomination.

My first choice for prez is someone with Exec experience, be it private sector or in the Executive branch of government. But the ultimate determining factor is CHARACTER which has been PUT INTO PRACTICE.

If I had a choice between Gov Bachmann and Congresswoman Bachmann, Gov Bachmann wins hands down. But if forced to choose between a crony phony gov like Perry and a Congresswoman Bachmann, then it is Congresswoman Bachmann, hands down.

That’s why if Palin gets in (which I am still hearing that she will), I give her the nod over Bachmann, barring some major stumble, but Cain remains in the hunt, as he is among my personal favorites as well.

I fail to see how that could be possible as much of what I have posted has only been written since Perry announced. That is less than 2 weeks.

“Like the 13th chime of the clock, discrediting all which came before it, and all that follows…”

Time to go charge your battery, RickBot.

Yeah, why should we listen to Conservatives who have lived in the midst of the Perry governorship for the past 10 years?
Certainly it makes more sense to listen to people who have not been subjected to his style of government…

If what Texas Conservatives have to say about their valid criticisms of Rick Perry carries no impact for you, then at least admit that you have your head firmly planted in the sand and you are willfully refusing the shovel. Go make your donations to Perry and plant your sign in your yard, and best of luck to ya. But please don’t insult the intelligence of others by trying to act like you are open to intelligent debate.

… and character would be nice.

Remember, 4 years is a long time. You see how sick we are of Obama, who is like Perry in that he talks well and sounds real appealing to his base? That is what we have in Texas with Perry.

Ten years as Gov – nothing done on property taxes, nothing done on illegal immigration, and a vast record of political payoffs and favors for cronies. He is all the worst criticisms of Bush come to life.

$80,000 donations to Perry win you multi-million dollar contracts. He will even force 6th grade girls to take vaccines for STDs if it benefits his business ties, such as the case with Gardasil and Merck.

Oh, and look up Grover Norquist, a deep Perry association of dubious distinction.

The more you peel back the onion of Rick Perry, the more you find the stench unbearable.

…is that if you spent a fraction of the energy dissecting your own views that you expend trying to diagnose and characterize those who dont see eye to eye with you, you might actually contribute something to intelligent discussions. As it is, all you display are traits of the left – attacking those who don’t agree with you not on the basis of Ideas, but just to try to glorify yourself as witty. Again, it only makes you come off quite small.

Perhaps you’d like to explain why this is relevant to the discussion? I guess it does accomplish 2 things: 1 it disproves the allegations of me being a troll. 2 it shows you have nowhere else to go to refute my points other than to attack me personally.

So now that you know who I really am, what now? You have proven you don’t know anything about pre-paid legal, or my association, or on what scale I am involved. Again, why that is relevant Is beyond me.

Let’s assume all of your worst fears are true, regarding who I am, what I do, and my motives for being here… How dies any if that change the validity of my arguments?

All you have proven is that I got to you, and you don’t have the class to say, “you raise some good points.” You certainly couldn’t admit you’re wrong. So now what?

You cracked the case. I am here to do what I can to stop Perry. I have only said that a dozen times. Busted.

You did fail miserably in your assessment of my motives. As well as pre-paid legal. I could explain it to you, but it really is beside the point. Even if you are right, and I am a trial lawyer with an axe to grind, my arguments have been substantive.

Perry practices political capital cronyism. This also tends to mix with a tendency towards nanny state policies that infringe upon individual liberties, such as the rirights of parents and private property. These allegations stand, regardless of my personal interests or political motives.

This is supposed to be a forum to discuss political ideas, not to personally investigate every person with whom we disagree. Huff Po and daily Kos has trained you well, As it is, you only made yourself look small, and proved yourself useful foils. I did not have to do any digging on you to make my case. You told us all we needed to know… Thanks!

You might not have made such an ass of yourself. I came here and made evidence-based arguments. You chose to make the fight dirty, and show your own lack of class. You are right, many people read this, and they are good, Conservative Americans looking for truth and information. You, gekster and acat have made yourselves look more like the shrill lefties than principled conservatives. Thanks for the help.

In a blog debate site is a very opaque being. As long as people stick to the facts, I think all of us can put on our big boy pants and engage in healthy debate.

My presentation has been on facts about Rick Perry. The only change in my tone has been when I have been personally insulted, had my motives questioned, a basic investigation by at least 3 other users into who I am, and what I do… All because I dare to throw a grenade into the Perry orgy going on by some at RS and in the Republican party?

Consider this gem, from scope:

“daviddlpe- Wouldn’t you be better off just dropping your hell bent case against Perry here at RS, as you are now not someone posting incognito? Aren?t you doing more harm to your company that you work for with your posts, as it is not now only you that has been exposed, but your company as well. Do you really want to bring this kind of shame to your company? I highly doubt that any company wants to be represented by your type of posting, no? I will make an effort tomorrow to hit any contact button I find for PPL, to ask if you are representing them responsibly.”

If you are deaf to that tone, then you can certainly keep your thoughts to yourself about mine, as you yourself have lost all cred.

Good point, kchand. That is what is amazing to me. Perry has skipped the first 2 debates, and he enters as top tier, then number 1. I have seen the guy debate, most recently in 2010 against KBH and Debra Medina. He is petty, and he engages in juvenile swipes at his opponents (very similar to a few of his supporters in this very thread). He also can look very, very stupid – mark my words… Just look him up on YouTube in the 2010 primaries against Medina and Hutchison.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJcrCwG82Ng

He has had a successful run because he has never faced a Republican challenger who equals him in funding and who isn’t a bigger RINO than he is.

He was handed the Gov office in 2000 when GWB left for pres. He rode a Republican wave in 2002 in the wake of 9-11. In 2006, after Texas caught his stench, he faced a wave of candidates, none of which was a true Conservative (Kinky Friedman?), Even so, he won with only 39% of the vote.

He finally faced some measure of competition in 2010 in the primary, but he was facing a well-funded RINO, Kay Bailey Hutchison, and a grass-roots indy, Debra Medina. Perry got schooled in the debates, with Medina performing quite well. The tide was turning for Medina until she muffed a question regarding 9-11 conspiracies on the Glenn Beck radio show, and she fell out of the race, leaving weak Conservative KBH to face the incumbent.

I cannot wait to see him in his first debate when he has a target on him and he has to face challengers in his weight class (financially speaking, of course). Any candidate armed with the truth on his record will get past his lip-service smooth talk and use him to clean the toilet.

We will see what happens, and if I am wrong, I will say so.

My fear is that, if Perry wins the nomination, in the best-case scenario he goes on to win against Obama, but his old habits will return and he will turn the American people solidly anti-Republican once again, and Dems will wind up with the White House, House and Senate in 2016. Worst-case scenario, Perry gets eaten alive by Obama in the general, precisely because of what you said…

If we do not take steps to toughly vet him in the primary, the Obama campaign will be happy to do it in the general. They will not go as easy on him as these RickBots are doing here. He is NOT the best candidate in this field.

And for all of you who get upset because I am only running down Perry, let me say it again… NO to Ron Paul, NO to Romney and No to Perry. Anyone else will do just fine.

In your case, the best response you could muster was to say I was not posting anything new. That is your litmus test, not mine. The information regarding the record of a sitting government in his most recent two terms is completely relevant, and does not have to meet the requirement of being new.

After that weak attempt failed, you helped others engage in a campaign against me personally, attacking my motives, questioning how I make a living, etc…

If this is a forum to discuss political ideas, which is what I was doing, why does it matter what I do, or my motives for voicing my opinion?

If BHO himself showed up and started posting on RS, as long as he makes substantive, evidence-based arguments, I welcome the debate. It is called the “Arena of Ideas.”

I voiced real concerns about the character and conservatism of Rick Perry, and your best response was, “nothing new.”

“Don’t let the dog on the couch, he’s dirty.”
“That’s old news – we already knew the dog was dirty.”
“Ok, the dog can get up on the couch…”

Truly fascinating logic.

If you have information that shows I have erroneous information, I welcome it. But if your only argument is that we already knew that, and Perry back-tracked, etc., I am letting you know that does not change my concerns about him, because he has demonstrated a penchant for this behavior, and his “backtracks” only came after extreme public outcry and legal battles.

Your arguments do nothing to alleviate my concerns – that is where we are.

First, to clear up the confusion, whatever this site claims to be should never trump the idea of open dialogue and civil discourse, especially between Conservatives. You’re right – there is nothing I said that was out of bounds, and I appreciate your recognition of the validity of my arguments.

My first inclination is to support the nominee of the party. What I have stated repeatedly is that this is the season to do all we can to elect the most Conservative candidate to represent the party. My knowledge of Perry as a citizen of Texas has provided me with a mount of information that tells me he is not that candidate.

I have outlined what I believe will happen if Perry wins the nomination. At worst, he loses to Obama. At best, he wins the presidency, but in the course of his administration, the country once again turns away from the Republican party and in 2016 we end up with a democrat majority in both houses of Congress and a liberal democrat in the White House. It is very important we get this right.

My bottom three candidates, worst first, are: Ron Paul, Mitt Romney and Rick Perry. As we get closer to the bottom, the likelihood increases that I look for the emergence of a viable third-party candidate. You might not agree with that, and I accept that.

However, the behavior of several others in the various threads posted on this article has been deplorable. I am not a regular here – I freely admit that. If this is what is tolerated by RS, then when I do come back, I will be ready to throw some flames of my own.

Because of my opinions, I have had 4 other individuals (gekster and scope two of the primary violators) post personal information about me and take part in an open investigation of who I am, what I do for a living, questioning my motives, and even threatening to contact a company I represent to try to negatively impact my job. They even posted negative information on my company in an open forum, simply because my opinions did not sit well with them. In addition, your near-apology aside, you allowed your ‘skepticism’ of someone you do not know to excuse you calling me a “punk,” in addition to the other insults you admit as not a part of your “best moment.”

This, on a Conservative Republican forum that is supposed to be well-regarded for maintaining a higher level of political discourse. The real punks are the ones I mentioned, such as gekster, who is willing to adhere to some foolish Hinz rule, but cannot seem to remember rules on how to treat his fellow man with respect, even in disagreement. To say the priorities are a bit misplaced is an understatement.

I freely admit that I do not know who is who on this site yet, but in a forum that is supposed to act as an arena of ideas, that should not have anything to do with it. I was not posting my comments to any one person, but in an effort to voice the truth on Rick Perry. Obviously, there are some people here who think of themselves as privileged, with rights to treat newcomers with disdain if they supsect they might be a PaulBot, troll, whatever…

As I stated earlier, I don’t care if Barack Obama himself decides to post here, as long as he leaves substantive material, I welcome the debate.

As far as my loyalty to the Republican Party, I will remain loyal to the party as long as they remain loyal to the principles that this party was built upon. Reagan was a Democrat until the party left him.. I will vote Republican unless the party leaves me.

If the party insists on shoving these phony Conservatives down my throat, such as McCain, Romney and Perry, I have no problem dropping them in the dirt. Perhaps you haven’t noticed, but the dems are turning hard left while we keep fighting to get back somewhere near the center. That is how we got here, with self-avowed Communists serving in a Presidential administration.

It is time we start pushing back with true Constitutional Conservative candidates, and let the unbelievers learn by what they see – just as what happened under Reagan. The Republican party is extremely over-managed, trying to give us candidates it deems “electable.” I contend that a proven Conservative with character is electable, and there is plenty of reason to doubt whether Rick Perry is that man.

That is where I stand. If that is not good enough for me to enjoy the privilege of enjoying civil discourse on RS, please let me know. Either way, no punk is going to shut me up, wherever I choose to use my voice. That goes especially for those people who engaged in posting personal information on me and my employer (scope, gekster rightwingmom52 and pttx333).
RedState has been notified of your actions. We’ll see where things go from here.

Thank you. @californiagold, thank you as well for your encouragement. I, too, am a Reagan Conservative. Since this Exchange took place, I have stayed away from RedState, knowing that time would prove me correct. Today, we wake up to an email from Mr. Erickson talking about “the Perry Problem” and how terrible he is in debates. Every one of the concerns he lists validates all of my key points on Perry.

To @docholliday, you showed some real wisdom in your comments, and I appreciate you laying out your thoughts for gekster. I don’t agree that I was abrasive. I was responding to outright abusive posts made against me because of my opposition to Perry. Regarding “small-minded”, I was referring to arguments, not people. And this was after I had been attacked for opposing Perry based on my own self-interest, and I was also accused of being a liberal troll…
Yes, I do feel that such responses to the argument I articulated are indeed, small-minded. We don’t have to agree there.

@gekster, you are and have been wrong at every turn. Not that what I do for a living should matter, but I am not an attorney. Pre-paid legal is a legal service I represent. Just as with Perry, you should have done your research before shooting off at the mouth.

The arguments I laid out against Perry have been proven right – they don’t need to be “new”. It is a problem with his character. He is not a true conservative; he is a political animal. And now he says if we don’t agree with subsidizing tuition for illegals, we have no heart…

Michelle Bachmann made the case against Perry very well in the post-debate interview. He lied about his relationship with the 31 year old woman who died of cervical cancer, and he portrayed an executive order issued by him which forced 6th grade girls to take a vaccine for an STD without parental notification or authorization as a “decision on the side of life.” Not to mention the fact that he has habitually engaged in similar acts which benefit his political benefactors, thus proving himself the embodiment of the term, capital cronyism.

If this is your candidate, so be it. But to attack people personally who don’t agree with you politically is, in fact, small minded.

I am not for Romney, either. Both he and Perry go wildly astray. But Romney has not proven himself to be a crooked politician. Perry has. If it comes down to only those two, I have to go with Romney.

Let’s hope Christie gets in, or that either Bachmann, Cain or Santorum begin making a push.

Evidence providing insight into the ideology or character of a candidate is not recycling, especially when it has occurred during the most recent term of a sitting governor.

Recycling occurs when you use the same faulty argument in an attempt to detract from the issue, or introduce topics more favorable to your side in an attempt to distract from the argument, as you are attempting to do with californiagold.

As Perry has proven, issues of character, ideology and intelligence tend to resurface. Just because you can argue away or attempt to rationalize one individual instance does not mean the issue has gone away. For example, in the debate on 9/22, Perry lied about a dying woman inspiring his decision to issue the EO for 6th grade girls to be required to take the vaccine for HPV. He did not meet with the woman until the order had been issued. He claimed he was “lobbied” by her, and he did it with his fake “poor, pitiful me” Texas drawl. He used the tragic death of a young woman in an attempt to provide political cover for himself.

This speaks directly to my assertion that he is purely a political animal, placing value on his political well-being above everything else. This is the guy who awards contracts to donors at taxpayer expense. After 4 years of president Perry, America would once again run and leap into the arms of the dems. That is why we need to make sure he is not the nominee – we have much better options.

Finally, notice how i was able to argue against you point by point without introducing any personal issues?