« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Isn’t This a Relevant Connection?

By: Erick Erickson (Diary)  |  September 21st, 2011 at 02:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Nicole Gelinas is over at National Review joining in questioning Rick Perry about his “ponzi” rhetoric on social security. I’ve read that post twice and really don’t see the point of it, even with the previous points.

But what is relevant to me is that Ms. Gelinas is a contributing editor to the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal.

The Chairman of the Manhattan Institute is Paul E. Singer.

What else does Paul Singer do? Why he manages Mitt Romney’s fortune.

Sure Ms. Gelinas is a couple degrees separated, but in my mind it’s like the National Journal survey that found GOP insiders prefer Mitt Romney and National Journal failed to disclose that 25% of its insiders work or formerly worked for Mitt Romney.

And this is indicative of the hill Rick Perry has to climb — most everyone of note is in some way tied to Mitt Romney or his money. A bit of disclosure might put a better perspective on these things.

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • red_oakster

    The Mahattan Institute is a think tank which had its own perspective long before Singer got his plum chairmanship-no doubt for writing large checks. I also thought Gelinas’s argument was weak, but I don’t think she made it on anyone else’s orders.

    My own view is that Romney is endangering himself by criticizing Perry on Social Security because it reminds GOP primary voters just how much of a squish Romney is.

    Perry’s biggest weakness thus far has been his statements of foreign policy. If he can get that sorted out, he’ll be away to the races. Conversely, that’s where he’ll be deemed not ready for prime time if he messes up.

  • ru4fred

    Every poll NR does on Perry is slanted (i.e. Is Perry too extreme?.. When did Perry stop beating his wife?,. etc.) NR is definately for Romney.

  • ru4fred

    Every poll NR does on Perry is slanted (i.e. Is Perry too extreme?.. When did Perry stop beating his wife?,. etc.) NR is definately for Romney.

  • Tbone

    Other than he used to know all the crooks on the International Olympics Committee.

  • acat

    Yes, this is a stretch. It may even be false, as you assert. The decision not to disclose the relationship goes further to cement the appearence of impropriety, fairly or not.

    Those who choose to disclose weaken their own pro-Romney arguments, those who do not risk damaging their appearence of independence.

    Romney’s supporters are, as Tolkien put it, caught in a cleft stick of their own making.*

    Mew

    * Two Towers, Gandalf explaining Saurman to Pippin and Merry, to be precise

  • earlgrey

    I considered contributing to their fall fundraising drive, but I have so many different demands on my money — including me! Today’s posts just made me decide to hold it back for either a local org, DeMiint, Am. Majority or Heritage.

  • johnt

    & the Dems and their creators the media loving it. And remembering. Probable that Gelinas is carrying water, a hint, a delicate whisper in the ear ? Regardless, the usual self destructive, wasteful guff. Then if The O gets another chance to deal his death blow to what’s left of America they’ll still have the joy of intraparty recriminations, for four years. A real consolation prize.
    And of course Perry is right on, the SS program is an ugly ponzi scheme and millions stand to get screwed.

  • aesthete

    has Perry made? The only statements I’ve heard from him have been his pro-Israel one, and the one made in the debate regarding a departure from Afghanistan. Both are views that the general public has strong support for.

  • streiff

    I mean Glenn Kessler of the WaPo doesn’t like Perry’s Israel policy but that is more of a feature than a bug.

  • Locked and Loaded

    Without hearing any more from them, it is clear that quite a few GOP insiders need to be outsiders. They are fighting tooth and nail to maintain the status quo. So much so, they are taking on the tactics of the evil party. So rather than disclosure, I recommend closure, as in, “Don’t call us, we’ll call you.”

  • red_oakster

    which was confused. I’m hoping he does better this time. I think Perry has been very good on Israel

  • red_oakster

    A think tank is full of scholars and board members. They go in all different directions. I’m pretty sure Guiliani is connected to Manhattan too. If he runs, then what? And if he doesn’t he’ll almost certainly endorse his close friend from Texas.

  • BlueLandRed

    Sure, I guess, in the sense that it is never bad to over communicate when one is trying to establish their bona fides to make said claims.

    But the big issue here isn’t Ms. Gelinas’s employer’s outside interests, but the fact the most Americans still really like Social Security. Which is why Gov. Romney is attacking him on that issue.

    Social Security has long been called American Third Rail of Politics and politicians that directly attack SS do so at their peril as Gov. Perry is now finding out. Will Perry be able to survive and win and demote SS from it’s Third Rail title? Well, that’s why we have elections.

    While I wish him well, I think he’s doomed if he keeps attacking SS.

  • lansing

    And don’t they own RedState?

    Didn’t the Heritage Foundation (that has close ties to Eagle Publishing) write Massachusetts horrible health care law with the individual mandate.

    I think you can go crazy looking for all these connections, I wouldn’t read too much into it.

  • justinhart

    … it’s what you hear. I like Rick Perry but he’s crafting an unnecessary club for his opponents to beat him up with on Social Security.

    It’s too early and too little in movement but note that in the latest Rasmussem poll Perry’s biggest demo drop is among seniors for what it’s worth:

    http://www.redstate.com/justinhart/2011/09/21/ras-reports-gop-poll-romney-gaining-bachman-imploding-paul-losing-youth-vote-perry-losing-seniors/

  • rightwingmom52

    Regnery Publishing (an Eagle Publishing company) did publish Romney’s book about the Olympics, but that’s a pretty weak tiesince it’s not a political book. And in case you haven’t noticed, redstate hasn’t been all that “friendly” to Romney.

    As for the author of Romneycare, it wasn’t The Heritage Foundation.

    here

  • lansing72

    Of course RedState is not in the tank for Romney, I was just using it as an example to show that there can be independence even if there are connections.

    The Heritage Foundation did write much of RomneyCare (the individual mandate was actually a conservative solution in many circles) It was a way to solve the free-rider problem (but I’m still against it)

    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/john-farrell/2010/04/19/conservatives-run-from-the-individual-mandate-they-once-embraced

  • rightwingmom52

    …

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    Justin are you a contributor and founder to MyManMitt.com now MittRomneyCentral.com?

    Is your statement is ironic, or disingenuous?

  • justinhart

    Ha! So a post which started by attacking the author of a blog post for supposed disengenuous intentions ends with someone attacking a commentor on the same grounds..

    Yes. People know exactly who I am – I’m not hiding behind any alias.

    My post is actually quite mild towards Perry. I note that it’s way too early to bash Perry for the movement against him in senior circles in the Rass. poll.

    If you want to respond to my post I welcome it…

  • jimmyg

    Milton Friedman called it a ponzi scheme, but he had a plan to reform and fix social security, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=1485
    Rick Perry has no plan for solving the problem s facing social security. He is telling us something everyone knows, but does not tell us his plan to solve the problem.. An odd way to run for president. If Perry is going to throw a bomb such as ponzi scheme, I think he has a responsibility to say how he is going to solve the problem other than just engaging in name calling. Social Security is not identified as an issue on his web site.
    http://www.rickperry.org/issues/

  • streiff

    he’s spoken on the subject. Just because you haven’t heard of it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Really.

  • streiff

    and if he does this again he’s earned himself the ban he so richly deserved in 2008.

  • jimmyg

    http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/13/news/economy/rick_perry_social_security/index.htm
    It appears he wants to have a conversation about social security, that is a long way from having a plan to reform social security. My point is he should not be surprised that he is drawing fire for his remarks on SS when he has not put forth a plan to reform social security and does not address, or even mention social securityton his web site.

  • jimmyg

    From his interview in Time Magazine from 6 days ago.

    How would you change Social Security? Would you consider private accounts or raising the retirement age?

    We are having a national discussion now about a lot of different options: raising the [retirement] age, doing it in a structured way for the younger worker, some options from the standpoint of private accounts ? all of those ought to be on the table. The idea that we?re going to write a Social Security reform plan today is a bit of a stretch from my perspective. I have accomplished one of the things that I wanted to do by talking about it. Americans are paying attention.

    Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2011/09/15/rick-perry-exclusive-the-gops-fiery-front-runner-on-his-rise-record-and-rhetoric/#ixzz1Ydb1los0

  • Scope

    about SS that gives me much hope that he won’t try to just shove through his ideas, but will go with what the voters want, and what the both houses are willing to pass. Is that a bad thing?

  • acat

    the “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you” schmooze we’re getting from the Dems or Mitt Romney.

    Mew

  • windwaker24

    It’s not the government’s business to tell me when I can retire. If I want to retire at 40, and I am able to, that’s my business and my right!

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    Whose rules say you have to have a pan to reform entitements? Obama’s?

    The bar has been set…and set low…by Democrats who don’t have any plan.

    Why serve up details which would accomplish nothing but hand Democrats talking points based on fabrications?

  • acat

    Thought I should point that out.

    Mew

  • jimmyg

    His opponents will continue to raise the issue, and be able to tell seniors whatever they wish about Perry and Social Security because of his remarks and lack of a framework to resolve the social security issue. He is all over the place with this issue, from unconstitutional, to private accounts to raising the age, to means testing.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    nt

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    you are going to vote for Romney anyway. Tell you what, why don’t you win election to the governorship of a state four times then tell Perry what a putz he is.

  • acat

    It’s not proven, and I’m inclined to agree with you, that there isn’t any “there” there.

    However.

    That’s not really the point. The point is that think tanks that have touched Romney money are going to make one of three choices.

    * They will disclose the linkage at cost to their statements, i.e. they will appear to be paid Romney shills.

    * They will not disclose the linkage, at cost to their reputations, i.e. they will appear to be paid Romney shills who lie about stuff.

    * They will keep quiet.

    There’s no other course for them, and .. if they pick the second, as Manhattan did, they’re just skeet for Perry’s supporters to blast away at.

    As the saying goes, better to keep the mouth closed and be thought a {paid tool} than to open it and remove all doubt.

    Mew

  • acat

    Yeah, cat’s curious. Stereotypes are sometimes rooted in truth.

    Mew

  • jimmyg

    2002, 2006 and 2010 and no where in any of my posts was I disrespectful of Gov. Perry, or you.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    they will post it on the Fox website pretty soon I am sure.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    like you were lecturing him on why his approach was all wrong.

    I happen to believe it is both morally correct, and good politics to tell the truth on this subject.

  • justinhart

    I can’t understand this?

    Erick takes issue with a post at NRO questioning Perry’s Social Security Ponzi scheme rhetoric. Instead of addressing anything in the post he takes issue with the author by making some obscure connection to Romney.

    I point to actual data showing that Perry may indeed be losing votes among older demographics but I qualify that it’s too early to tell if it means anything.

    Justin S. attacks me (again, without addressing the content of what I brought up and posted at RedState) claiming I’m somehow disingenuous because I supported Romney in 2008.

    Notice, I’m not using a pseudonym and everyone on the RedState staff knows where I stand with things.

    Then Streiff comes in and threatens me with a ban from RedState if I do this again?

    Do what again? Post fact-based, content analyzing poll data?

    And what did I do in 2008 that warranted a ban? Fervently debate people in the comments out in the open?

    Honestly guys – I’ll be the first to admit that many Romney folks in 2008 were nervous nellie’s when it came to criticism of Mitt – thin-skinned and reactionary…

    … please don’t act the same for Perry this time around. He deserves a better defense than ad hominem attacks.

  • Scope

    just watched it as well. As to SS, he promised that anyone on, or near to SS age will not be affected. He gave the Ryan plan kudos, he supported means testing, and he supported increasing the age to collect SS. He pointed out that when SS was started, the life expectancy was 60, and SS benefits were to kick in at 62.

    I love his smile of it can and will get better. If you watch his new ad, you don’t have to even have sound, it speaks for itself. It seems that Perry is trying to run a positive campaign, even with those that want to attack. He may have to change that up a bit, but I’m sure he can handle it.

  • Scope

    in his interview with Hannity. He is for private accounts, and he is for raising the retirement age, and he is for means testing.

  • Scope

    his position is with what the voters want. Just as he backed off some Texas issues, because he listened to what the voters in his state wanted. Can’t get better than that.

  • KBDay

    For one thing because some candidates told outright lies, claiming Perry would “kill” social security. Perry never said that, not in his book and not in the debate.

    Seniors responded to the fear tactics because other candidates with help from media pushed this narrative.

    In sharp contrast, Pres. Zero threatened to withhold soc. sec. checks for no good reason whatsoever during the debt battle. Media didn’t assist with the political assassination and Zero got away with it.

    Love the Zero label Perry used in his new ad vid, by the way.

    With education and repetition, the public should be made aware soc. sec. is on the skids. Those of us with children want something done so their earnings are not confiscated without some sort of safety net like privatizing–that option is one my husband and I would certainly have chosen by the way. If we had all the money taken from our checks for soc. sec. we would have a very large pile of bucks.

  • acat

    Some folk still fear touching the Social Security third rail.

    Give it time. Eventually, they’ll realize that today’s 65 year olds first started hearing conservative rumbling about means testing and privatization from Pete DuPont .. when they were 45.

    Mew

  • rightwingmom52

    What a novel idea to determine the problem first and then discuss and flesh out various solutions with us citizens in an effort to figure out what might be the best one and what we want. Sounds a little like Cain’s approach.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    I didn’t attack your character…

    My first question was to verify if you’re the same Justin Hart that I was familiar with back in 2008… in fact, it was one of your posts on MyManMitt in early 2008 that led me to Redstate for the first time… and I thank you for indirect involvement in my introduction to this great site…

    That being said…

    My second question was intended to get your distinction from you regarding your statement…

    Your comment is titled.. “it’s not what you say… it’s what you hear…”…

    Applying that logic to the rest of what followed, I was seeking your take…

    Given the concluding statement of the diary, either you were not self aware of the irony of your comment regarding “Perry’s polling with seniors”… on a diary directed at calling people out for full disclosure on their ‘ties to candidates’ when you clearly were tied to Romney with your involvement in your blog. Even if you’re not a paid Romney staffer…

    or you were being disingenuous regarding your directed comment on Perry, on a Diary that isn’t about Perry… it wasn’t written by Perry, and it really has nothing to do with Perry… other that it was the author’s mention that Romney’s organization is a challenge to Perry.

    Look I’m not calling your integrity into question… but if you’re going to sling around a statement (even with equivocation) about Perry on a non-Perry diary, I think it bares the opportunity for you to clarify your position prior to offering “Post fact-based, content analyzing poll data?” in regards to your motive in suggesting a Perry weakness in poll data, don’t you? I mean if I have to “hear” your blather (as irrelevant as it is)… don’t you think you owe me the courtesy to disclose your support of Romney? I mean its not like you’re just an everyday commentator just making a point about the potential slide in Perry’s polling numbers with seniors right?

    It’s not the data, or the point you may have been trying to make… for me… it was all about you not disclosing your potential for bias, or confirmation bias within you non-sequitur analysis regarding a subject not relevant to the scope of the Author’s diary.

    I know you’re a genuine person, I’ve enjoyed your analysis before, and even learned from you… but I’m sorry… your comment was out of place for me… and I hoping to give you an opportunity to clarify.

    Suggesting I’m “thin-skinned” for calling you out such it is what it may be… but I think I’m perfectly satisfied knowing where I stand, and with whom I stand with… at this time I’m for Perry, but I’m not Anti-Romney…

    And I don’t need to go around using logical fallacies, and assumptions about synthetic analysis on a poll with stratified variable demographics to express my dissent with the Author’s diary.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    n/t.