« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The Horserace for October 13, 2011

It was the one question in the Bloomberg-Washington Post debate that gave away the game. A source close to, but not in, the Bachmann campaign told me it was that question when he realized the game was over for Michele Bachmann. It was that one question that, according to a source close to the Perry camp and a source close to the Cain camp, raised a red flag for the Romney campaign and shows just how worried the Romney camp is about the race consolidating.

It was that one question that also shows why the Romney campaign is, behind the scenes, furiously pushing states to move up their caucuses and primaries.

That one question spoke louder to more people than all the other questions asked Tuesday night. And in that question lies Michele Bachmann’s ultimate defeat and Mitt Romney’s Achilles heel.

Yes, one question did all that. Find out what that question was in this week’s horserace.

Michele Bachmann

It was the moment a source close to the Bachmann campaign and supportive of that campaign told me he knew, the minute it was asked, Bachmann’s campaign is finished. He cautions that the campaign itself may not have had the “a-ha” moment he did, but that it will sink in.

That question?

During the candidate portion of the debate, Mitt Romney asked Michele Bachmann a question. It wasn’t just any question — it was a softball question filled with mush to rehabilitate the Congresswoman’s low standing in the polls. It was Mitt Romney’s way of saying, “I need you to stay in this thing.”

The question:

Let me turn to Congresswoman Bachmann and just — just as you, Congresswoman. As — as we’ve spoken this evening, we’re all concerned about getting Americans back to work. And you’ve laid out some pretty bold ideas with regards to taxation and cutting back the scale of the federal government. And there’s no question that’s a very important element of getting people back to work.

And I’d like to ask you to expand on your other ideas. What do you do to help the American people get back to work, be able to make ends meet? You’ve got families that are sitting around the kitchen table wondering how they’re going to make — make it to the end of the month. You’ve got — you’ve got young people coming out of college, maybe not here at Dartmouth, but a lot of colleges across the country wondering where they can get a job.

What — what would you do — beyond the tax policies you describe — to get people back to work?

That question said so much. The implication for the Bachmann campaign is clear. The Romney camp is calculating, accurately, that Michele Bachmann has no path to victory, but she can very clearly be a spoiler.

The Bachmann campaign was pronounced dead with that question.

Herman Cain

I did not see it coming and I did not expect it. Herman Cain is now in first place. For an upstart campaign low on cash and staff, it is an unenviable position with so much to envy.

Cain is going to have to start answering tough questions. The more 999 is explored, the more it is clear the national sales tax portion is not viable. It will be an anchor on Cain. More so, he won’t answer who his advisors are. That’s actually probably because he does not have many to rely on. But because he will not answer the question, the media is going to keep hounding him.

The Wall Street Journal/NBC poll gives the media every incentive they can to pick off Herman Cain. If his fundraising increases rapidly, he can hang on. If not, his fall benefits Newt Gingrich.

Newt Gingrich

Already polling is showing a Gingrich rebound coupled with a Cain rebound from a strong debate performance. But Gingrich needs to improve his fundraising substantially. Without money and organization, he cannot win.

The poll fluctuations show that voters prefer someone other than Romney and they will keep going through the candidates looking for someone. If Cain falls off, Gingrich is probably helped and, if he can start laying down a foundation now, he may be able to benefit.

Jon Huntsman

If Jon Huntsman would stop telling bad jokes at debates maybe he could start rehabilitating himself. As of now, his polling keeps slowly creeping up, but he remains more a media fantasy than a real candidate.

Ron Paul

Ron Paul will not be the nominee.

Rick Perry

I realize this will get me locked in as a “Perry shill,” but the more I think about this race, the more I think Rick Perry still has one of the clearest paths to victory.

Look at the Wall Street Journal/NBC poll. Pretty much every bit of Perry’s fall went to candidates not named Romney — in particular to Herman Cain.

Of all the candidates not named Romney, Perry is the only one with (A) substantial cash on hand and (B) a continued ability to raise substantial sums from an existing network of donors.

He has the largest staff in Iowa. He has not yet released his jobs plan, his energy plan, his foreign policy plan, etc. That means more exposure over the coming month in free media.

Republican primary voters clearly do not want Mitt Romney and are judging alternatives. If Cain collapses again and Newt can’t get traction, the odds are those votes rebound to Perry, not Romney. And with a compressed calendar, Perry remains the only non-Romney with the money to compete.

Perry must (A) deal with the immigration issue effectively as that remains a serious sore spot with primary voters and (B) get people back into a comfort level with him — easier said than done. But if he can, he has the money to compete and Romney’s question to Bachmann is a clear indicator the Romney campaign knows consolidation of the field is still possible and would work against Romney.

Mitt Romney

Take Romney’s question to Michele Bachmann on Tuesday night, add to it the news that Romney advisors helped build Obamacare, and then throw in the Wall Street Journal/NBC poll and pretty much every other poll showing Romney has reached a ceiling of support among voters while voters vet alternatives.

Sure, the establishment is ready to proceed to the general election. The “inevitability” bandwagon is on. Mitt Romney is the GOP’s Hillary Clinton. The establishment wants the base to settle down and marry now. But the base is still flirting and showing no interest.

Mitt Romney needs the field to stay crowded to win. Right now, Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann are serving only to bolster Romney’s chances. If they drop out, they may embrace Romney, but the odds are their supporters do not.

The conventional wisdom is that it is Romney’s race to lose, but I wonder if the conventional wisdom might be wrong. If any consolidation starts happening, it will work against Romney. Just as Perry’s fall helped Cain get ahead of Romney, any fall by Cain could see those voters go back to Perry (if he rebounds) or go to someone like Newt Gingrich. And yes, a failure to consolidate should help Romney, but look at what is happening. When the voters move their gaze from one candidate to another, that candidate not Romney suddenly takes the lead. He’s the perpetual bridesmaid.

If I were Romney, I’d be worried. And that he asked Michele Bachmann a question on Tuesday instead of any of the other candidates polling in double digits suggests he knows he needs to be worried and also knows he needs to keep the second and third tier candidates in the race as long as possible.

Rick Santorum

The Santorum-Cain exchange on Tuesday night was ridiculous. Santorum would not shut up, whined about a lack of questions, and then tried to rally the crowd against Herman Cain only to fail. I was embarrassed for him. He will not be the nominee.

Tags:
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • yael

    Most Perry supporters, myself included, aren’t giving up on his candidacy just because of recent “debates” or polls. Do we want America to go the way of Chicago, Massachusetts… or Texas?

  • jaykali

    How is he even relevant? I am tired of 1%-ers (no not an OWS reference, I mean 1% polling!) – wasting everyone’s time at these debates. I think you should have to poll at least 5% to be in these things after the first several debates. He had his shot to prove he is relevant. Same deal with Huntsman. Paul, everyone’s favorite crazy uncle at least has some polling to back his candidacy. I just don’t believe every wannabe presidential candidate deserves debate air time unless they show they can move the needle above 5% polling.

  • http://punditpawn.wordpress.com punditpawn

    The real question is where are Obama’s grades and college thesis?

    Perry’s were published the day he announced he was running.

    Cain will ID his advisers once he gets their permission to do so… otherwise he will be responsible for the liberal media hounding their families.

  • lineholder

    I genuinely believe that you want to see Conservatism win, Erick

    Okay, so something has changed re: Cain. He’s cancelled his book tour and he’s putting boots on the ground in some of the primary states where he hasn’t had much exposure. You can read his comments about that

    http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/13/cain-time-for-me-to-be-a-job-creator/

    Yes, Perry does have a public perception public problem in regards to the immigration issue, and apparently that’s part what is bogging him down. And I don’t know whether he can resolve it or not either. Time will tell. Given that he’s the other Conservative with a chance at winning this right now, I hope he does.

  • bzip

    Perry is the man, the most conservative candidate that hss the experience (10 years governing isn’t anything to laugh at).

    Should Perry bow out, it is New’t for me.

    Erick hits upon the reason why Perry is the only hope. Perry has the resources, the money the big backers to go the entire distance. I don’t think it should be to hard to see that. he does have his problems but who in the race doesn’t have a problem?

  • jaykali

    He is the only one who could really make a run at this thing but he looks lost out there. I suppose it’s still early but he just hasn’t got his crap together.

    The thing is Romney doesn’t have to split his vote with anybody. All of the ‘conservatives’ are lumped in 1 big non-Romney group and are splitting the vote. I agree that the way you beat Romney is to discard the wannabes.

    And so I have been saying it’s Romney for a while but I am going to disagree with myself to say this. Post Iowa if you have a non-Romney win (like Cain) and all of the 5th tier waste of time candidates drop out you might have only Romney + Cain + Perry + Paul (he’s got money to stay for the long haul). That means you might have enough ‘conservative’ votes to rally behind 1 candidate, either Cain or Perry.

    Perry most likely has to win Iowa. If he does he would look like a legit anti-Romney choice. If Cain wins Iowa, which may look more likely it will probably be the Huckabee moment of ‘hey isn’t this neat, Cain is going to get his own TV show – too bad he can’t win.’ We shall see.

  • damianvincent

    On what planet have I teleported to where Rick Perry, is behind to a guy who once ran to the left of ted kennedy, and a guy who wants to raise taxes on millions, and million, and millions of American’s???

    Look at Perry’s record, solid conservative. Over a Million new jobs, most of which are good paying jobs. Tax cuts, reduced debt, reduced regulations, tort reform, voter ID, vetoed d/l’s for illegals, I can go on and on but Perry has a great Conservative record, one that would contrast with obama perfectly.

    Look at Romney’s record, he’s supported gun control, abortion, amnesty, he once ran to the left of Ted Kennedy. This is a guy who hiked taxes, or fees as he calls them, half a billion dollars. The company he bases his business experience off of was saved with a 10 million dollar federal bailout, Romney personally pocketed 4 million on the deal.

    Herman Cain, here is a guy with a pizzabox economic plan, that quite frankly will raise taxes on 2/3 of America, the middle class and poor bear the brunt of this, in an extremely visible way. This is a new form of federal taxation, on consumption, which is 2/3 of our economy. This will literally restrict the largest vein of our economy. How does that make sense.

    My question is WHAT IS GOING ON HERE. Have I become absolutely dumb, and missing the mark here, or is up now down?

  • flipflopper

    is that it is always wrong. Whether it was saying that Herman Cain didn’t have a path to victory or that Perry was the front-runner. Now he has said that if the candidates consolidate, Mitt won’t receive any of the votes. There is a new Rasmussen poll out today that says that Mitt and Herman are tied at 29%…that means that some Perry people have gone to Mitt.

  • adamd

    I am in agreement that Perry still has the best path to victory. Bottom line Republicans really do not want the nominee to be Romney. Of the candidates Gingrich, Cain and Perry, Perry clearly is the most credible. Much like in the Democratic primary in 2004 when Dean was surging, the voters realized that he was not the best hope and went for Kerry, I think the same will happen with Perry.

    If Perry wins Iowa which I think he will, he will become the anti Romney candidate. Romney will likely win New Hampshire and then South Carolina will be a key primary as it often is. In South Carolina Senator Demint has the most power and has said he will not endorse Romney unless he admits Romneycare was a mistake. It looks as though Romney will not make that confession. It is likely that all the major players in South Carolina will get behind Perry.

    If Perry wins South Carolina, he will likely win Florida and clean up on Super Tuesday.

  • nepanyrush

    Perry has done so bad in the debates — even though only committed voters watch the debates — that he has now even falled below Gingrich in the Rasmussen poll just released. And in head to head matches, he loses to Cain by 54% to 29% and to Romney 54% to 30%. He is in a free fall.

    I never heard a serious candidate so inept on the debate stage as Perry. It was painful to listen to him. Even Palin and Bush were much easier to listen to then Perry. I don’t believe he has any chance of winning.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    Other than him, it’s up to to the rest of them to close the deal.

  • texas214

    The problem with all of our candidates is there is a flaw with each that you have clearly defined. The thing that I think all of them fall into isto accentuate their past acheivements and mistakes.Tthe candidate that starts to talk about and creates a clear vision for the future will be the winner.

    PS. Reagan had in his past and did things during his presidency that would clearly be unaccepable today, but what he did have is that “vision thing”.

  • NeoKong

    It makes me groan.
    I don’t want the guy. I don’t trust him.
    How can I believe the guy who implemented the model for Obamacare that he would repeal it….?
    It would be like Col. Sanders swearing off fried chicken.

    What really get’s me is how glibly he lies when he says that if the people of Massachusetts don’t like Romneycare they can repeal it.
    That is the biggest load of horse crap I have ever heard.

    So he is trying to tell us that in Mass. with Deval Patrick in charge and a state legislature lopsidedly Democrat that the voters could repeal Romneycare….?
    It would never EVER happen.

    It is a lie.

    They have about as much chance at repealing Romneycare as they had at repealing the gay marriage law.
    The voters got ten times the signatures needed to put it on the ballot as a referendum question and the state legislature crushed it.
    They never did that before.
    It would have been overturned and they knew it.
    So much for that.

    The voters of Mass. have about as much a chance of repealing Romneycare as they do getting the toll booths taken down on the Mass. Pike.
    By law they should have been taken down many many years ago as the bonds to build it were all paid for.
    They just float some more bonds and keep it going.

    Mitt Romney is another Bill Clinton.
    A slick talking huckster who will say whatever it takes to win and then throw everything out the window when he is safely in office.
    The establishment likes him because they know he won’t rock the boat.

  • flipflopper

    and people are too biased to see it. People hate Mitt Romney so much that they are willing to choose a candidate who is clearly not on the top of his game economically. Cain has essentially come up with an economic plan that he is almost certainly going to have to change because it can’t be implimented. Erick Erickson himself has said that Herman needs to tweek it. Yet everyone seems to think that this is the guy that we need during the most crucial economic time of our lives!!! Can you imagine choosing Herman Cain and then finding out that his economic plan is elementary and won’t work! That won’t win the general election. Why is everyone dogging on Mitt Romeny’s plan because it is too complex? We don’t need a plan that sounds good or is “catchy”, we need a plan that will get the economy going.

  • nepanyrush

    I should have provided the link. Perry is at just 9% in this poll.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/election_2012_republican_presidential_primary

    I have completely moved on from my initial fascination with, and hope placed in, Perry. He is one of the poorest public communicators that I have seen on such a stage.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    on a number of his positions. AGW, healthcare mandates, to wit.

    How can you trust a guy whose positions on the two things that are damaging the economy the most don’t differ that greatly from Obama’s?

  • flipflopper

    This site has essentially become a bash Romney convention. I sure hope everyone is aware of the damage that this could cause if he gets the nomination.

    Also, how many times does he have to explain his healthcare plan before people accept the fact that it is different? In fact, I would love for people to comment as to how the plans are so much the same. I suspect that most people on this site don’t even know the details of Romneycare. They simply follow the Romney hate-mongering talking points.

  • paladin1

    Lock me in as a Perry shill as well. No one else is viable, having money and the organization to challenge Romney. And…I’ll take the Texas way over any little “blue piece of heaven” like Mass. or Chicago!

  • texas214

    that Cain’s plan while being catchy and all, could be a liability around the neck of the GOP. If the scoring and sentiment to turn against it, it could have an effect in down ticket races.

    Before there is anymore bandwagonning on this there needs to be an in depth analysis.

  • damianvincent

    Perry got unfairly beaten like a rented mule by the other candidates, because they know he has the record to beat. So his opponents have hit him on immigration painting him as a liberal open borders, pro amnesty candidate. That isn’t true, Perry’s done more for border security than all the other candidates combined. He’s put half a billion on the border fighting illegal immigration and cartel violence. He’s moved the national guard and texas rangers to the border. He vetoed a bill that would have given d/l’s to illegals, he got voter ID passed, he joined Az in it’s suit with the feds, he even pushed with emergency legislation to ban sanctuary cities.

  • texas214

    Cain’s plan will help the economy?

  • nepanyrush

    You state that Romney once ran to the left of Ted Kennedy. In their 2007 endorsement of Romney, the “National Review editors pointed out that in 1994, when he tried to unseat Ted Kennedy, ?he ran against higher taxes and government-run health care, and for school choice, a balanced budget amendment, welfare reform, and ?tougher measures to stop illegal immigration.??

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/279983/mitt-romney-s-regeneration-christian-schneider

    You may have your disagreements with Romney, but lets stick to facts rather than muddy the waters.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    The only thing that wil damage Romney is is past governance and his policy statements, which are out there for all the world to see.

  • conservativemusician

    Everyone here knows the stakes and if Romney ends up getting the nomination, he will get our support. I will remind you that one of the basic tenets of this site is conservative in the primaries, Republican in the general.

    Interesting name you’ve got there BTW. Describes very accurately how many of us feel about Romney and why we are supporting other candidates in the primaries.

  • flipflopper

    One is a state program and another is a federal program. Why doesn’t anyone see that? He was the governor of one of the bluest states in the union. I look more to Romney’s actions. Example: He vetoed the first pro-abortion bill that came to his desk. Can we honestly say that Romney is pro abortion?

  • damianvincent

    Here is an analysis, it will shift a great portion of the taxation in this country downward on lower income people. We don’t support tax hikes on the rich, but we’re going to support tax hikes on the poor, yeah let me tell you that’s a winner. Every time a single mother is buying diapers and it’s costs more, she’ll think about Republicans, every time the construction workers buys food to feed his family, he’ll think of Republicans. Not in any positive way either.

  • avagreen

    And, a month ago Cain was at the bottom.

    Polls change with perception. As I’ve pointed out in previous elections, Al Gore and Howard Dean were at times at the top of polls.

    Much of Perry’s drop are due to the constant attacks he’s endured from rival campaigns over his stance on illegal immigration, border security, and Social Security…….all of which that I’ve read are close to flat out lies and misrepresentation of facts, but stick with those that don’t research or dig for facts.

    Further, a new CNN Poll of Polls of the GOP race October 13th, 2011, 23 minutes ago indicates that Mitt Romney is on top of the field of candidates, at 23%, with Cain just three points behind, at 20%. Perry, who was the front-runner in the national polls in the race for the Republican presidential nomination from late August through much of September, is at 14%, followed at 10% by Ron Paul of Texas.
    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/13/cnn-poll-of-polls-romney-cain-battle-for-top-spot/

    Much of Cain’s support comes from his 999 plan, which is presently being vetted with growing discontent over it. If that goes, so does his popularity.

    Polls are just snapshots in time, nothing set in stone.

  • flipflopper

    Finally someone who can step back from the ani-Romney rhetoric and be rational.

  • clintonformccain

    The Perry collapse among the conservative wing of the party is nearly all tied to in-state tuition in Texas. They are punishing him for breaking with the accepted orthodoxy. The collapse has gotten a big nudge from the establishment NE Republicans who can’t stand cowboy boots.

    The irony, of course, is that Perry’s abilty to court Latino votes in a national election would help the Republicans both now and into the future.

  • gekster

    I can see why you like Romney.
    You couldn’t have made it more obvious than if it was Romney4dogcatcher.

  • reggie182

    Cain’s 9% sales tax will receive widespread denunciation from the opposition as a regressive tax hurting middle and lower income brackets.? Once that narrative establishes itself, his campaign is pretty much done.? What else does he have?

    Perry is a terrible candidate.? Obviously unprepared for this race.? He seems ready to do little else but run for Governor of Texas again.? I’m sorry, but basic communication skills and a comprehensive grasp of national domestic policy and foreign policy are not superfluous qualities. They are indispensable.? If he can’t go on a news program and answer questions about these things then he has no business being in this race.? Nevermind that the guy doesn’t exactly have the conservative bona fides that so many assume him to have as far as his ideology is concerned.

    With Newt….well is there a chance in hell he could win?? He certainly has the knowledge.? I think he’d make one hell of a President.? He’d basically vaporize Obama in a debate.? Sixteen years is an awfully long time to remain consistenly unpopular though.? My heart tells me to support him, but my head tells me that the chances that he would win are slim to none.

    Paul, Santorum, Bachmann, Huntsman, et al…..bah…..they’re a distraction.

    Which brings us to Romney.? The evil ultra-liberal, quasi-communist.? He’s the one who is running on a?conservative platform, but once he gets in office he’ll? fight a GOP Congress tooth and nail to implement Massachussets heath-care on every American citizen.? He’ll work to realize everything that Ted Kennedy ever aspired to do.? Everything he says he will do now is a lie.? Political consequences be damned.? He’s not concerned about that.? A future primary challenge ala Pat Buchannan that could jeopardize his re-election chances? Not a worry. He is only concerned with turning our nation into a form of Mormon Socialism, and leaving office to be subjected to the eternal scorn of his own party.

    Right?

    Well if you are to believe some of the Romney bashers it is.? There really isn’t legitimate reason to believe in it though.? He

    Actually I think it is entirely reasonable to expect him to make good on his word and work with a GOP Congress to promote a conservative agenda. Which by the way isn’t going to be possible by any stretch of the imagination if we select an unelectible candidate and get four more years of BHO.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    As I said, job number one is to shove Romney out of the way.

  • damianvincent

    MITT ROMNEY: “I will preserve and protect a womans right to choose, and am devoted and dedicated to upholding my word on that”.

    He then goes on to explain how a child can get an abortion without a parent present, saying not one single time has their been a denial of that.

    Abortion without parental consent, is very pro abortion. This guy is a scam, a joke on our party, and we don’t even get it.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4

  • Repair_Man_Jack

    some loud, obnoxious twerp with a bizarre screen name was calling us Mitt-State. Which borg are we supposed to belong to? I’ve posted here for years and still don’t have it quite nailed down.

  • windwaker24

    he gives Obama the opportunity to paint conservatives as hypocrites. Remember how we all complained about Obama’s inexperience to no end? If Cain is the nominee, Obama can paint conservatives as partisan hacks and takes the spotlight off his own inexperience.

  • NeoKong

    So tell us how the voters of Mass. could repeal Romneycare like Mitt says…?
    It is a lie and that is a F-A-C-T.

    As far as this site becoming a “bash Romney convention” I think you need to look around on the internet.
    We are not exactly alone.

  • snowshooze

    I don’t know, it might backfire.
    And Michelle is off to see Trump today.

  • flipflopper

    You hit the nail on the head. This site has produced so much anti-Romney sentiment, that it almost seems like people aren’t thinking straight.

  • Ann_W

    I love Herman Cain, but I’m not sure how 999 will play out. Everyone’s looking for someone to go to, but everyone has big issues. I can’t believe Pawlenty dropped out so early. I wonder if he’s having second thoughts now.

  • avagreen

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/10/09/romney-a-flip-flop-used-to-be-more-liberal-than-ted-kennedy.html

    You may be too young to remember this. I’m not. ??

    He used to be ultra-left. Almost kooky in his beliefs. He’s just reinvented himself for convenience sake.

  • paulplantowin

    If ‘only committed voters’ watch the debates why is Perry falling so rapidly?
    If not his pathetic stumblbum performances – what does account for his numbers?
    I believe u long time political activists have a blind spot.
    You seem to have a hard time factoring in the current climate.
    I am kind of new to this – so I don’t ‘know’ who can win and who can’t.
    I see Cain and Newt throwing off all your conventional wisdom.
    I don’t ‘know’ who can win – but it seems something unusual is occuring.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    It’s not my problem if he ran with an “R” in front of his name in Massachusetts but goverrned like he had a “D” in front of his name.

  • flipflopper

    and every one thereafter?

  • sunshinek67

    to this website to gin up the conservative base for Romney? Nice try. He has hit an average of 25% ceiling for years now. Conservatives just do not trust him, as he has essentially two answers for every question. If the DNC is already spending their stash on websites, whichmitt.com & tv ads in the works, 20 minute David Axelrod phone conferences with reporters to highlight the perpetual positioning Romney, why should Republicans rally around THAT, a weak candidate. It is the media establishment and Romney paid endorsements from rank and file congressmen & women that has hoisted Romney to an unreal throne over the GOP. If Romney gets the nomination, I can see another John McCain scenario where by millions of the base just stays home.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    With Romney, the 40% becomes the 53%.

  • Common_Cents

    Cain, Romney, Perry, Gingrich.

    I’d love to hear all the wheeling and dealing behind the scenes between camps for future endorsements by the rest of the candidates + Palin, DeMint etc… Would be very interesting.

  • streiff

    how about using English in your comments.

    If you are 13 and have to use “u” then go back to your X-Box and leave us alone.

  • damianvincent

    Watch this and tell me this and tell me he was Republican in Mass

    Romney supporting abortions without parental consent.
    Quote “I do not take the position of a pro life candidate”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_w9pquznG4

    Romney supporting abortion, gay rights to the point of supporting gay scoutmasters, repudiating Ronald Reagan, and an affirmative action supporter.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI

    Romney raises taxes, or fee’s, half a billion.
    In a 2006 fiscal policy report card on America’s governors, the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, estimated the cost of the fees at $500-million

    Some Republican… National Review is pathetic, I think they even endorsed him again.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    He’s more damaged than McCain.

  • reggie182

    The hyperbole about Mitt is getting to be ridiculous.

  • Jim Tomasik

    Cain is the man.

    I bet Perry will become the millstone to Cain that Thompson was to Huckabee last go around.

    The Republicans ended up with McCain and now it looks like they could end up with Romney. Such is life.

    Like Thompson, Perry ain’t got “fire in the belly”. That last debate proved it.

  • sharp

    I try to suppress all the negative history or personal resume of each candidate when listening to debates, and just listen to their answers.

    The clear winner is Newt.

    So, why doesn’t he have more than 10%?

    Most Red Staters know he has personal baggage, but I think they all have baggage. Most past Presidents had baggage, but that didn’t keep them from getting elected.

    Do we have to nominate someone without any flaws?

  • flipflopper

    If you tell me exactly how Romneycare works, I will tell you how it can be repealed. I suspect that you probably know nothing about it other than what people here tell you.

  • avagreen

    some few elections back.

    He’s not, never has been, is an opportunist willing to say whatever will get him into office.

    He’s being pushed by the MSM, even Fox, which is disturbing and disgusting.

    Another wolf in sheep’s clothing. We already have one of those in the WH.

  • paladin1

    Last night I listened to Greta Van Susteren interview Speaker of the House John Boehner on her Fox show, On The Record. The show topic was the Obama ?American Jobs Act? bill and the congressional response to it. I sat through the entire interview listening to Speaker Boehner speak over and over again of meeting with the Democrats on common ground; the nirvana of establishment political thought in Washington, D.C. As he spoke, I mentally reviewed the last three years of the Obama presidency and the last four years of the Bush era, and saw the inevitable result that compromise of principle brings to our country: burgeoning national debt brought on by unrestrained government spending, the collapse of the artificially inflated housing bubble with its accompanying financial failures, TARP, Dodd-Frank, the two stimulus packages, bailouts, Quantitative Easing, and high unemployment. I then reviewed of the damage and attempted destruction to our capitalist system which the Democrats under Obama inflicted on it while they had complete control of the Congress and the Executive. There I saw the greatest boondoggle in the history of the nation: Obamacare. The conclusions to this are chilling.
    We are so close to ruin from the ?benefits? of compromise of our principles that we cannot make even one more mis-step without beginning to tumble off the cliff. The conservatives of the nation have grasped this and have risen up in an attempt to head off the impending doom and demise of the United States as a world leader in economic and influential power. It is a leaderless uprising, as it should be, because American patriots are still, at heart, an independent minded people. The result of this uprising is seen in the slate of candidates running for the Republican nomination for the presidency, each one promising to bring the government back under control. This frightens the Republican Establishment, represented in and by the thought processes of the entrenched Republican leadership like Speaker Boehner, and they will not go easily. To prevent losing control, they have to build a conservative Trojan horse to put into the White House in 2012.
    Enter Mitt Romney and Herman Cain, both touting their conservative values and their plans for redemption of the economy. Both are leading the pack of candidates currently and both have done quite well in the series of Republican debates. A closer look at their views, as expressed by both candidates in the Bloomberg debates, should raise the hackles of any conservative. Romney hedged around the issue of bailouts and refused to state that he was opposed to them, citing the need to preserve the currency and financial system. In his own words:
    MS. GOLDMAN: But — so would you — so would you or would you not be open to another Wall Street bailout?
    MR. ROMNEY: Well, no one likes the idea of a Wall Street bailout. I certainly don’t. Asset — asset —
    MS. GOLDMAN: But you said in 2008 that it prevented the collapse of the financial —

    MR. ROMNEY: There’s no question but that the action that President Bush and that Secretary Paulson took was designed to keep not just a collapse of individual banking institutions but to keep the entire currency of the country worth something and to keep all the banks from closing and to make sure we didn’t all lose our jobs. My — my experience tells me that we were on the — on the precipice and we could have had a complete meltdown of our entire financial system, wiping out all the savings of the American people. So action had to be taken.
    Was it perfect? No. Was it well-implemented? No, not particularly. Were there some institutions that should not have been bailed out? Absolutely. Should they have used the funds to bail out General Motors and Chrysler? No, that was the wrong source for that funding.
    But this — but this approach of saying, look, we’re going to have to preserve our currency and maintain America and our financial system is — is essential.
    MR. ROSE: And as far as you’re concerned, there’s no institution — no financial institution that’s too big to fail.
    MR. ROMNEY: Well, no, you don’t — you don’t — you don’t want to bail out anybody. The idea of trying to bail out an institution to protect its shareholders or to protect a certain interest group: that’s a terrible idea, and that shouldn’t happen. You do want to make sure we don’t lose the country, and we don’t lose our financial system, and we don’t lose American jobs, and that all the banks don’t go under. So you have to take action very carefully to make sure that you preserve our currency and preserve our financial system.
    On one hand, Romney condemns the bailout of individual corporations and businesses, but on the other, again asserts that the financial system must be preserved and thereby tacitly approves of the bailout process. He tries to conceal his approval by alluding to the preservation of the system and the economy but analysis of this statement can only show that the economy of the United States is made up of the conglomeration of businesses, both large and small, and that any effect on the system MUST come from action on individual entities because the system and individual entities are inseparable. Therefore, in Romney?s mind, the bailouts he supported in 2008 were necessary, some businesses are too big to fail, and he knows this puts him at odds with conservatives and the Tea Party. He panics at the thought of openly supporting this action because he must appear to be conservative in order to secure the support of the conservative wing of the party and help maintain the status quo.
    Now, here is Herman Cain on the same issue:
    MS. GOLDMAN: Mr. Cain, back in 2008, you wrote that the Wall Street bailout was a win-win for the taxpayer. You just heard Governor Romney. Do you agree?
    MR. CAIN: Conceptually, I made that statement based upon the concept, but I happen to agree with Governor Romney. The way it was administered is where it got off track. They were discretionary in which institutions they were going to save, rather than apply it equitably, which is what most of us thought was going to be done. The implementation of it is where they got off track. I didn’t agree with it. I don’t think Governor Romney agreed with it, so did a lot of us. The implementation was at fault.
    Cain supported the bailouts in 2009 as a ?win-win? but now says that the implementation was at fault. He further states that the administration should have been ?equitable?. Can any rational person think of an equitable way to implement a bailout without applying the funds to individual companies as each needs? I don?t think so.
    Now, here is Romney on bi-partisanship:
    MR. ROSE: We’ll come back to energy and also your economic plan this evening, but I go now to Governor Romney.

    The paralysis is there and everybody’s concerned about it. What specifically would you be prepared to do to make the country moving again on addressing its problems?

    MITT ROMNEY: I’d be prepared to be a leader. You can’t get the country to go in the right direction and get Washington to work if you don’t have a president that’s a leader. And — and three years ago we selected a person who’d never had any leadership experience, never worked in the private sector, never had the opportunity to actually bring people together, and he hasn’t been able to do so. He said he’d bring us hope and change. Instead he’s divided the nation and tried to blame other people.
    The real course for America is to have someone who’s a leader, who can identify people in both parties who care more about the country than they care about getting reelected. There are Democrats like that. There are Republicans like that. I was the governor of a state that had a few Democrats. (Laughs.) People in this room know how many we had in Massachusetts.
    MR. ROSE: So it’s essential to deal with Democrats —
    MR. ROMNEY: Yeah, you have to —
    MR. ROSE: — and to be prepared to compromise on the big issues of our time?
    MR. ROMNEY: You have to stand by your principles. At the same time, you know that good Democrats and good Republicans who love the country first will be able to find common ground from time to time and recognize we can’t keep on spending like we’re spending.
    We can’t demand more from tax revenue from people, because that kills jobs and hurts working families. We have got to help the middle class in this country.
    Here now is a question for all conservatives; ?Can you think of ANY Democrat who has not supported proposals and voted for bills that have not damaged the American economy or way of life?? I can?t, and there are plenty establishment Republican members of Congress in that same group as well, all of whom have crossed the aisle to embrace the other side. For instance, how about John McCain, Mr. RINO himself and ?the Romney of 2008?? McCain/Feingold ring any bells, you conservatives out there?
    Conservatives must open our collective eyes and see both Romney and Cain for the big spending, big government candidates they are. Romney has a track record of social liberalism and big government interference (read Romneycare ? the pattern for Obamacare) and has supported the bailouts. Cain supported the bailouts, though he now says he has problems with the implementation; hardly a conservative rejection of market interference. Do we really want another establishment RINO, an Establishment Trojan Horse, to lead us to election disaster and embrace the bitter pill of compromise? If we don?t we need to run far away from either of these candidates now.
    The only conservative candidate on the slate, with a viable organization and the money to compete, is Rick Perry. He must attend to some damage control from his early start but I believe he can and will as he progresses. The release of his economic plan is imminent, he has previewed his thoughts on energy to the post Bloomberg debate meeting, and he is steadily marching down the campaign trail. Polls, like bloggers and the public at large, are fickle things and Perry can rise again as quickly as he slipped.

  • Scope

    pretty closely aligns with the ideas of J. Last who also still believes that Perry has the best chance to prevail as the anti-Romney candidate. One of the sentences in his article spells the major problem for Perry-

    “The establishment pushed back against Perry, hard. Like Palin-in-2009 hard.”

    I disagree that Perry has to bring up the immigration issue again. Perry has addressed it, many times. He has explained why he supported the in-state tuition thing, and he has explained many times what his border ideas are. He has said that he is against the federal Dream Act, and he has said repeatedly that he is against amnesty. For those of us that are paying attention, we’ve read the little known articles on some obscure websites or local newspapers where he has given speeches, or has done town halls and answered those questions in speaking or answering questions of attendees. As far as the MSM, there has been an almost blackout against reporting anything Perry says unless it is to trash him, or to attempt to make him out as a bigot, homophobe, and/or racist, falsely.

    Again, someone had posted here a few days ago that if you read the local newspapers in Iowa where Perry has been campaigning, the stories are mostly positive for Perry.

    So many have said that when you meet Perry in person, and ask him questions, he is very engaging and tries to answer your questions to your satisfaction.

    Tomorrow Perry will be rolling out his energy plan in a speech in Pittsburg. I’ve read some small stories about what the plan will include, one from an Iowa newspaper, and one on a leftist site mocking his plan because he is going to just dirty up our air. No other candidate has really talked in any meaningful way about energy. A few months ago, Romney said he believes in Global Warming, and that man is responsible at least partially. Perry will run circles around Romney, or any other candidate with tackling a problem that only seems to get major attention when gas is near $4 per gallon. Perry believes that his energy plan will create over a million jobs. It will give back some of that land that the feds have been taking over mostly to tie up our energy resources.

    It’ll be interesting to see how the elites attack Perry now for his energy plan, no matter how good it is, and no matter how in line with the voters desires it will be.

  • windwaker24

    And I don’t like Mitt Romney. I’m a Perry-krishna! :)

  • damianvincent

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/279983/mitt-romney-s-regeneration-christian-schneider

    This guy says we should accept romney because his formerly liberal positions may make it easier for dems to vote for him.

    This is exactly what I’m talking about, WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO OUR PARTY, just a few years ago, we were purging RINO’s from the party, now we’re on the verge of nominating one.

    I think the tea party was hijacked and this will bring back the true reason for the tea party. Purge time, again. Lesson was not learned.

  • acat

    The point being, Scott Brown is the best conservatism can hope for in the Peoples’ Republic of Massachusetts.

    We should not accept the best governor conservatives can get there…

    Mew

  • clintonformccain

    …to letting some kid brought to Texas from Mexico by his parents, pay the standard tuition at a Texas community college. Now, THAT’s a hangin’ offense.

  • acat

    (nothing further)

  • Tbone

    We have a guy who has never won an election, served as a token Fed Governor and managed to run a second rate pizza franchise tied with a proven RINO who couldn’t even beat the splut McCain 4 years ago.

    Behind them we have a guy who was Speaker of the House and is obviously the smartest guy in the room every time he opens his mouth and the 3 time winner of the governorship of one of the most successful states in the Union during the 10 years he has run it.

    Let me tell you something folks, if you support either Romney or Cain over either Newt or Perry you are just too plain effing stupid to be allowed to vote.

  • Ann_W

    He has a lot of turn around experience.

    I love Cain, but he’s so locked into the 999, I’m not sure it’s going to work out. Perry’s going to get creamed in debates, plus the George Bush look-alike sound alike thing, to our enlightened electorate.

    I so wish Pawlenty had stayed in, but as I think about Mitt I keep thinking that he wouldn’t be horrible. He took over the 2002 Olympics after they had been severely mismanaged and had very good instincts in turning it around to be very successful. Here’s a link about the Olympics http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/19/us/politics/19romney.html?pagewanted=1 . Gives a pretty good idea of what happened. NYT def. not biased toward Romney. My husband thought he remembered that it was Huntsman Romney took over from in the Olympics. I can’t find that, though. He was governor in a VERY blue state, so he should get a little slack in trying to make things work there. I don’t think we should be too upset if Mitt is the nominee. Although, I still probably support Cain over him.

  • izoneguy

    many people would rather kill the kid before they can get in-state tuition.

  • pttx333

    been one. I have stayed with Perry throughout his career in Texas and will remain that way. He is a the one to lead us – period.

  • newagegop

    Obama has supported or made law…socialized medicine, gun-laws, abortion, benefits to illegals, ect.

    Romney has supported or made law…socialized medicine, gun-laws, abortion, benefits to illegals, ect.

    I’d have more respect for Romney if his principles meant more to him than his ambition. Of course with a conservative House and a RINO senate maybe a sellout won’t be that bad. So long as the wind blows from the right Romney will be standing for freedom. If the wind blows from the left…well he’ll be standing for bipartisanship and compromise.

  • flipflopper

    thanks to the wonderful job that you have done in misrepresenting Mitt and twisting his record.

    And by the way, a new poll shows that Mitt is tied with Cain at 29% and I suspect that it will go up after Mitt ran circles around the other candidates at the debate. The only one that Mitt can’t run circles around is Newt, but he won’t bash Romney because, 1) he was for a healthcare mandate once too and 2) he knows that Romney is intellectually supperior and a far better candidate than anyone on stage other than Newt himself. I suspect that if Newt got out of the race he would endorse Romney.

    But you go ahead and nominate the sure loss and then we can all be grateful that at least we nominated the most conservative candidate even though we have four more years of BHO

  • damianvincent

    I remember reading that article when it came out, and it’s very true.

    Romney will lose to obama, this will be about the economy, and the Liberal romney, the Mass one, was third worst in the nation in job creation. His business experience is based off a company that he saved with a federal bailout. The same Romney who said let detriot go bankrupt, which i happened to agree with, but Obama will use it to show romney will take a bailout for himself, but not hard working Americans. With his dismal economic record in Mass, obama will blur the line, and can continue to say Republicans don’t know how to create jobs, and we’ll hand him a candidate that has the record to back that up, third worst in job creation isn’t going to cut it.

  • benko

    “Actually I think it is entirely reasonable to expect him to make good on his word and work with a GOP Congress to promote a conservative agenda.”

    You must be joking (or under 30). Romney is not a conservative e.g. global warming, Romneycare, etc. He is better than Obama, but not what the country needs now.

  • damianvincent

    I’ve said it a hundred times, a Mass Republican is a Texas liberal.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    Exactly *who* is the base only Romney can deliver?

    What are *their* beliefs?

  • Scope

    for those not also listening. He said that he is hearing the theory now that Perry is purposely laying low right now. Putting that together with those that know of Perry’s campaigning style in Texas have been alluding to the same thing. Rush said the advice is not to give up on Perry yet.

    I love the comment someone left earlier that claimed that Texas is littered with the dead bodies of candidates that have run against Perry and lost.

  • NeoKong

    I don’t jump through hoops.

    So your response is that I have to explain your position in great detail and then you will reward me with the secrets of unlocking Romneycare…?

    “Well well well NeoKong….I knew you couldn’t do it”

    Feel free to copy and paste that if it saves you time.

  • flipflopper

    Did we just establish a pro Romney thread on Redstate?! I am shocked

  • clintonformccain

    …that Perry hurt himself by being invisible in the debate Tuesday night. I’m not sure I agree. At least he wasn’t getting pummelled about painted rocks and childhood vaccinations and tutiion at Texas community colleges.

    Now, that he is so far behind the prohibitive favorite, Herman Cain, he might actually be allowed to talk about real issues going forward. Granted, it will be at small town hall meetings in places like Iowa and South Carolina. The media has moved on the larger than life leaders in Republican Party — like Herman Cain.

  • acat

    All of the candidates have flaws. Erick has done a tremendous service by highlighting these flaws in his Horserace series.

    It seems to this cat like Perry’s timed this pretty well. The blooms should be off their roses by the time voting actually starts, and Romney seems to have a hard ceiling.

    Perry is on the downswing right now… and will be in “second look at…” phase about the time the voting actually starts.

    Cain is in front right now… but the 9-9-9 isn’t going over terribly well, and the exposed gaps in his grasp of foreign policy are significant. Great guy, would happily support him but .. he’ll be on the downswing when the voting starts.

    Newt is rising but .. again, he’s got significant personal baggage. He’ll also be on the downswing when the voting starts.

    Bachmann’s done. Get the hook.
    Huntsman’s done. Get the hook.
    Luap Nor is done. Get the straitjacket…

    Mew

  • sunshinek67

    does not have a grasp of the issues on a national front. Redstate poster Moe Lane III submitted the following two links on yesterday’s discussion of Perry:

    From youtube, the clips are titled Gov Rick Perry (R-TX), Part I & Gov Rick Perry (R-TX), Part II, taken after the NH debate

    1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SDFnGky0io&feature=feedwll&list=WL
    2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwD79Yu-ri0&feature=feedwll&list=WL

    Clearly he knows how to work a room with a command of the issues. While he did get the century wrong on the Revolution, he is human and is passionate to get the economy working again. He reminds me of Reagan without the debate skill, and even then, Reagan appeared “old” and “confused” in his 1984 debates. George W. created new words and sentence structure. Strong leaders both of them. Amazing to me that the GOP is considering a front runner a candidate that has two answers for every question asked in a debate, but whichever answer he chooses to submit is rhetorically sound and Godsped delivered. I am not buying a Romney band ticket.

  • conservativemusician

    And, of course, I think Rush is right as well. But I do hope Perry gets going soon. If they keep moving up the primaries, he may run out of time to properly get his message out.

  • flipflopper

    That is how elections are won, not by the base. Tell me which independants and conservative democrats can Perry or Cain deliver? That is a huge problem with this primary. People want someone as far right as possible…I disagree. You need a right of center president and a very big conservative congress. That way you get the president elected and use the congress to promote conservative ideas.

  • sunshinek67

    over the years. whichmitt.com is damaging. Perry’s video of Romneycare is damaging. This whole debate is a waste of time. Take care~

  • Scope

    n/t

  • pttx333

    I read him for the flip-flopper that he is the first time I saw him long ago. That is not to say I will not vote for him if he is the last one standing, but I pray daily that it will not be the case that I would be forced to do so. In my view, he is an illusion, a chameleon and too liberal/semi-moderate for me.

  • Matthew Morris

    …that quite frankly will raise taxes on 2/3 of America

    GOOD. We need this. You need to broaden the horizons and boundaries in your thinking. This is our only shot at long-term survival- much less prosperity. This is the true conservative position. It is not conservative to support a politician-gamed system, where national politicians pick winners and losers. It is not conservative to support a system in which some citizens are contributing at such rates such that other politician-hand-picked winners will not have to contribute at all. It is not conservative to support a system in which politicians are able to appeal to a by nature subjective notion of what is “fair”. It is all quite disgusting, really.

    Herman Cain is the only one brave enough to go 100% conservative, at least as far as tax policy is concerned. (Although who knows- maybe Perry will soon announce a 12-12-1 counter-plan (1% being the national sales tax, preserving the path to FairTax) as part of his economic plan)

    We are in a pickle. Because of philosophies and cultures that enable / permit this sort of flawed reasoning. The only way to right the ship is…. to right the ship. (Sinking fast…. little time left.)

  • sunshinek67

    I concur with that statement to a point. KBH was left in ashes~

  • damianvincent

    yeah but a snap back of that proportion would be devastating and have sever long last repercussions, and would allow the Democrats to rewrite the tax code the very next election.

  • flipflopper

    Keep drinking the anti-Romney Kool-aid

  • Swamp_Yankee

    Romney did not lie at all. Any piece of legislation can be repealed. When Romney says the people can get rid it, he is referring to the will of the majority.

    The fact is that the majority does no want it repealed. If they did they can elect state legislators that will repeal it. Its no conspiracy. The people voted for Deval Patrick twice – that is the people.

    Our system of government isn’t designed for small minorities to overturn legislation in the name of “the people”.

  • nittany

    I was very open to Perry, but after seeing his performance in the debates and hearing of his liberal position on tuition assistance for illegal aliens, I would never vote for this man. Perry is in way over his head and intellectual capablilities. Just picture him standing next to Obama one on one in a debate and remind yourself that the goal in this election is to defeat Obama.

  • mkozikowski

    Perry may not be the best debater. But frankly, I want someone who understands what Conservatives want and one who actually produces results which Conservatives want.
    Romney is not that man. Too many socialist actions in his history.

    Perry is the clearest choice by way of his actions, not his words.
    We chose a man of words last time. That didn’t work out so well.

    I want a man of action.

  • avagreen

    Those of us with long memories need to stick together.

    I can barely stand to watch Romney on TV, almost as much as I do Obama.

    Both are cut from the same cloth.

    Opportunists and liars.

  • wennejunk

    “Right now, Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann are serving only to bolster Romney?s chances. If they drop out, they may embrace Romney, but the odds are their supporters do not.”

    If they endorse Romney, they give lie to their claim to be conservatives.

    It is that simple.

  • pttx333

    The dirty campaigns run by KBH, Bill White, et al., infuriated me. There is nothing they didn’t throw at Perry and, obviously, there was no amount of $$$ they wouldn’t spend to do it. And that is happening today – just a different set of opponents. It is going to be a bloodbath, but I will remain an avid supporter of Perry.

  • avagreen

    Listening.

  • Scope

    today. He said that there is a very long 24 page article coming out in the NYT magazine this weekend, which talks about the Republican elites fighting hard to kill of the Tea Party. Apparently it names names of people who don’t care that they are being quoted saying that the Tea Party is a disaster. There’s one guy who talked about the newbies in the House after the 2010 elections, and how they have been referred to by the elders with negative names.

    Then he talked about an email he got from someone telling him that the establishment took back over after Reagan left the WH. Old Bush was a moderate, and destroyed everything Reagan tried to accomplish.

    I’ve been asking what has happened to the Tea Party people, and, actually read this morning that they are so non-existent this election cycle they are now being seen as nothing more than Paper Tigers.

    Rush just said that the Republican establishment has joined together with the leftist media to make it appear as though the Tea Party is dead. I really hope that these people are still around and will insure that the entire work of the conservatives doen’t throw everything away, and elect Romney. If that happens, the Tea Party is surely dead.

    GET. RID. OF. ROVE.

  • txpat

    Talks about how bad he did, and folks take that information.
    They don’t take the time to watch the debates to decide for themselves how he did.
    I know his debate skills are bad, but he did so much better than the Florida debate.
    Does that mean he was good or better than everyone else.
    No, but it was an improvement. He didn’t make it worse.

  • avagreen

    Both are equally bad.

    What you are doing is presenting a false dichotomy, or “black and white” thinking in this issue, which presents only two options.

    I’m still for Perry because of all the facts that have been listed.

    I know the lies being told, and they aren’t true.

    At one time, Reagan was behind the polls when he was running against Jimmy Carter. Wasn’t he called the “comeback kid”?

    http://www.politico.com/pdf/PPM41_reagan_story.pdf

  • txpat

    I want a President that I know where he stands on issues.
    Not some plastic person that says what you want to hear.

  • SoFiMil

    P: )

  • tailfins1959

    Somebody will appear as the anti-Romney. Limbaugh’s pushing back against Romney gives me faith that there is a viable anti-Romney. It IS possible to take Perry without taking Texas. Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin made their careers in NYC at WABC. Politicians don’t define the place. The BosWash corridor contains 40% of the population and perhaps most of the economic activity in the US. Furthermore, it provides the best exposure to workshops, conventions and training regardless of one’s professional endeavor.

  • conservativemusician

    1) Elections are won by first solidifying the base and then going after others who can possibly be persuaded (i.e. independents, conservative Dems, etc.). A major reason why McCain lost in 2008 is because many in the conservative base either stayed home or voted for Obama in protest. Rush just noted that over 70% of the conservative base does not want Romney as the nominee, so what does this say to you about Romney’s chances?

    2) It is still too early to write anyone off yet – especially Perry who has the grassroots organization and money to challenge Romney. Either Perry or Cain will do just fine with independents.

    3) You say we need a “right of center president”. Well, would that be Romney? Do you really think that Romney is as “far right as possible” with all the liberal positions he has taken over the years (i.e. Romneycare, abortion, global warming, etc. ad infinitum)? Please.

    4) Again, as I posted to you earlier, unlike 2008, no one will be staying home this time around. The stakes are far too high and Obama has done far too much damage to be allowed another 4 years to further wreck our country.

    I agree with sunshinek67 that you are a Romney shill (or probably a troll). However, the rest of us are interested in electing a true conservative this time around.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    Therein lies the derision of the Tea Party.

  • sharp

    My 27 yr old daughter has some vague memory of negative news on Newt, but doesn’t have a clue what it was about. I would think that most people in 20s and 30s have no idea of his pros and cons from 1994-96.

    Should he be disqualified for past sins?

    I think Romney’s current sin of Romneycare = Obamacare is much more disqualifying than Newt’s past.

  • Scope

    but he has no record to judge him on. Some of the things he has said or supported like TARP, the FED doesn’t need to be audited, do not make him a 100% conservative. His immigration plans are almost identical to Perry’s, but he conviently said he could not support Perry because of his immigration plan, among other things. It is unwise for even the most unseasoned candidate to state that he would not support the candidate, whoever it is. Then he doubled down with that in saying he wouldn’t be his VP either, not long after Perry said he would have him or Newt as his choice.

    Cain’s 999 plan is only getting a magnifying glass on it now, because he gained popularity. He won’t say who his economic advisers are, or who helped him write that plan. There are many questions left opened on it with no detailed explanations. It reminds me Pelosi saying that we have to pass Obamacare to see what is in it.

  • izoneguy

    The father of ObamaCare??

    Or the guy who believes in Global Warming?

    Or the guy who was for abortion before he was against it?

  • avagreen

    Instate Tuition was enacted in Texas to avoid civil & federal lawsuits. 38% of legal citizens in Texas are Tejanos and a large chunk of these are multi-generational Texicans who have family and commerce on both sides of the border going back over 100 years . Has has been the case since the earliest days of the Republic. Most who move here to Texas settle in Texas and become legal Texans. Perry pissed off a lot of people over the Anti-Sanctuary City bill (Most of Houston) which is why Strauss tabled it.

    Perry isn?t perfect?But Texans an ornery bunch keep electing him cause he does his job for Texas. He?ll do the best he can for the nation. It won?t be perfect according to purists but he won?t do a Reagan Amnesty ( He?s for guest worker which means documentation and taxation and cleaning up the immigration courts & prosecuting the grafters).

    The federal government mandates that we, as states, give education, K-12 to children of illegal aliens. They, the feds, have failed to secure the borders so the states must deal with the very real problem of 1.2 million illegal immigrants. We tried shutting off their state benefits and got sued for doing that.
    If the children of illegal aliens must apply for citizenship, register with ICE, attend at least three years of a Texas H.S. and qualify for college, they get to pay in-state tuition. This is the same rules for any out of state students. They still have to pay the tuition price, room and board and books. It is not any drain on Texas taxpayers.

  • damianvincent

    Don’t get me wrong I don’t defend the current tax code at all, but Cain’s plan scares me. I personally like Paul Ryan’s idea, which is to remove all loopholes, and lower the rates considerably.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    Cain is ‘the man’, but Newt is Fred Thompson. Newt = Great quipper, right on the issues, but … nobody is seeing him as viable or serious. He’s running for elder statesman. Which is odd, because of ALL the candidates running, he is the one who can most easily be “ready”. More so than a 1 term Mass. Governor, and certainly more so than a congresswoman, an ex-senator or a guy who’s only government gig was at the Fed.

    Cain is Huckabee – heart and soul all the way, but …
    - foreign policy newbie, no real money or organization, hasnt had any elected experience to show his conservative cred, has already made enough gaffes to keep the lib media harrassing him (muslims, etc) during any general election (which raises electability spectre). Further, a tax plan should be a UNIFYING thing for Republicans but 9-9-9 has many detractors in the GOP (dont like sales tax, its regressive, etc.) and may end up being a detriment not positive to his campaign … so we still have to ask if Cain can survive serious vetting. the most telling thing about the debate questions was the question for Cain “Who is your economic advisor?” Some guy from Cleveland (Cleveland Texas?) That right there said it all. The Establishment is Asking Establishment Questions, and they wont like the answers, because Cain has been winging it.

    Perry is the Romney (08 Romney), the guy who should be the nominee if you look at the checklist, but …. can’t close the sale.
    Perry does have the fire in belly, but his subdued debate performance this week was not enough. He has to step up his game, and has dug a deep hole thanks to being inarticulate enough to remind Republican voters that having an inarticulate Texan in the White House helps liberals. Good news to hear he is rolling out his positions and policies. That’s what is needed.

    Bachmann is the Duncan Hunter… but Hunter was not as cringeworthy as Bachmann is at times. Sorry, 666 was a sorry joke. She will need to drop out the day after Iowa (if not before) when she comes in n-th place (along with Santorum).

    Romney is the McCain … the establishment wins again. Nothing personal conservatives, its all about Who Can Beat Obama, and principle be damned.
    Surely the foreign policy conservative establishment will want to ‘settle’ on Romney if Cain is enough of a threat. Cain’s statements on Iran are … not serious. So “serious” establishment people will get seriously antsy for Romney if Cain actually appears to be on track to win.

    The Cain phenomenon is about wanting a Real Conservative (TM) in the White House. That’s why Bachmann rose earlier. But every conservative has been found wanting. Gingrich failed because he sat on the couch with Pelosi – but Romney has touted global warming (uggg). Perry wrong on immigration? Yet Romney was for amnesty (before he was against it).

    This is a 2008 primary rerun – the conservatives WERE NOT SATISFIED with any candidate, split their vote and the Establishment Guy won. We are on track to do the same. I too like Cain, but can’t quite make myself belief he will actually make it to the White House. He’ll end up like Perry Bachmann newt more likely….

  • Scope

    by the establishment. He was made out to be dumb, same is being said about Perry. Reagan had no one in the media on his side, same as Perry. Reagan won, so will Perry.

    When it comes down to it, most will realize that Perry has the most and best experience. The negatives being put out about him, are being spun to make him look like a child murder.

    Do not allow the media to choose our candidate. They are in the bag for Romney, and are using Cain just to knock Perry out. That tells you how much fear the establishment has of Perry. As EE said here long ago, with a President Perry, many of the lobbyists and elites will be out of a job.

  • NeoKong

    Got it.

  • Scope

    that there are not a lot of Romney supporters here. In fact there are many here that will do everything in their power to insure that Romney never gets near the WH.

    No one here could possibly do any more damage to Romney that he hasn’t already done to himself.

    I just heard the replay of Romney saying this year that Global Warming is real, and that it is man made.

  • Swamp_Yankee

    Gay marriage:

    http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_MA_0923.pdf

    No one likes tolls and taxes. But MA voters like their pork and subsidies and parks and unions and hand outs even more.

  • Scope

    that has got to win the prize for guts. As least you know what he is.

  • acat

    And as soon as they figure out that they have to pay for their own bread and circuses, it’ll end.

    The problem, right now, is that they’re looking to the farmers in Nebraska and the foresters in Washington State and the retirees in Arizona to bail them out.

    As Thatcher put it, the problem with socialists is they eventually run out of other peoples’ money.

    Mew

  • reggie182

    If Perry can answer the complex questions about foreign and domestic policies, but is unable to do so in a debate format, then he must go on more news programs. Speaking before relatively small groups is insufficient in a national campaign.

    Are the Sunday news programs friendly territory? No, but they are an obstacle that has to be confronted by any candidate. When you are in freefall in the polls you don’t have the luxury of playing it safe. He needn’t worry about “screwing it up” if he’s on Meet The Press. He’s got nothing to lose at this point. If he’s too intimidated by that format then he really needs to think about running for U.S. Senator in TX, or going to the private sector and making some beaucoup dough.

  • barleycorn

    You’ve used that word several times but you haven’t cited any examples. I’m unaware of any “hate” directed toward Mitt Romney on this site.

    We aren’t fond of him and we don’t trust him, but I doubt that you can find a measurable amount of conservatives who hate him.

  • Scope

    that Bachmann requested the meeting with Trump. I suspect she may be looking for some cash.

  • avagreen

    along with using the RINO Cain to drain off the votes from Perry.
    There are illegals all over this nation, from Poles and Irish, with no outcry.

    Even the little hypocrite, Bachmann, was in favor of this at one time. I think I read it on this site:
    Instate tuition for children of illegals.
    http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2011/09/in-state_tuitio.shtml

    But let us not forget that we have no problem with the law concerning Cubans?dry land?they are citizens.

  • gekster

    People can’t come on this site and claim anything without it being THOUGHOLY reaserched.
    Romneycare, we probably have posters who know more about it than Romney and the guys who wrote it.
    example: Texas Dream Act.
    As soon as the lefties started saying it was amnest for illegals, in two days that act was better known here than in Texas.

    If someone here says they know what they’re talking about,
    you can bet 7 out of 10 they do.

    You’ve been posting for all of 1 day.
    I suggest you read for a weak and get the lay of things before beclowning yourself.

  • Scope

    have been twisted. He’s been on every side of every issue, it is hard to twist his record when he has twisted it all himself.

    Flipflopper is for the flipflopper. That is rich.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    that makes sense. We need to get back to everyone – and I mean everyone has skin in the game.

  • Scope

    in which Romney has no support. Of course he can win the Dems. as he is one.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

    For obvious reasons.

    And Franz was a much better judge of character than anybody I know.

  • acat

    Your 27-year-old can be forgiven for not remembering this:

    Being blunt, your 27-year-old is less likely to vote than a 67-year-old who remembers Newt’s flame-out and crash all too well.

    Mew

  • avagreen

    That’s a Texan for you.

    Don’t be fooled by the easygoing exterior.

  • Whacker77

    I know I sound like a broken record, but the Republican field is a complete disappointment. A year ago, who would have thought Romney, Cain, and Gingrich would be the top three choices just two or three months from the fist voting. I know I didn’t and I suggest most would have thought it impossible.

    I’ve settled on Romney because no one else seems even remotely credible. “Herb” Cain seems like a great guy, but we are really going to nominate someone who has never served in elective office? Is that the road we want to follow with the problems we face? History shows our best presidents have, in fact, had lots of government experience.

    There’s plenty to like about Cain, but he’s got no campaign and he’s got loads of staffing problems. If he were to win the nomination, it wouldn’t be until late in the process. That would mean he’d have about a month to set up a credible national campaign and I don’t think he can. Whereas Perry can’t get past Texas, Cain can’t seem to get past 999.

    I don’t understand how we got to this point with such a vurnerable president, but here we are. Romney, while not great, is a known quantity. Cain is just too much of an unknown for me. My concern is that most will vote with their hearts rather than their heads and give us a nominee who could have an Angle/O’Donnell like effect.

    Marco Rubio, please reconsider and run.

  • izoneguy

    and drag the MSM with him…..

    Perry can tell everyone and SHOW everyone what Texas is doing.

  • acat

    I’ll vote for Romney if he wins the nomination, but I hope he does not.

    Mew

  • rightwingmom52

    From the hill here.

  • steveinfl

    is my candidate. The population in Texas is 45% white, and 37% hispanic. To reject in-state college tuition to persons who have lived in Texas their whole lives because their parents aren’t legal is simply fodder to the race baiters.This is the argument the left made- “Rick Perry gives in state tuition to the white kids, but won’t do the same for latino kids”. I mean, unless the Republican party wants to follow the way of Pete Wilson, and give up Texas the way we gave up California, I don’t see Rick Perry having any other choice on the issue.

  • Scope

    Almost where ever you read, so many are saying that Perry dissapeared, fell asleep, fumbled and mumbled his words etc. When I read the comments here the next day, there were plenty that saw the debate that had much different ideas.

    What keeps stricking me is if Perry is such a goner, nobody, nothing, loser, then why is the MSM still attacking him daily? If their boys are in the lead now, why is Perry even still discussed?

    The media knows that the field is very unsettled. Cain is just getting the vetting he never got as a second tier candidate. They know that the national sales tax portion of his 999 plan is a losing proposition, no matter how he and his supporters try to spin it. Some of his answers at the debate are being highly criticized by the conservatives like supporting TARP. He is quickly earning the same title as his master Romney that he is a flip flopper.

    First it was Bachmann, until she self imploded. Then it was Perry until his lackluster debate performances. The MSM has been Palinizing him since before he got in. Rove promised War, or open hunting season on him, with no good reason other than personal ones. Now it is Cain, however, I’m seeing more and more people saying they are getting off the Cain bandwagon, and either going back to Perry, or are in the undecided column.

    Perry has the money to see this through. I’ve heard that Perry is a very active and busy campaigner. He has been spending a ton of time in Iowa lately, covering the state. When people hear Perry speak, and when they ask him questions, they come away as supporters. They talk to friends and family and gain even more Perry supporters. Perry is coming out with his energy plan tomorrow. That will give him more free press time. His plan will be a big boost for him.

    Perry will recover.

  • rightwingmom52

    Paul Ryan loves 9-9-9 –
    here.

  • snowshooze

    We didn’t generate ANY anti Romney sentiment here.
    Romney is the one who does that with his actions, we just pay more attention.
    A young man who is a Conservative has no heart.
    A grown man who is a Liberal has no brains.
    It is a matter of being informed. And having seen a bit of history first-hand doesn’t hurt.

  • cwfoster

    I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again and again, until people start to REMEMBER their history! RONALD WILSON REAGAN was “too much like Goldwater”, he “sounds good on his opposition to the Soviet Union, but he just isn’t realistic”, “He’s goning to start World War 3 if we elect him”, Just doesn’t sound credible, isn’t electable if we nominate him.. yada yada yada!

    I’ve heard people say that Reagan couldn’t become President anymore because of new campaign finance reforms. BS! Reagn couldn’t get eleceted to day because the GOP has been GELDED and forgets that if you sacrifice principle for electibilty, you get someone who’s not WORTH electing!

    People say Herman Cain has no money or organization. I can’t speak to campaign finance issues, but one thing I CAN address. I have never been involved in any political campaign beyond casting my vote in my entire life, I am a member of Team Cain though! I have gotten off my butt and started trying to make a difference to end Washington business as usual. We can’t afford Washington business as usual any longer. Our economy is on life support and the usual suspects want to dial back the amount of oxygen the patient is getting. Maybe we NEED someone who reversed the money losing trend of Burger King restaurants in the Philly region, maybe we need someone who was handed the office of the CEO of Godfather Pizza to preside over it’s demise, and brought it back to profitablity. How did he do that? Not with a tax scheme, not with catchy phrases, but by cutting back and closing unprofitable outlets. Regardless of how 9-9-9 plays out, if we get a President that starts closing down parts of the Federal Government that aren’t accomplishing anything could accomplish a LOT right there.

    Maybe instead of saying “I like Cain but…” we should all be saying “I like Cain and…”

  • snowshooze

    I ain’t sure. It could be, but she might be thinking of taking the whole Trump.
    When do Candidates usually begin to actually make their running mate selection?
    I would think after the Primary, but in her case, she is in lousy position to wait. She has to make a move to stay in the game.

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    never goes out of style.

    Remember, that Newsweek cover was BEFORE he enacted anything. The liberal media was in attack attack attack mode on him from day one.

    Coming soon …
    “Cain’s plan to double your taxes”
    “Mitt Romney – cultist?”
    “Rick Perrys will poison your air”

  • onemovoter

    McCain who was just as unliked as Romney was. Either one at the time would have lost to the unknown quantity of Obama.

    The only time we conservatives win is when we don’t “settle” for the “acceptable” and not great but known candidates.

    Both Cain, Perry and Gingrich are more than acceptable to me because I at least know where they stand, even if there are some things I disagree with them. The key to me though is that I know they are conservative in their stances.

    After having researched Romney, I can’t say the same. Romney seems to be doing well in the debates is that he’s been on both sides of every issue. He showed it again with his answer to the TARP issue where he really didn’t answer it.

    When people say we need to be “moderate” in order to gain the independent vote, I counter with a simple answer. Independent voters are people who aren’t well informed and tend to waffle a lot. That type of person won’t follow a fellow waffler, they will follow someone with a strong personality who can lead people. It is why Reagan won with such overwhelming numbers.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Not to be too critical here, but the way I read that is the Ryan likes that an idea is being offered more than the idea itself. Especially when he says that he is more of a flat tax guy.

    Those who run with this and claim that it is an endorsement might want to hold off for the inevitable clarification.

  • snowshooze

    Which Romney’s records were represented?
    Was it the Mitt of today that got insulted, or is it the Mitt of a month ago, a year..

  • GR

    You are correct! Time to move on from Perry, he can’t put together a coherent statement especially in a debate. If he was the nominee, Obama would eat him alive. Mitt has the ability to be the master of debate and whether we like him or not, he hasn’t lost one of the debates, and in fact has been the best!

    If Cain can get any traction, it would be great, but he’s got some serious fundraising problems, and his 999 plan now has so many holes in it that it is hard to understand how he gets the nomination. Romney seems to have the ace in the hole, I just wish he would come out against his current stand on Romneycare and discuss how even though it was a state issue, it was wrong.

  • Psycmeistr

    One of Romney’s top aides who developed Romneycare said so, the main difference being as to how the two were funded. He actually was one of the people who went on to help BHO develop Obamacare.

  • gekster

    Polls don’t elect candidates, people do.

  • sharp

    I thought Newsweek was a liberal mouthpiece for hating on newts conservative accomplishments.

    I’m 54, but I don’t remember the Rep. congress actually starving kids. Did I miss something?

  • rightwingmom52

    i.e., not an “endorsement” of the plan itself but of it as a starting point for the discussion. However, I still see that as good news for Cain. Much like Perry’s statements on Social Security, I’m happy to see our side actually talk about the issues that we’re facing.

  • Psycmeistr

    Is just what Cain has. He’s been in top management spots in Pillsbury and for Godfather’s Pizza, and has always left every position with the companies in much better shape than he found them. Obama didn’t as much as run a private-sector lemonade stand before he fell (pretty much by default) into his position as Illinois Senator.

    I’d much rather have a guy who has successful administrative expertise and success in the private sector than a guy who’s been pushing pencils and/or living off the government dole for the lion’s share of his lifetime.

  • thirstyboots

    How did that work out for you?

    He became the President of one of the most socialist administrations in the history of the US and damaged the conservative brand to a point that a liberal full control of the White House, Senate and Congress was unavoidable.

    Perry’s record in Texas is similar to Bush – little respect for the principles of limited government and a great deal of crony capitalism promotion.

  • Flagstaff

    He seems able to handle himself. He may get it “wrong,” but that doesn’t seem to matter. The media is dogging him to name his advisers? Guess I haven’t been paying attention.

  • thirstyboots

    Reagan was an incredibly talented politician. And in 1979 he had the support of a big part of the establishment.

    Perry is a machine hack who lacks the political skills that Romney had.

  • thirstyboots

    Just 4 years ago. When he had the exact same record he had today.

    Those people won’t be able to call him a liberal demon today after calling him a solid conservative back then unless they want to become laughing stocks. In fact, I’m fairly sure that at least DeMint will endorse Romney sooner rather than later.

    The opposition to Romney is much softer than people are assuming.

  • Flagstaff

    He’s already announced he’s leaving the senate. Several good possibilities. Personally, I’d like to see somebody who can then become president in the VP slot. That might not be DeMint.

    How can Obama be leading anybody in the polls? Yet he is leading in head to head.

  • clowngirl

    This is the first “horse race” post I’ve almost entirely agreed with.

    Not only do I heartily agree that Romney has already maxed out his (willing) support but would submit that when and if another candidate emerges as really viable — starts consolidating the anti-Romney vote and shows they can stand up under intense, top-tier scrutiny and is perceived as solidly able to beat Obama — Romney is likely to be robbed even of most of the people who are supporting him now.

    But m aybe there’s a silver lining in Romney being pushed as inevitable despite the wide lack of enthusiasm ranging to visceral dislike among most of his own party.

    A lot of folks have been dissatisfied with the field and maybe it takes the imminent threat of Romney as nominee to get us all to embrace one of the options we have and get firmly behind the horse who comes closest to fitting the bill.

    But it’s also on the other candidates. At least one of them needs to step it up and prove that they are ready and able both to be an excellent President and to beat Obama. Perry, Cain and Gingrich all generate concerns and/or questions that need to be answered.

    Perry needs to debate a LOT better and show that he isn’t going to shoot off his mouth in a manner that provokes a media feeding frenzy. He needs to show he’s in earnest. His camp’s remark that Perry’s been running for 6 weeks, whereas Romney’s been running for 5 years was funny — but also flippant and not an excuse. It begs the question of why he waited so long — and why — less understandably — he wasn’t thoroughly preparing if he was even seriously considering running for President.

    Cain is exciting and impressive — but has no record and is isn’t well known to voters. We’ll see how he does now that he’s gotten the spotlight and increased scrutiny.

    If Newt continues to rise and ever gets to be top-tier – he’ll have to more thoroughly address the concerns – and probably the baggage- that has kept many from supporting him so far. And he’d have to establish that he can beat Obama. ( I think he’s already proven that he would out-debate him)

  • thirstyboots

    Are you aware that the author of this post was a Romney supporter 4 years ago?

  • gekster

    What makes Perry a socialist, and what croney capitalism.
    You made the claim, you must have an example, don’t you.

  • gekster

    Romney was more conservative then McLooser.
    Now Romney is the liberal of the bunch.

  • davesinsanantonio

    be stuck with Romney. He is NOT a conservative. Not even close to being a conservative. His policies, judicial appointments, etc. would be a, only slightly, slower creep to destruction than Obummer.
    On the other hand, Perry would probably not do any worse than Obummer in a debate where The Big 0 doesn’t have the use of a teleprompter. He is just awful, and says really dumb stuff when he is winging it. Perry may be a bit hesitant, but he isn’t as bad as he has been made out to be. I would much rather listen to him than the snake oil salesman from MA! Lets at least wait until we see his program before we shove him under the train, If he has a good program isn’t that better than Romney with a horrible record, even though he speaks well?

  • Flagstaff

    Cain’s 999 plan is not a problem for Cain, even though we know it won’t be implemented as proposed. All Cain has to do at some point is to say that our only choice is to do something or do nothing, and “nothing” is what got us where we are now. Before we can do something, we have to have a starting point, and that’s what 999 is.

    BTW, the Debt Commission has their dilemma, right? If they don’t succeed, we have to unacceptably gut defense and cut a bunch of other stuff (supposedly). That tells me they have a natural starting point.

    Come up with the minimum acceptable defense budget. Then cut the rest out of everything else. It makes the process so much simpler and avoids the arguments about defense spending being too high or too low. By avoids, I mean provides an honest response that can’t be assailed politically.

  • texanlady

    Huff Po is out saying that Cain’s 999 plan is similar to Sim City. Doubt Cain could even carry Texas. Either live with rino Romney or go back to Perry. Perry is a good family man. Newt will lose too. He has too much baggage in every since of the word. This is a golden opportunity for republicans. I hope it is not blown by the 999 plan.

  • thirstyboots

    1) Like Palin, he’s basically unelectable in the GE. The last Rasmussen had him down 15 to Obama, his fav/unfavs with independents are terrifying, he often lags Romney by double digits in H2H versus Obama.

    2 ) Like Palin, he’s stuck as a low double-digits candidate. He keeps a cult of rabid fans on the internet. Palin had The Other McCain, Perry has RedState. But in the real world, the world of the large majority of the voters, few really care any more.

    3) Like Palin he is supposed to have a great conservative record as a governor but that in reality is much less impressive than it sounds (check the CATO reports). Like Palin, the appeal to conservatives was more about identity politics than policy issues: cowboy boots, farmer, air force, shoots coyotes, talks loud, church-goer, etc.

    4) The difference is that Palin is a talented politician that wasn’t ready in 2008 and was taken down because of that; Perry has all the experience in the world but, as many who followed his career in Texas has always known, he lacks the talent to be a national politician. Great working the machine and the Texas republican establishment; terrible with voters, especially any voter who isn’t a social conservative from the South.

    And obvious, one is running the other is not. However their chances of clinching the nomination are basically the same.

  • txpat

    I assume you live in Texas.
    We pay 8.25% sales tax. We would pay additional 9% Cain’s fed tax on top of Texas tax. That is a lot of Tax money out of your pocket.
    I spoke to someone today, and they were thinking how great Cain’s plan is, and didn’t understand that Cain’s sales tax would not take away Texas sales tax. When I explained it to her she didn’t think it was such a great idea any more.

  • eburkedisciple

    No if’s, and’s or but’s. Romney is like Obama in the sense that anyone but him is better.

  • eburkedisciple

    I must love the wind!

  • Whacker77

    This establishment vs. the base stuff is crap. The establishment doesn’t care for Cain because they know he and Perry and the others are train wrecks in the making. It has nothing to do with conservatism. It has everything to do with not screwing up a sure thing.

    If people really believe the establishment hates conservatives, then you must believe they would be attempting to block Marco Rubio if he were running right now. Of course, that’s just ridiculous. The same establishment types skeptical of Cain and the gang would be all in favor of Rubio, or is Rubio a RINO.

    I’m willing to settle for Romney because no one else is remotely credible as a national candidate. If you want someone to blame, blame Jeb, Daniels, Christie, Thune, and Barbour for not running. By not doing so, they left us with a field full spare parts and retreads.

    I don’t want to make a mistake on a nation scale like we did in Nevada and Delaware in 2010. I want to win rather than lose with a feel good candidate who drags down the whole party. Nothing has demonstrated to me Cain or Newt or Perry or Santorum stands a snowball’s chance in Hell of winning.

    Rush Limbaugh is doing a great disservice by saying the establishment hates conservatives. Some might, but they’re more concerned about winning than going through purifying losses.

  • Scope

    He talked about that just today and said that he has heard people say that, but he never endorsed Romney in 08.

  • gekster

    Instead of bashing Perry, tell us who you support and why.

  • davesinsanantonio

    does that help Romney?
    Insisting all Texans are alike is just stOOOpid!

    Try to bring some intelligence to the table, not silly playground taunts.

  • acat

    It’s not about the negative press. I count that in Gingrich’s favor, actually. He knows the media is not his friend, and acts accordingly.

    However.

    Gingrich folded on the government shutdown *after* public opinion had turned from blaming the GOP to blaming the Clintons.

    Gingrich told one wife or another (he’s had several) that he was leaving her while she was hospitalized.

    Gingrich left Congress in disgrace after his affair with a staffer became public.

    This is leaving out the argument that Gingrich sided with the establishment rather than the conservative wing of the GOP on at least one battle…

    Mew

  • davesinsanantonio

    Thirstyboots below.

    Mea culpa!

  • Scope

    until he admits that Romneycare was a mistake. Romney has doubled down on his support for Romneycare just this year.

    Thirstyboots, please at least try to be honest with what you post. You can’t pass of BS to many here that are well informed.

  • texanlady

    Obama’s approval ratings are low. People don’t like him but republicans need another candidate. Indepedents have turned against Obama but don’t think they like the 999 plan or flip flopper, either..

  • texanlady

    DeMint is too southern to win Ohio.

  • eburkedisciple

    Just like Romney is better than Obama but that doesn’t make him our best choice. Perry is way too soft on immigration and illegal immigration. Perry is still a big government guy under that skin as his Texas corridor road project shows. When you look are record Perry is not stellar – even with the jobs record in Texas there are many detours from the conservative way. We need to get rid of the politicians and Cain offers a refreshing alternative of skill and vision.

  • Aaron Gardner

    So I’d guess he is now backing Romney.

  • thirstyboots

    http://hotair.com/archives/2008/02/05/rush-limbaugh-endorses-mitt-romney/

    You can read Limbaugh’s words and judge by yourself.

    Has he said today that “there iis a candidate on our side who does embody all three legs of the conservative stool, and that?s Romney”?

    Because it’s hard to figure out how Romney went from embodying all three legs of the conservative stool 4 years ago to being a liberal now.

  • davesinsanantonio

    seem to be all that committed to Defense, more likely they would welcome a chance to gut it. All they have to do is nothing, and then blame the Republicans on the committee for the deadlock.

  • Scope

    and making things up that are not true as he goes along.

  • daniel22

    but there is too much rehash going on at least from the Romney crowd. No matter what the polls say all I hear is how Romney is the only viable candidate against Obama. Fair and balanced Fox News seems to have jumped onto the cheerleader wagon themselves. I know who I am leaning towards but that is beside the point.
    All of these guys and girl running for President are politicians. Remember,”How can you tell if a politician is lying?”. Their lips are moving.
    I agree Obama has to go and the damage repaired and sacrifices will need to be made. The question should not be who can beat Obama but who has the guts to lead this country by example and not fiat? I for one do not like flip floppers nor political opportunists. We have seen what happens when there was an anybody but Bush malaise in this country. We cannot repeat this with anybody but Obama. We need to vote someone in that we can trust in a foxhole.

  • texanlady

    They will make it official if Romney is the nominee.

  • gekster

    you would have seen two things.
    1. At the time, Romney was to the right of McCain. Now Romney is to left of everyone else.
    2. I and others have asked you questions.

    Instead of running around throwing crap on the wall, want to answer a few.

  • thirstyboots

    I mean, what is this? Middle school?

    Back to the issue:

    I said DeMint endorsed Romney four years ago. Are you disputing that? DeMint was actually one of the earliest endorsers of Romney and fundraised for him.

    DeMint had no problem endorsing Romney – FULLY AWARE OF ROMNEY’S SUPPORT FOR ROMNEYCARE.

    Take my prediction that he’ll endorse Romney again as an informed guess.

  • eburkedisciple

    What do we win if we elect Romney? We get to move right but not far enough to make any real difference in our trajectory. Like chemo, we get 6 more months or a year with lots of pain. We got lots of benefits from Obama – people are starting to think about the consequences of socialism and anti-colonialism or anti-capitalism. Perhaps we need 4 more years of bad medicine. Politics is compromise but we have compromised ourselves into this current mess by not showing what is different about conservative governing. A time comes when you have to draw the line. Give me a conservative or give me death!

  • rattlerjake

    n/t

  • gekster

    The stablishment didn’t like Reagan.
    Now re-writing history, are we.

  • thirstyboots

    This is the 3rd. Sorry if this isn’t my full-time job, I’m doing this as fast as I can.

    Any other comment of that nature and I won’t reply to any other single comment of yours. Understood? Thanks.

  • davesinsanantonio

    sheep in wolf’s clothing!

  • porkandcheese

    He should run it in all early primary states.

  • eburkedisciple

    Well said. Thank you!

  • Scope

    about Romney 4 years ago, but it is a fact that Rush does not endorse anyone until the general. He has also talked up many of this years candidates, and actually went on and on for about a week about the wonders of Palin, but he hasn’t and again said he doesn’t endorse.

    Also, 4 years ago Romney promised everyone that he was the greatest conservative to ever live. This year he supports man-made Global Warming, his Romneycare which is the blueprint for Obamacare, ethanol subsidies, TARP, Bailouts, WallStreet and that’s just for starters.

    Whatever Rush thought of Romney 4 years ago, despite the fact that he doesn’t endorse, he is doing his very best to insure that no one thinks for a minute that Romney would be good for the country. He has been spending much time talking about what a RINO Romney really is, and in detail including playing old soundbites of Romney’s.

  • gekster

    What has he done that makes Perry a socialist, and what proof do have that Perry is a croney capatalist.

  • thirstyboots

    I think McCain had a far more conservative record than Romney. Especially on the war on terror/Iraq, spending and earmarks and abortion. He was more liberal on immigration and little else.

    The problem with McCain is that he’d frequently attack the Bush administration – most of the time with reason for that: see deficit, public debt, the Iraq strategy, Donald “Mr. Incompetence” Rumsfeld”, Medicare part D extension (aka socialist bribe) – and for many republicans, Bush stayed an icon of conservatism till the very end. There are lots of people who value partisan loyalty over anything. It is the way it is.

    In any case, I’m not sure this matters. Those guys didn’t endorse Romney because “he is less liberal than the others”. If their words are to be taken seriously, they endorsed him because in their mind Romney is a good conservative that would make a good conservative President. It was them saying this, not me.

  • powertothepeople

    of Burger King burgers, Wendy’s Burgers, or Subway Sandwich slathered in mayo does not mean when I state that Subway is the best choice to preserve my diet that I am inferring a diet endorsement.

    Rush was stuck with bad choices and made it clear he was not endorsing anyone, simply stating that out of the bad choices, Romney was his choice and I agree. I think Romney was the better choice in 2008 and would have done a much better job fighting Obama then McCain did.

    The reality of 2008 is not what the reality of this election cycle. Romney is nothing better than the greasy Burger King choice. It will fill your belly and keep you alive, but your diet will be ruined and it is not a good choice especially considering the healthy salad choices.

  • porkandcheese

    When he ran against Crist. But Rubio is not running now, so what’s your point? Perry was the establishment, but there are always different factions. The old guard had power during the Bush administration, and there is no love lost between Perry and the Bush family and especially Rove. If Perry succeeded, alll their hangers on would be locked out of power. If you don’t understand how this works, then you missed the 2008 Democrat primary when Florida and Michigan were not allowed to vote. Likewise, the Republican establishment is threatening to move up the early state primaries. If not the establishment, then who sets the calendar? The establishment is donors, lobbyists, activists, etc. but they are real.

  • thirstyboots

    His position on Romnecare, ethanol subsidies and Global Warming is exactly the same. I see no reason to believe that Romney wouldn’t have endorsed the TARP 4 years ago.

    So, why did Rush changed his opinion? This is exactly the same Romney of 4 years ago.

  • porkandcheese

    NT

  • davesinsanantonio

    than to re-elect Obummer who IS a flaw!

  • sharp

    Nothing on your list is as bad as Romneycare = Obamacare.
    Nothing there that conflicts with closing the Texas border.
    Nothing as bad as a national sales tax.

    Marital infidelity is not a good character quality. I agree. But, I don’t believe it prevents me from making an intellectual decision regarding political issues and problem solving. Newt will have to deal with his moral failures.

    I’m looking for a political “fighter” – someone who will battle the leftists of this decade.

    I think you are blinded by the past.

  • thirstyboots

    As soon as you write them down.

    I’m not one to make political discussions personal. Sorry.

  • renl57

    The Perry people are thinking that Cain’s supporters are only sticking with Cain as a temporary placeholder, until Perry gets his act together a bit more–after which Cain’s supporters will jump right back to Perry.

    Not gonna happen.

    After Perry disappointed, folks took a look at the other choices–and with Cain, they liked what they saw. Cain now has a certain “brand loyalty”–Cain’s supporters aren’t going to automatically jump to Perry even if Perry does better in the next debate.

    Perry will have to actually work to get the Cain supporters back in his fold.

    And Step One is Perry has to release a detailed economic plan. I mean like this week. No more excuses. The other two front runners have theirs, even Bachmann has hers.

  • acat

    I’d be happy to support Gingrich in the general.

    I think his baggage will prevent him getting enough support in the primary to win the nomination.

    I’m not blinded by the past, but that doesn’t mean I think Gingrich can overcome his.

    Mew

  • http://www.fpcr.org balloonjuice

    “Cain acknowledged that his lack of legislative experience means he would likely need to fill the top slots with Washington insiders.”

    I’m not that impressed with Mr. Cain’s political acumen. I can admire his business sense without wanting a European style VAT and without wanting to have the same people as we’ve always had at the tiller.

    We were promised transparency by Mr. Obama and got the most non-transparent presidency in memory. Mr. Cain does not even promise transparency, but withholds names and insists that “nuh uh” is an answer to a question.

  • thirstyboots

    You want an example? The Texas Enterprise Fund is probably the best example of all.

    A good write-up on the issue here:
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-01/perry-s-pay-to-play-job-incentive-funds-miss-targets-in-texas.html

    Cato’s Fiscal Record reports are, IMO, very enlightening. Here’s the 2010 edition:
    http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/PA668.pdf [PDF]

    As Shikha Dalmia wrote for Reason Magazine:

    There is something else that ought to miff Perry?s conservative base about these funds: They legitimize an ?industrial policy? economic approach that empowers government to pick economic winners and losers. Indeed, Perry defends these programs on grounds that they helped create jobs. But if he can use government money to generate jobs in Texas, can he credibly oppose Obama using stimulus money to generate jobs around the country?

    Full disclosure: I’ve contributed as a researcher to the Fiscal Policy Report Card on America’s Governors from Cato Institute.

  • Scope

    as a solid conservative since the last election. DeMint said he will not endorse Romney unless he backs away from Romneycare. Romney doubled down on his support for Romneycare. DeMint will not endorse Romney. Take that to the bank. That is unless you think DeMint is not a man of honor, and a man of his word, unlike your guy.

  • cbartlett

    He is doing a perfectly lousy job of defending his record with the very large group right now but if/when it gets down to just Obama, Perry will eat him alive. He has a history of chewing up and spitting out opposition. He also does a lot better if he has time to explain his position. These “sound byte” debates are not his forte’. Perry certainly has some baggage but I think one of the most important priorities right now is to get rid of federal government intrusion in our lives. Perry absolutely believes in getting everything possible back to the States and abolishing federal agencies. I’m afraid Cain’s lack of experience dealing with Congress would really hurt him. Remember that the White House is only one branch of government. Even if 9-9-9 is a wonderful plan (and I have my doubts), if he doesn’t have the clout to also get it through both houses of Congress, it’s dead in the water. This also points out the importance of getting rid of BOTH Democrats AND RINO’s in the Senate and the House, no matter who is in the White House. We need real conservatives in ALL branches of government (including SCOTUS) to make any headway!

  • thirstyboots

    I disagree that Romney was more conservative than McCain and even more that he’d give Obama a bigger fight (Romney was much easier to associate with Bush – I suspect he’d struggle to hit 44% of the popular vote) but all that is beyond the point.

    If Rush and the others had said that they were endorsing Romney because he was the lesser evil, you’d have a point.

    But that wasn’t the rationale used – especially by DeMind and Levin, who were truly enthusiastic supporters – so you don’t have a point.

    I’ve quoted Rush ipsis verbis. Do you want to comment on his words, instead of commenting in that alternative reality? If not, maybe it’s time to let this issue die. I just brought it up to suggest that people are overrating how hard is the opposition against Romney. Many of those opposing him now have already voted for him in the past – when he held the exact same positions he holds today.

  • ammy

    Do you want to beat Obama or not? Because frankly, I’m beginning to wonder. Romney has gotten better and better – no one else has. Perry isn’t even all that conservative, he comes across as dumb and yet all the purists just love him, or is it his religion they love? Bachman – no. Cain – love him – do we really want another untested politician? Sorry, love you Herman but you aren’t ready. None of others stand a snowballs chance in beating Obama. And this is really what this is about right? Are you really that afraid that Romney has been waiting his whole life to flank to the left of Obama. He has moved right on social issues, he is brilliant on financial matters, he is the hardest working man out there, there has never been any hint of dishonesty or unethical behavior he appeals to the independents who will decide the election – like it or not. So, it comes down to – do you want to beat Obama or do you want to puff out your chest and say that you went for the most conservative least electable candidate available. If so, you should move to Nevada – they did that and you will have lots of company – just say yes, Senator Reid.

  • Scope

    should get that same bad report card from the Soros funded Cato institute also then. Here in VA, the exact same funding mechanism is set up to attract businesses to the state. It is a very smart business and job creation device.

    VA and Texas keep swapping the best job and new business attractions to their states reports each year. If helping to fund a new business venture to attract it to your state is considered crony capitalism, then more states should be participating in crony capitalism of that sort. Both VA and TX are not in dire budget woes as most blue states are.

    As I said, Cato has been funded by George Soros. When Soros gives money to any organization, he expects payback. I guess that’s your purpose here. I would imagine when Perry becomes the next president, old Georgie will have the big one.

  • Scope

    in 08. You are making that up. Rush may have had nice things to say about Romney, but that is not an endorsement.

  • Scope

    is made up of far right anarchy type libertarians. Of course they would support a liberal Republican who sees things their distorted way.

  • Scope

    this arrogant arse told you huh.LOL Understood? LOL

  • http://www.fpcr.org balloonjuice

    to support a new national sales tax because there are inequities and complexities in the current tax code. The answer to a complex and unequal tax code is not to invent new taxes out of thin air.

    Flat tax with no mortgage deduction? How will that fix the housing problem exactly or what unintended consequences will there be?

    Corporate tax with no deductions for labor costs? What effect will that have on jobs and the current tendency for corporations to ship them overseas? Again, unintended consequences are still consequences.

    And that new VAT — there is nothing less conservative on the table today than adding new taxes. We need spending relief; not new taxes. Our problem is not that we are undertaxed and it is only marginally true that our tax code is too complex (one person’s “loophole” is another person’s legitimate deduction).

    How about concentrating on getting rid of ethanol subsidies, oil depletion allowances, etc.? Of course the tax code could be more fair. People who can afford lobbyists seem to have the “fairest” taxes. 999 is different, but so was Obama 3 years ago.

    I’m not so easily swayed. I’m still looking for the candidate who will lower my taxes by lowering government spending and entitlements, whether to the urban poor or the large corporation.

  • kenchely

    The 1980 analogy is almost perfect. Obama has been an ineffectual president reduced to the state of complaining about the mental state of Americans as the economy gets steadily worse and Iran gets friskier and friskier.

    Romney is this y ear’s Howard Baker. He’s the Establishment guy; all the insiders like him. Huntsman is John Anderson, the guy off to the left of the rest of the party. Bachmann is Phil Crane, the right-wing ideologue from the House of Representatives who has no prayer of winning. Gingrich is George H.W. Bush, the old warrior who has served honorably and knows how government works. He’s more eloquent than Bush, probably the best debater of the lot; on the other hand, unlike Bush, who was an exemplary family man, Gingrich has a checkered personal past. Gingrich’s only chance is a win by default where the party decides that Romney is too liberal for them and the other conservatives have all faltered.

    But who’s this year’s Reagan? The obvious one would have been Perry. Perry even looks a little like Reagan. Like Reagan, he has served as the governor of a large state. The resemblance ends there. Reagan was eloquent, fast on his feet in a debate, and charming. Perry is as lacking in eloquence as the last governor of Texas to be elected president. He stumbles in debates. He has fumbled a number of issues. He is not Reagan.

    Rick Santorum’s position on the issues is probably the closest to Reagan’s of any of the candidates. He’s good-looking, a pretty good speaker, and a strong debater (other than a slight but not horrible tendency to become shrill). But unlike Reagan, Santorum’s last election was a dreadful defeat in his home state, and he has no money. I love him, but he’s not going to be Reagan.

    That leaves Herman Cain. He has that earthy touch that Reagan had, and is intensely likeable as Reagan was. He has a strong background in finance, a huge asset right now. His only debit is a lack of prior experience as an elected official, which is clearest in matters of foreign policy and of how to deal with Congress. On the other hand, Reagan was very adept at going over the Congress’s heads to the people to get what he wanted. If Reagan went on TV one night, by the next morning, every congressman had tens of thousands of phone calls, faxes, etc., and a line of hundreds at his district office door. Cain seems to be the sort who could do that, too. He seems to have the kind of forceful personality that could call Congressional leaders into the Oval Office and get most of what he wanted.

    Right now, Cain appears to be the most Reaganesque of the candidates. For now, that’s my candidate. But there’s time; we’ll see.

  • davesinsanantonio

    invite him, or if they ignore his requests to come on them? They do not want him as the candidate because they know with his jobs record that he will stomp all over Obummer this cycle. So, they shill for Romney, invite the also-rans in, etc., because they know those others will trash Perry, and that is all they care about. They shill for Romney because they believe Obummer will beat him over the head with Romneycare and his lousy jobs record in MA. Not to mention his flip-flopping like a hooked fish in the bottom of the boat.

  • cbartlett

    You are misinformed on Perry’s position – he is not a liberal on immigration. The Texas legislature voted, by a margin of 181 to 4, to allow children of illegal immigrants to access in-state tuition RATES only – we are NOT paying for their higher education like California did! Many, many, very conservative Texas Republican legislators supported this law because it is so much better than the alternative. These kids were brought here by illegal immigrant parents because they had no choice. Texas is required BY FEDERAL LAW to educate these kids in our public school system and provide health care. The alternative to giving them an OPPORTUNITY to better themselves is that they drop out of high school, have an “anchor baby” which pretty much allows them to stay here, and continue the cycle of sucking on the welfare system at the expense of the taxpayers. These kids are required to have attended & graduated from public school in Texas for at least 3 years, apply to and be accepted at an institution of higher learning (i.e. good grades, acceptable SAT scores, etc.) and begin the process of applying for US Citizenship. This is actually a very huge problem here primarily becasue the stupid federal government is not doing their job to defend the borders. AND Perry NEVER said the rest of the country should necessarily do this – it is RIGHT FOR TEXAS and is absolutely a state decision. Please tell me what a “conservative position” on illegal immigration is exactly. Do you know how Romney or any of the others feel about this issue? Have they expressed any plans to deal with the problem? Perry is being judged on this simply because he is having to deal with an actual problem in his state. Have you seen Cain deal with a legislature on any kind of problem? You have a lot more power over a board as a CEO or Chairman of the Board than a President (or Governor) does with Congress.

    And yes Perry has baggage (don’t they all?!) and he certainly has not “performed” well in the debates. Unfortunately, in this age of TV, performance is judged to be more important than experience and record. He does much better one-on-one and would kill Obama in a debate in a heartbeat – we’ve seen him eat up opponents in Texas for years.

  • davesinsanantonio

    full of voters who supposedly think the same way and have the same values as you, and when you have already run out of money, what choice do you have but to drop out???

  • bgintn

    I am still in the undecided position.
    Here in Tn. we pay a 9.25% tax and I am leaning toward Cain.

    At the GOP presidential debate in New Hampshire on Tuesday, Cain’s plan received criticism from many of the candidates on stage.

    Cain has been criticized from the left as well, as charges that his “9-9-9″ plan is regressive have been made, charges that Cain has often refuted by citing that the payroll tax would be eliminated under his plan and used goods would not be levied sales taxes.

    As Cain’s profile increases and poll numbers rise, his opponents will attack him more fiercely over his “9-9-9″ plan, but it looks like Cain has found an ally in Laffer, an economist who is more than respected by fiscal, pro-growth conservatives.

    The Godfather of supply-side economics, Arthur Laffer, said that the proposal was pro-growth and would create the proper conditions for America’s economy to expand and thrive again.

    “Herman Cain?s 9-9-9 plan would be a vast improvement over the current tax system and a boon to the U.S. economy,”. “The goal of supply-side tax reform is always a broadening of the tax base and lowering of marginal tax rates.”

    Added Laffer: “Mr. Cain?s plan is simple, transparent, neutral with respect to capital and labor, and savings and consumption, and also greatly decreases the hidden costs of tax compliance. There is no doubt that economic growth would surge upon implementation of 9-9-9.”

    Laffer also said that “such a system provides the least avenues to avoid paying taxes, yet also maintains the strongest incentives for work effort, production, and investment.”

    “9-9-9″ calls for a nine percent tax on income, a nine percent national sales tax, and a nine percent corporate income tax.

    Correct me if I am wrong.

    Locked in by a 2/3 super majority to change.

    A nine percent tax on income would be lower than what you are paying now.
    This would put more income in your pocket each payday.

    A nine percent corporate income tax is major drop.
    Everyone knows that Corporations do not pay taxes, they just pass the cost down to the us.
    This would allow them to use the money saved to increase the business. (jobs)
    Attract busniesses back to the USA. (jobs)

    A nine percent national sales tax on new products.
    This affects everybody, fine.

    And “all” the other federal taxes go bye-bye.

    This is the first step toward getting rid of the Income Tax Amendment.
    And “all other taxes left to have the just one Fair Tax.

    Talk about getting the Federal Government out of our lives, this would.

    As for all those other taxes, they are individual State and Local issuses and need to be handled there.

  • macjedi

    why would the voters be EXCITED about the guy who couldn’t beat John McCain 4-years ago??? WHY were the voters EXCITED about John McCain 4-years ago, when he couldn’t beat George Bush 8-years before that?

    If the Republican machine is happy to keep >pushing< the tired old 'last time' guy (Ford, Dole, McCain, Bush 41), then don't be surprised if the bored to death voters don't materialize.

    It would be ashamed that, given the quicksand that BarryO is in, that Republicans fail to bring THE BEST candidate out to defeat little Barry. THE BEST candidate is the one that the PEOPLE want to come out and vote for. We don't want another 'approved' party pick.

  • bgintn

    Is This Romney baggage?

    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=354721

  • davesinsanantonio

    is about 40% Dem, about 35% Republican, and about 20% independent.
    If Romney has only 25% of the Republicans, that means he has less than 10% of the electorate. So, he would have to win all of the independents, and more than half of the Dimocrats just to get even. Then hope that the disaffected and disenchanted in his own party don’t stay home. Since he will NOT win half of the Dims, then he has to rally the base to vote for him, and he has been unable to do that.
    There are many willing to hold their noses and vote for him, but not all of them are. We can do so much better than that.

  • http://www.fpcr.org balloonjuice

    n/t

  • cbartlett

    How well did that work out?

  • Whacker77

    That’s total nonsense. No one in the Republican party tried to block or stop Rubio. The NRSC asked Crist to run and he did. At the time, it was considered a big get. Having said that, did they ever run an ad supporting Crist over Rubio? Was Rubio even announced or a known quantity when Crist announced very early in the 2010 process? I don’t think so. Rubio won because he earned it and he became the darling of both the establishment and base.

    As for your other point, of course I know how this works. Again, this tripe about the old guard vs. the new guard is just crap. Many in the party are against Perry because he’s a crappy candidate who can’t make a point even when he has a point to make. Whether Rove is for him or against him is beside the point. Who the heck cares. Had Perry turned in reasonable debate performances, he would still be the leader, but he’s a terrible candidate who has always benefited from the political landscape in Texas.

    Stop propping up bad candidates because they check all of the boxes. And I’m not trying to prop up Romney either. I just think he’s the least bad choice.

  • davesinsanantonio

    n/t

  • davesinsanantonio

    the Paulbots.

  • Whacker77

    You prove my point. Rather than prevent Obama from appointing more justices to the Supreme Court, you would rather have a purifying loss because your dream candidate is not walking through that door. Just insane.

    I don’t want to be accused of being a Romney shill, but if he wins there will likely also be more Republicans in the House and Senate. You can bet the House will force and Romney will accept conservative proposals he’s claims to not accept right now. That would give us a better tax structure for both the individual and corporations.

  • powertothepeople

    to associate the choice we were forced to make being the same as wanting to make the choice and that is where your argument has a ton of holes.

    Lets take DeMint for a sec. His endorsement was simply what it should have been, a forced choice due to the party loyalty he holds and his wisdom to know we had to beat Obama. But please, I know Jim personally, and there was never an enthusiastic support. You are stretching things in order to try to make a point.

    I read your “verbatim” of Rush’s words and no where does he endorse him not too mention you neglect to add in later words where he clearly states it was not an endorsement. He had the same choice I did, McCain or Romney, he chose the lesser of the two evils.

    And it matters little that you think Romney would not have done better, it still does not change the fact that McCain was so detested in many conservative circles, that once he won, many stayed home. This is not an assumption, it is a known fact. To this day, McCain is still the pandering, liberal ass kissing bum that we perceived him to be in 208. We were tired of his McCain/Feingold allegiances and party backstabbing moves he was making, so we rejected him. Romney was not our party savior, he was simply less of a devil than McCain and we chose him because of that.

    Same applies to this election. We all have our favorites. But if Romney wins, most will fall behind him to make sure he beats Obama. But just so you do not come back in four years claiming since we voted for him in 2012 we must have liked or endorsed him, let me set you straight. We would only chose him this time because he is the lesser of the two evils between himself and Obama, nothing more, nothing less.

  • Aaron Gardner

    So, you are wrong.

  • Whacker77

    Some people just don’t get it. Choosing a president isn’t like choosing a House member or even a Senator. Just being a conservative heartthrob isn’t enough in presidential politics or Fred would be president.

    Running for president is hard. It’s hard because the candidate must establish a national campaign organization and a national donor network. It’s not enough to go on Fox and speak sweet nothings to Hannity.

    The reason Romney apprears to be the only viable choice is because he has the campaign structure, the money, and he is a known quantity, No one else in the race can say that.

    Herman Cain has shown he has terrible problems with staffing. Just ask Erick. If he can’t keep a small staff together, how can he set up a national campaign in a matter of weeks? What about Santorum? He’s all in for Iowa. He’s nowhere else. What’s the proof he can set up a structure to go head to head with Obama?

    The point is everyone but Romney has shown no ability to be anything other flavors of the month. No one has been able to capitalize on their polling bounces and that shows the public just isn’t ready or happy with them

  • http://www.fpcr.org balloonjuice

    Most of the SUPPOSED dirt that has been dug up on Perry was originally hatched in the 2010 Republican primaries by KBH and Debra (truther) Medina.

    I agree it will be a “bloodbath,” but I would bet on Perry’s opponents being the ones with the blood trail. Perry is as good in a large room as he is in a small room. You may remember, however, that he refused to debate Bill White in 2010. The reason for that has become obvious.

    As he pointed out previously, he was seemingly invited to the party to become the pi?ata. He’ll eventually get his turn at bat ($17 million gives you that) and then we’ll see if he strikes out,.

  • johninohio

    We are not trying to nominate someone to be king. The president is not the end-all and be-all of government. As far as legislation goes, Congress is vital. If we have a conservative Congress, all the right bills will arrive at the president’s desk. What we need to make sure of is that this president doesn’t have strong inclinations toward pro-illegal immigration, man-made global warming, anti-free market and pro-government control of healthcare that will produce vetoes of those bills.

    Romney has already made it clear that he believes in man-made global warming and government control of healthcare. But does he believe in them enough to be a roadblock? With a conservative Congress, I suspect not, but if we have a anything like a split Congress, he might be.

    Although Newt is attractive for his aggressive criticism of stupid ideas, he might also be bullheaded toward a conservative Congress on issues he is absolutely positive about, even though wrong. After all, at one time he said he believed in man-made global warming. Does he still? I don’t know.

    Cain may not be a genius, but his heart is in the right place. I don’t believe he would resist a Conservative Congress, but the question is, not being a politician at heart, will he be easily duped and manipulated by establishment Republican politicians?

    I don’t know enough about Perry. I have no idea what his real views are on the issues I mentioned above. But if he has no strong views, then he would probably go along with Congress no matter what it’s makeup.

    Bachmann isn’t someone I would worry about as president. She says all the right things about the important issues. I can overlook an occasional gaff or bad joke.

  • cbartlett

    Is it possible that any of these guys perceived “support” of Romney back then was based on the belief that there would be no way that anything remotely resembling RomneyCare would EVER go farther than that state? Nobody saw ObamaCare in the future back then. It is a much different situation now that the primary objective for Republicans MUST be to repeal ObamaCare. DeMint or any of those others certainly realize that we have a much better chance of “anyone but Romney” to accomplish that! I didn’t like either Romney or McCain last time and sure enough, we ended up voting for the “least worst” option in both the primary and general elections. I am SO tired of the MSM and establishment career-politician Republicans picking our candidates for us.

  • davesinsanantonio

    things than he is saying now. A few years before that he was saying more “progressive” things than he was saying 4 years ago. Which Romney will show up once the election is over? And,. for how long will he stay that way?

  • swami7774

    …exactly right.
    It would explain why Perry took so (relatively) long to get into the race.
    Maybe all he really wants to be is governor of Texas. No shame in that.

  • http://www.fpcr.org balloonjuice

    But misses the point that while a lot of the base will “hold their nose” and vote for Romney in the GE, they will not get energized to work for him and bring in the Independent voters.

    Without that, Romney is not only not a shoo-in to beat Obama, he could well lose.

  • iddavis

    Rick Perry is the only conservative who has the experience that is needed to serve as our president and get the job done. He isn’t afraid to cut spending, get rid of frivilous programs, and get our country working again. I feel he did fine at the first debate…he was blunt and to the point..and SS is a Ponzi scheme..he was right on the money. However, since that debate, it appears he has “handlers” who are misguiding him, restraining him. Perry needs to go back to the plain talk, telling it like it is, and get the people back on his side. He’s much better debating/articulating his points when he’s filled w/compassion and emotion….he appears sincere and believeable and there’s no doubt he’s a winner….Romney on the other hand has won only one campaign in his lifetime that I’m aware of…he’s a loser in that he even allowed McCain to beat him last time out……..what was that??!! No, Rick is the person we need to support, and if all you folks reading all you can about our candidates picked up “Fed Up!” by Perry, you would soon find out what Perry is all about. He’s a common sense conservative…he isn’t as hard-lined as some may like, but he makes sense and on important matters, like jobs and cutting spending, he is heads and shoulders above the rest of the candidates. The Tea Party and all true conservatives had better not blow this one and let the RINO win the nomination. We conservatives/Tea Party folks had better start rallying around the only true leader who can get this country back on track and that’s Rick Perry…not Cain, not anyone else in the race. Let’s stop playing games and realize the future of this country and our children are relying on this nomination to get us out of the whole the Dems and Obama has dug for us….Obama is a Saul Alinsky student…Rules for Radicals…. he cut his teeth on that bible for Marxists. We should all be pulling together for the only candidate that can get us moving forward, away from the brink of disaster that this administration has put us in……we MUST back Rick Perry because he’s the proven winner and I do believe he will eat Obama alive when it’s one on one, no doubt about it. Let’s UNITE and elect a true leader who knows how to get the job done w/o taking away our freedom and liberty…who defends states rights, defends the 2nd Amendment, believes in a strong defense, etc. We don’t need Obama Lite…and Romney and all the rest of the GOP candidates would be basically Obama Lite…they just don’t have the experience to turn things around as quickly as we need it done. The task is huge..the next president will have to hit the ground running and make difficult decisions, unpopular decisions…he must separate himself from the rest of the pack…he has to be fearless, etc….Romney nor any of the others have what it takes…Perry has already proven what a tremendous leader he is. Not backing Perry will be devastating for this country…we must take back our country and Perry is the most qualified to do it. Let’s defy the GOP establishment and the talking heads on the left and right, Fox News, etc……..and get the job done by supporting the best candidate in the race, Rick Perry.

  • iddavis

    Rick Perry is the only conservative who has the experience that is needed to serve as our president and get the job done. He isn’t afraid to cut spending, get rid of frivilous programs, and get our country working again. I feel he did fine at the first debate…he was blunt and to the point..and SS is a Ponzi scheme..he was right on the money. However, since that debate, it appears he has “handlers” who are misguiding him, restraining him. Perry needs to go back to the plain talk, telling it like it is, and get the people back on his side. He’s much better debating/articulating his points when he’s filled w/compassion and emotion….he appears sincere and believeable and there’s no doubt he’s a winner….Romney on the other hand has won only one campaign in his lifetime that I’m aware of…he’s a loser in that he even allowed McCain to beat him last time out……..what was that??!! No, Rick is the person we need to support, and if all you folks reading all you can about our candidates picked up “Fed Up!” by Perry, you would soon find out what Perry is all about. He’s a common sense conservative…he isn’t as hard-lined as some may like, but he makes sense and on important matters, like jobs and cutting spending, he is heads and shoulders above the rest of the candidates. The Tea Party and all true conservatives had better not blow this one and let the RINO win the nomination. We conservatives/Tea Party folks had better start rallying around the only true leader who can get this country back on track and that’s Rick Perry…not Cain, not anyone else in the race. Let’s stop playing games and realize the future of this country and our children are relying on this nomination to get us out of the whole the Dems and Obama has dug for us….Obama is a Saul Alinsky student…Rules for Radicals…. he cut his teeth on that bible for Marxists. We should all be pulling together for the only candidate that can get us moving forward, away from the brink of disaster that this administration has put us in……we MUST back Rick Perry because he’s the proven winner and I do believe he will eat Obama alive when it’s one on one, no doubt about it. Let’s UNITE and elect a true leader who knows how to get the job done w/o taking away our freedom and liberty…who defends states rights, defends the 2nd Amendment, believes in a strong defense, etc. We don’t need Obama Lite…and Romney and all the rest of the GOP candidates would be basically Obama Lite…they just don’t have the experience to turn things around as quickly as we need it done. The task is huge..the next president will have to hit the ground running and make difficult decisions, unpopular decisions…he must separate himself from the rest of the pack…he has to be fearless, etc….Romney nor any of the others have what it takes…Perry has already proven what a tremendous leader he is. Not backing Perry will be devastating for this country…we must take back our country and Perry is the most qualified to do it. Let’s defy the GOP establishment and the talking heads on the left and right, Fox News, etc……..and get the job done by supporting the best candidate in the race, Rick Perry.

  • dio55

    when you get to that point it is too late . go check out my past posts i was a strong perry supporter the only guy to stop RinoRomney now is Cain and he now has my complete support after his 999 plan endorsement from two economic minds i trust most Art Laffer and Paul Ryan if they are cool with it So am I . Yes we Cain

  • thirstyboots

    I was against Romney 4 years ago. But what he’s saying now is the same he was saying 4 years ago. If not, please provide examples.

  • Scope

    of the border. He should include aireal shots of the Rio Grande and Canyons for Bachmann who said she would put a fence on every inch of the border.

  • thirstyboots

    I don’t think you have the slightest idea of what you’re talking about.

    Rubio was Jeb Bush proteg?e and American Crossroads basically banked his campaign.

  • Whacker77

    But I wasn’t trying to imply anyone would be excited about Romney.

  • Scope

    before he signed off were- No, don’t count Perry out, not by a long shot. He said it with much passion. That, with his earlier comments leads me to believe that he knows something that we don’t, but will be shortly finding out.

    Can’t wait to hear his energy speech tomorrow.

  • thirstyboots

    I’ve read many silly things in my life, but this is probably the top one.

    I don’t think you’re ready to have this debate.

  • Whacker77

    Wow, so the official announcement came one whole week after Rubio, but it was known for some time Crist was going to run. That was the point I was trying to make, but thank you for the techincal details.

    Regardless, that’s beside the point. Not a single establishment person tried to stop Rubio in favor of Crist. That’s just made up junk perpetuated by this stupid idea the establishment is out to destroy conservatism.

  • thirstyboots

    Reason Magazine is supporting a liberal Republican.

    No idea on who that may be, but okay. After the “Soros is funding Cato Institute” I don’t think anything you may write can surprise me.

  • thirstyboots

    I’ve made a note to come to this site once DeMint announces his endorsement.

    Btw, if I were you I’d compare these articles:

    The first one from March

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/262446/demint-won-t-endorse-romney-unless-he-renounces-romneycare-katrina-trinko

    These from July and September:
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/271248/could-demint-endorse-romney-again-katrina-trinko

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/09/12/demints_endorsement_could_alter_trajectory_of_gop_race_111292.html

  • cbartlett

    What IS the “conservative” position on illegal immigration? Does everyone agree on some magical plan? It is a very complicated issue. I don’t know where you are from, but we Texans have a real problem – primarily caused by a federal government who refuses to help with border security. We are spending huge amounts of taxpayer money to attempt to defend the border, as well as house, educate and extend health care to these illegals. I do NOT believe in amnesty, but allowing kids to get in-state tuition RATES (NOT paying the entire 4-year bill) so that they canl get an education and hopefully a job, along with US citizenship (that is REQUIRED) seems like a better plan than anything else I’ve heard. It just might get them off the welfare rolls that their parents will be on for life. And BTW – Perry had the support of 181 out of 185 state legislators for this – many of them very conservative Republicans. AND Perry has consistently said that it was right for Texas – this is a state issue and has never proposed that the rest of the country implement it.

  • http://www.asterling.com asterling

    Newt is tailor-made for them to re-do the Gingrinch who Stole Christmas etc. I also don’t think he’s best-qualified, to be honest. Kids don’t know now but don’t underestimate how much damage the MSM can do in a short period of time to a candidate who lacks likeability. Newt is a lot more likeable to me now, but over time . . . I don’t think so.

  • thirstyboots

    DeMint was an early booster for Romney. He asked Romney to run. He fundraised for Romney. He endorsed Romney in early 2007, when Romney wasnt’ sure he should run and the field was very far from formed.

    You are misremembering this grossly.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,242547,00.html

  • http://www.asterling.com asterling

    I already posted a link to Tom McClintock’s warning article about California. I believe Tom is right – he says that California voted Democrat not because it’s totally insane this past time, but because all except one of the candidates was a weak RINO. Meg Whitman was a terrible candidate. This is the only chance to elect a strong conservative. You are mistaken – Herman Cain can easily win.

  • celador2

    I agree with Mrs Perry that Rick has been brutalized for his faith. Fox news has led the charge. I think Perry is situated with funds and governing gifts to win the WH also. But not in this media climate sadly.
    I feel the bruises inflicted on him over this overblown remark by a pastor that said Mormons were grood people but not mainstream Christians, a cult. Perry disagreed they were a cult but when he refused to cut the pastor off the media firestorm began.

  • tluvgolf

    I am still a Perry supporter too. I do not want slick, like in Romney. I want a man that understands what this country needs- like less federal government involvement in our lives. He knows how to get the country back and successful. He wants the federal gov’t to do what it is supposed to do, like defending our borders…….He is a true conservative…..

  • Aaron Gardner

    Rubio went to the NRSC and they declined him and instead supported Crist. This is all detailed rather well in Sen. DeMint’s book.

    There was a large backlash against the NRSC and this led in part to the creation of the Senate Conservatives Fund.

  • http://www.asterling.com asterling

    I didn’t understand how critical it was to pick a real conservative, until I read (I know I already mentioned it) Tom McClintock’s article in RealClear Politics. He’s RIGHT. The article covers how liberals destroyed California, but he also covers why the RINOs nominated in California went down to defeat, and were unable to help more conservative candidates in more local offices. I worked for Carly Fiorina’s campaign and she was the strongest conservative and did the best, but Meg Whitman was a pathetic, terrible candidate.

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8531629/BETRAYAL%20CHAPTER%20ONE%20final%20version%202011.doc

  • http://www.asterling.com asterling

    I can’t believe I cut and pasted that. SO sorry.

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/10/08/a_second_term_for_obama_would_make_the_united_states_go_as_california_has_gone_111620.html

    That’s Tom McClintock article.

  • sharp

    I think his baggage is irrelevant, but you go ahead and keep pushing that theme – if it makes you feel better about yourself.

  • Common_Cents

    but it may be one or the other against Romney for the nomination.

    A Perry/gingrich combo would be pretty lethal. Outsider tea party guy, combined with a wicked smart insider that knows where the bodies are buried and where the liberals hide in DC.

  • celador2

    …Or so she says recently, She will be a candidate through NH. Romney had no need to take out Bachmann as she has lost support and he can look kind spirited. He also has noticed she has not attacked him much. She may want a spot in a Romney administration just as they all do.

    Would she serve with a president Perry, wonder?

  • avagreen

    approval rating?

    he’s being pushed by the establishment……..that’s the biggest thing going for him.

    Romney is a RINO and was a bigger liberal than Kennedy before he re-invented himself.

    I’m not voting for him.

  • celador2

    Governing is not about how well one times sound bites on stage before cameras.

    It remains to be seen what Perry offers us as a future president, His debate stye is but one impression to consider.

  • avagreen

    The information is out there and there is plenty on this thread alone..

  • runner12

    I am not 100% in the Perry camp, but I am very close to getting there. The videos yesterday in NH that were posted on here on RS impressed me greatly. I look forward to hearing his energy plan as well.

  • notpropagandized

    You may be right in your analysis, but the time is wrong for Romney because conservatives that are not moderates are so tired of capitulation to TheWashingtonDCEstablishment. And Romney is a perfect candidate for capitulation. That’s why your candidate has not YET exceeded ~25%.

  • notpropagandized

    Don’t EVER count Perry out… until the polls close. If he hasn’t won after that, it will be the first time.

  • annplato

    Why does everybody lose sight of the primary and most essential goal?

    With the pressure of awaken and active conservatives on his heels, Romney would make quite a good president. Furthermore, his tendency to go with the popular will and mood, he WILL be what the conservatives want him to be!

  • cbartlett

    And he should film some of those hospitals and schools near the border while he’s at it. Show the rest of the country how many illegals Texas is required BY FEDERAL LAW to take of. Maybe he’d get more support for the feds taking care of securing the border like they are supposed to.

  • Scope

    is doing all they can to make a non-story a story with the pastor. I would not be a bit surprised if the Rove’s aren’t behind the Politico rock story as well. They are so desperate they are throwing everything they can against the wall.

    Perry has gone down in the polls, for now, but if he is no longer a threat why the daily constant attacks from the Romney camp and the Rove/Bushie camps? They know that Perry is only temporarily down, but not out. They won’t stop until he is laying on the floor dead, but that won’t happen.

  • annplato

    guaranteed!!! Maybe that is what you REALLY want!

  • bzip

    From: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/13/cain-says-campaign-is-debt-free/

    A portion of the article:
    “We will report at the end of the quarter several hundred thousand dollars in cash on hand,” Cain said. “Within the last week or so, our fundraising has really picked up a lot, because of the response of the public.”

    By comparison, Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s campaign has $15 million in cash on hand funds, according to their third-quarter fund raising report.

    Cain has not said how much in total he raised during the third quarter. Candidates have until October 15 to file that information with the Federal Election Commission. Perry raised a total of $17 million in the third quarter, while former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is expected to announce a haul between $11 and $13 million. Texas Rep. Ron Paul reported raising $8 million.”

    Do you really think cain can pull in the massive bucks needed to compete in all 50 states?

    Cain is waiting till the last day to show the actual fundraising number which should make it clear it isn’t going to be too good.

  • acat

    I do look forward to reading more of your deep political insights.

    Mew

    /sarc

  • thirstyboots

    What are you talking about? Who the heck competes in 50 states in the general elections let alone the primaries?

    He needs the money to compete in Iowa and keep an operation ready to be upgraded in NH, SC and FL. If he wins Iowa, the race becomes a Mano-a-Mano between him and Romney and money won’t be a problem.

  • Scope

    and make stuff up. And yes I was around during Reagan’s terms as pres., and leading up to them. The establishment hated Reagan because he was too far to the right for them.

    Actually, it was old Bush who changed the party, as he was a moderate. The party has never gotten back to anything resembling conservatism since Reagan left the WH.

    Since the onset of the Tea Parties, the direction and mood of the country is to take the party back to the right. Romney would destroy any chance of that, that would be if he could win the WH which is doubtful. Why vote for Obama-lite when you can have Obama?

  • cbartlett

    would be so incredibly fun!!! Newt would absolutely plaster Joe on the walls!

  • ammy

    Perry may be a nice guy but he is inarticulate and not real smart. I don’t understand why conservatives are so in love with what is basically a weak conservative and a dumbed down version of Bush. You really think that’s a winning ticket. He can sit next to Sharron Angle at the next tea party. If he can’t handle a debate with the other R’s he sure can’t handle Obama.

  • ammy

    I’m having a hard time mustering a lot of sympathy for the Perry’s over their self-inflicted wound. Perry knew this pastor was an anti-mormon and after the introduction gave him an enthusiastic endorsement. “Hit it out of the park” I guess they think it’s alright to denigrate another person’s beliefs but not their own. Religion has no place here and so NO SYMPATHY. And even more, stop with the whining over getting what you’ve been giving out. Brutalized – talk to the Mormons about that. You haven’t a clue.

  • windwaker24

    If it is not grounded in the Constitution, it can be easily changed by a simple majority. All that has to be done is have “2/3 majority” striken from the bill and replaced with “simple majority.” If the Dems are clever enough, they can stick it any spending bill they choose. It doesn’t have to be a full-blown repeal bill. I used to work on amending legislation at my old job (I used to work for a company that published tax and accounting books. Congressional legislation was a big seller). It’s a very simple procedure.

  • redtillimdead

    That Ronald Reagan was attacked as a flip flopper. I agree with you. Out of all the candidates- save maybe Cain- Romney is the only one who my opinion of has risen greatly. My opinion of Perry has seriously declined. I say this as someone who supported Perry after Pawlenty dropped out. I still love T-Paw and wish he had stayed in, but, I think it is critical that we defeat Obama. Right now, Mitt Romney is the only person who can do that. Plus, he will help Hoekstra in Michigan, Heller in Nevada, Brown in MA, and give us a better shot at gaining a comfortable Senate majority.

  • windwaker24

    That should be “stricken from the bill.” Long day… :)

  • ammy

    When I got to your line about Perry killing Obama in a debate my job dropped. Based on what I’ve seen so far, Perry couldn’t handle a debate with a 7th grader. Obama is an incompetent but he is a good debater. It gets easier and easier to believe Perry’s college grades. He just ain’t that smart. I’d suggest he keep his Texas gig cause he can’t make it in DC

  • Scope

    that the Romney people will stoop as low as they can, including using liberal tactics to call any of our candidates dumb. Actually it is you who is not to bright to engage in Alinsky methods.

  • ammy

    You’re kidding right? What do we win? We win the WH. Romney has said that he will repeal Obamacare. Without that win – we all lose because it will become solidified and undoable. Don’t forget – that for a lot of R’s that’s what this is about. Romney may not be the most conservative guy in the race, but he is conservative enough and he is great at fixing things. And we have never needed a fixer more than we do right now. Romney’s record in Mass has been misrepresented and so I would encourage all of you who just keep parroting the RINO line to do some homework.

    For you to suggest that we need 4 more years of bad medicine shows that you are not interested in overturning Obamacare. After that nothing else matters.

  • damianvincent

    wrong without the base to support him in the relentless barrage he’ll face he’s toast, he’ll look like flip flopping, tax hiking, poor job creation record, mass liberal he is.

  • windwaker24

    that was created during the last GOP primary with nothing but attacks on Romney, some that have NEVER been used. Sounds farfetched, but it makes one wonder if Romney can actually beat Obama, especially if there are things out there that nobody knows about him yet. “October Surprise”, anyone?

  • Scope

    There is no possible way that Romney, the architect of Romneycare, and later Obamacare will ever repeal Obamacare. He recently made an arrogant statement that if the people of Mass. want to repeal Romneycare, let them. I’m sure Deval Patrick will jump right on that. Just as Deval Patrick jumped on eliminating Romney’s weak and non-sttempt to appear as though he was putting the state police on the trail of the illegals. Of course by the time Romney did that, in his last month as Gov., he already decided his next goal in life was the presidency or bust.

  • Scope

    also tried to make Reagan out as a dumbo. Dumbo’s don’t survive to be the longest serving Governor of a large state.

    Now, let’s go through this. Romney couldn’t beat an also ran McCain in 08. Apparently, Romney currently isn’t beating out a neophyte, no elective experience, fellow flip flopper Cain in 2012. His poll numbers are locked, and going no where. I just heard yet again that even with Christie’s endorsement he still couldn’t remain at the top in the polls. Romney can’t win with 25% of the vote, with 75% of the population preferring anyone and everyone else.

  • dio55

    Most of us were perry supporters, this is the primaries not the election perry is a dud now lets move on. I have and i am a vet just like perry but this election is too important to take a chance on a guy who can’t seem to string two sentences together not even a brother in arms

  • windwaker24

    without a telepromter. uh uh uh i-iii-it’s, uh uh, uh not pretty. Let me uh uh uh be uh clear…

  • wennejunk

    Presumably because he is not ‘Conservative enough’ and they are the better candidate to take on Romney’s moderate stance.

    If they bow out and endorse Romney, they will have indicated it was all a show – was always about taking out Perry to protect Romney.

    Alternate explanation: being humans and having thrown it all away demonizing Perry in the hopes of coming out on top – they then have too much pride to support him = admitting he really wasn’t that bad.

    Again, it is that simple.

    Of course, these are hypothetical situations that may be moot when compared to the reality that will happen.

    Heck, Perry himself could hang it up and just endorse Romney over Cain (thus earning the same chastisement I leveled above).

    At this point that is just as hypothetical and likely as the one we are quibbling about above.

  • powertothepeople

    dude, if you are going to try to pass crap off as fact, at least do so with better crap.

    No one said a thing about when he came out for Romney, what was said was that it was his only real choice. Whether that happened in 2007 or 2008 matters little. You may think everyone to be a moron and unable to see through your BS, but on your best day, your IQ does not stack anywhere near as high as mine. You are trying to BS here, and it is not working. You can lay claim that his fundraiser was prior to his announcement, but that would only be a technicality at best. Everyone knew McCain was in, everyone knew Romney was in. Exploratory committees were in place, people were moving to getting their guys name in the race. The only other real candidates were Ron Paul if you wear tin foil and Huckabee which was a no go for any real student of conservative politics not too mention he had zero chances of winning the primary or the general. Then of course you had the worst campaign on record by Giuliani not too mention his dismal record for conservatives. These were the known players before the announcements 2007, so again, your BS as to when he held the fundraiser and not knowing who would be in is another blatant misrepresentation.

    Jim DeMint is a proven conservative, something Romney is not. He chose from a field of losers and that is all he could do. So please, for the sake of what pride you have left, take this silly nonsense elsewhere. No one is buying it.

  • texanlady

    Cain is over 35%. Does this candidate of the month have staying Power? There are no more so maybe so.

  • unclefred

    If any of you have ties to his campaign I, with all humility beseech you to listen, if he wants any shot at the nomination he must walk back from his position on instate tuition for illegals. Period.

    Since I lost my wife I generally eat out. I go to a local restaurant, sit at the bar and have dinner. Often I talk with the people around me. Tonight the topic was politics. When Perry’s name came up I heard the following comments: “I was a Perry guy until I heard him talk”. “He doesn’t get it” “Even Romney is better”. As the discussion unraveled, the reason these people, who are not activists but will be voting in the primary, will not be voting for Perry is simply his position on instate tuition for illegals. They are unwilling to listen to any rational. If that is Perry’s position then he “doesn’t get it”. If Cain emerges some may vote for him, otherwise their default is Ronmey. They are not happy about it, but they WILL NOT support Perry because of that single issue. Full disclosure: I won’t support him unless he walks this back either. On many factors he is far preferable to Romney, but for me this blind spot is a deal breaker. Doesn’t matter because unless Perry addresses this he has no shot.

    I don’t want Romney anymore than you do,. I’m willing to see if the long shot named Cain can pull it off, but the pragmatist in me would far prefer a governor of a large state with solid experience PROVIDED HE CAN WIN THE NOMINATION. If Perry wants this he must face the simple fact that his position on this issue is unacceptable to the generic Republican voter, and for that matter the country at large. As long as he maintains his position on this issue he will NOT get another look from enough of the voters. Please if you have the connections, get his advisors to dig in and get the data and make the case, otherwise his shot is over.

    I’ve worked for campaigns. When I did there were staffers I could call to pass the word. I have to believe that some of you here have similar contacts inside the Perry campaign. Reach out. Tell them. He needs to recognize that it is NOT 2001 and that the illegal problem has vastly increased. What was a viable position for the governor of Texas in 2001, is not a viable position for the conservative candidate for the Republican nomination.

  • reggie182

    Old enough to understand what Romney has stated about global warming.

    He’s stated that there is probably SOME contribution from man.

    He hasn’t said it is caused by man. He hasn’t said that man is a major contributing factor. He hasn’t said anything to contradict the proposition that a man made contribution is there, but infinitesimal.

    Romney is not stupid. That’s one criticism you don’t see about him and for good reason. He remains fully cognizant of the fact that every single word he utters during the nomination process can be used for or against him in the general election. To outright deny the proposition that man-made causes have any effect on global warming opens him up to criticisms as being a non-scientific crank on the issue during the general campaign.

    As for Romneycare. Oh gee. It’s a Massachusetts program. A deep blue state program. He has never proposed implementing it’s like upon the entire nation. The farthest he has gone is to say that it’s something the individual states might want to look at. Then they can make a decision. That is completely in-line with the tenth amendment. As far as Obamacare is concerned, he said he would grant waivers to all states on the first day, and start working on the repeal process on the second.

    Romney has changed positions on certain issues. Nobody is denying that, but I don’t see any evidence that he would campaign one way, and then govern in an entirely different one.

  • reggie182

    Old enough to understand what Romney has stated about global warming.

    He’s stated that there is probably SOME contribution from man.

    He hasn’t said it is caused by man. He hasn’t said that man is a major contributing factor. He hasn’t said anything to contradict the proposition that a man made contribution is there, but infinitesimal.

    Romney is not stupid. That’s one criticism you don’t see about him and for good reason. He remains fully cognizant of the fact that every single word he utters during the nomination process can be used for or against him in the general election. To outright deny the proposition that man-made causes have any effect on global warming opens him up to criticisms as being a non-scientific crank on the issue during the general campaign.

    As for Romneycare. Oh gee. It’s a Massachusetts program. A deep blue state program. He has never proposed implementing it’s like upon the entire nation. The farthest he has gone is to say that it’s something the individual states might want to look at. Then they can make a decision. That is completely in-line with the tenth amendment. As far as Obamacare is concerned, he said he would grant waivers to all states on the first day, and start working on the repeal process on the second.

    Romney has changed positions on certain issues. Nobody is denying that, but I don’t see any evidence that he would campaign one way, and then govern in an entirely different one.

  • Scope

    on the in-state position for children of illegals. That is a non-starter. Guess you will have to look for another candidate to support.

  • pttx333

    He did refuse to debate Bill White, but, then, he didn’t have to either. He wiped out that weasel anyway. Having lived in the Houston area for many years, I know full well who and what White is. So … that should prove that my guy can knock ‘em out anyway, huh.

    I don’t think he will strike out. He is sort of a “hanger-back” type – he’ll let you stew and fret and then head straight for the k.o. when he feels it is time. I’ve seen him do it – and I think that is still his plan. It is still early, and I have faith that he will be standing tall when everything is said and done.

  • pttx333

    He did refuse to debate Bill White, but, then, he didn’t have to either. He wiped out that weasel anyway. Having lived in the Houston area for many years, I know full well who and what White is. So … that should prove that my guy can knock ‘em out anyway, huh.

    I don’t think he will strike out. He is sort of a “hanger-back” type – he’ll let you stew and fret and then head straight for the k.o. when he feels it is time. I’ve seen him do it – and I think that is still his plan. It is still early, and I have faith that he will be standing tall when everything is said and done.

  • pttx333

    No. 1 – Rush is never wrong, and No. 2 – he said it (as you said) with great passion. That is not something Rush does often – not at all. Yep, I’ll be waiting to hear our guy tomorrow – his style is usually to come up with guns drawn, and I bet that is what happens then. What is the old quote – “Still water runs deep?” Something like that.

  • windwaker24

    Perry will get my vote till the end. Just like in state tution is a deal-breaker for you, 9-9-9 and Cain’s inexperience is a non-starter for me. With everything that is going on around us, this is not a time for learning on the job. People tout Cain CEO experience as being good enough, but it is different than running a country. Different industries have different criteria. A bookstore CEO can’t just turn around, and say, run a restaurant without knowing how one works. Politcs has its own rules and criteria. Cain admits he doesn’t know the ins and outs of government and doesn’t care. That’s scary to me. I’ll stick with proven leadership over “I hope he gets it right!” “I hope he gets it right” disappoints every time (i.e. Obama).

  • bzip

    Perry;
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65899.html

    Cain:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUmdexAKLuw&feature=player_embedded

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/65898.html

  • bzip

    I could be qwrong but I remember watching a old Reagan video of Reagan which seem to suggest Perry would have gotten Reagan’s blessing on in-state tuition

  • pttx333

    pt

  • uncmike

    It is becoming an open secret, a fact that is increasingly noticable to everyone (like the proverbial elephant in the center of the room) that Romney is up against a glass ceiling in the low to mid-20s in the polls. So, for now, the other candidates keep reshuffling the deck for the other 75% of the voters polled, and it’s clear the majority pick is ABR (Anybody But Romney). The fact that Mitt’s handlers are becoming more shrill by the day in their attcks on Perry gives their game away. They know, as Eric has stated, that if the field collapses, and the consolidation begins, it will be very bad news for Romney.

    EE states that “Right now, Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann are serving only to bolster Romney?s chances. If they drop out, they may embrace Romney, but the odds are their supporters do not.” I think he is absolute right about that. Their endorsements will be virtually useless to Romney (should he garner them) because their endorsements will not deliver conservatives to the candidate who is not to be trusted as a conservative. How much of a bump did Romney get from the much heralded Christie endorsement before the last debate?

    The longer Rocky, er. …Perry stays in the ring, the more desperate Romney will become. After all the years, time, money, planning, debate practice, slick consultants, paid shills, and all the rest he has invested in becoming the Republican candidate for President, he’s at about the same place in the polls.

    Perry, on the other hand, has a lot of room to grow and retake the position he had when he entered and move beyond that. Personally, I think Perry’s support base is solid, and when the rest of those looking for their dream ABR candidate finally realize that Cain, Bachmann, Santorum, Gingrich and the rest of the field are not really going to make the cut, they will give Perry their support since giving it to Obama-lite (AKA Mitt Romney) is something they know they can’t stomach.

  • onemovoter

    on Romneycare and says it needs to be completely repealed, then I’ll consider your request that not only Perry but the entire Texas legislature and the people of Texas needs to repeal the Texas in state tuition for illegals law.

    It’s interesting that I found out that Bachmann supported and voted FOR a near duplicate in state tuition for illegals law when she was a state senator in Minnesota. I think she also voted to have Hep B vaccine become mandatory with no waivers, which happens to be a sexually transmitted virus. Yet she complains about Perry and his HPV with waiver deal?

    I do agree to a degree that Perry does need to educate people outside of Texas about the in state tuition deal. Many of us here at Redstate have actually researched the issue and found out why it was the only option Texas had.

    I could easily sit down with you and your group of friends and have them understanding the agreeing with me on the tuition issue in a matter of minutes. All it would take is explaining Texas law and constitutional powers and Federal Powers and the differences.

  • unclefred

    Reagan foolishly trusted the left to close the door. They didn’t. At this point I suspect Reagan would say fool me once…

    I see that I have failed to convey the situation. I’ll try a different tact. I’ll start by telling you a story. A ways back I was working to replace a Democrat congressman. I was at a public meeting there were eight Republicans vying for the seat. Once of my more politically experienced friends had me ask one of the candidates a question. The question was if there was a very popular bill that you believed was unconstitutional which your constituents widely supported would you vote for it or against it? He tried to duck and the people in the meeting lit him on fire, because not voting against it would violate his oath of office. I was green in those days and was pretty upset that I had been used to hand this man a tough question. My friend said to me, better he learn this now than once he is in office. He needed to understand what mattered to the voters he would represent. Similarly Perry needs to understand what matters to the voters he wants to represent.

    To my original point. Perry’s peak support was what? around 38%. Now depending on the poll he is between 15% and 8%. The singular reason for this is his stand on the tuition issue. He is out of touch with the Republican voter and with the Republican leaning independent voter. A presidential candidate is selected by voters because they feel that he/she shares their values and vision for the nation. As clearly and as strongly as possible the voters who will pick the Republican nominee have indicated that this issue separates them from Perry.

    Simply put. You folks claim to want Perry to win the nomination. If you really want that then somebody better tell him to look around and realize that his position on this issue has spilt off the support he needs to make that happen. If I had a connection into his campaign I’d be bending their ear and assembling the data to convince him. If no one gets this message through to him, he’ll be in single digits and all the money in the world won’t fix it.

    This issue has legs all out of proportion to its cost and the numbers of illegals involved. It is personal to every parent struggling to pay their kids tuition. They don’t like it and when the average voter hears it he/she discards Perry as a candidate. My personal support for Perry in unimportant to his success, the support of something around 25%-30% of the Republican primary voters is critical to his success. If one of you does not find a way to convey this to Perry’s organization you, not I will need to find another candidate to support and that in my opinion would be tragic.

  • msjallen

    that Perry would not ask her to serve. She has lost credibility when she is so hateful putting down Perry like that is going to make her look good!
    All candidates need to stop putting each other down. It is like a high school election and petty. We need to beat 0 and keep the GOP looking good.
    I pray that Romney does not win the election but I will vote for him if he does just to get rid of 0.

  • jaykali

    And even though we have a lot of complainers around here (probably rightly so) bc it’s natural for conservatives to want a full-blown conservative not a moderate – we all know that all conservatives will show up at the ballot box in the end.

    I am tired of the stupid argument that completely overstates the issue by saying that Romney is going to be the *same* as Obama. I feel like those people need their head examine. That would be the same line of thinking that a liberal would say Hitler and G.W. are the *same*. It’s not true.

    I personally think that no matter who the Republican nominee ends up being, the agenda is likely to be similar bc what the constituents are demanding are pro-growth policies, less burdensome regulation, BIG domestic energy expansion, tax reform – these are all items I could see on just ab anyone’s agenda list. I don’t see Romney rushing to pass a bunch of pro-abortion bills and nominating liberal judges to piss everyone off.

    Personally what I’d really like is the best executive that can make some traction in this agenda. I don’t know if that would be Romney or not. I’d prefer someone with executive experience, ala Governor, CEO (sorry being 1 of 400+ congressman isn’t super impressive to me). I’d like some real leadership experience, that’s why I would have really liked Christie who’s demonstrated advancing a conservative agenda in a liberal state. Again I don’t know if Romney is the guy or not, I am impressed that he seems to have his *S* together and can debate and sound competent. Then again we’ve seen that being a good campaigner does not mean one will be a good executive leader.

    So I will not cry my eyes out if Romney is the nominee. If anything maybe conservatives would be more apt to hold his administration’s feet to the fire bc there’s some uneasiness there.

    I do have concerns with the idea of electing someone who is a lightning rod like Bachmann. I think she would get much more resistance than a Romney-type.

    Anywho I think it’s a moot point bc I just don’t see anyone with the ability to take on Romney other than Perry if he gets his act together but it’s getting late.

  • msjallen

    makes me think he doesn’t really want to run. I have been disappointed in him because I thought would be the one to beat 0.

  • unclefred

    I would be interested in that justification.

    I hate to make black and white statements so I will put it this way. The underlying goal of these people is for the illegals to leave the nation. They are opposed to any path to permanent residency or citizenship that does not involve them returning to their countries of origin and starting the immigration procedure from scratch. They understand that the simplest and most effective method of accomplishing this is to end jobs and services for all illegals and let them self-deport. The whole instate tuition thing with the notion that eventually they will somehow gain permanent residency flies in the face of that. Hence the anger.

    If there is a private way that I can provide you an email address, I would be very interested in hear the rational.

  • jaykali

    Is the goal of conservatives to elect the most conservative person possible or to advanced as much of a conservative agenda in a 4-8 year span as possible (and that includes winning the election)?

    Sometimes I wonder if people understand that there is a difference. Let’s say that Obama is so damaged (possible) that we can get anybody we want. We can get Bachmann, who is down-the-line conservative on every item. Don’t we also have to consider who effective this person would be in advancing that agenda? Who would be the most effective at getting enough votes to pass tax reform? Domestic energy bills? Etc?

    The ‘I don’t want to compromise’ line is fine if you can get 60 senators and keep them as long as possible. The partisanship is only getting worse as time goes on so I fear that the window is closing to get anything meaningful done. I am skeptical quite frankly of all of the candidate’s being skilled enough to get their agenda through congress bc I am pretty sure they won’t have 60 senators. They will have some blue dogs and some political capital to spend. I hope that whoever wins (and IF they win) is smart ab using their political capital on something important like deficit reduction or tax reform before it runs out.

    Even though I’m not in love with Romney I would hope that maybe just maybe since he isn’t exactly an ideologue that he could lure some blue dogs over and have a functional coalition to pass some big items year 1. After the 1st year anything goes, you may not be able to do anything if the environment changes. So that is my hope in the end.

    I am also hoping that Rubio gets the VP nod bc he is the Reagan-esque conservative everyone wants and if Romney is the Prez and doesn’t totally screw things up maybe we have a chance to have Rubio take things over and have even more years of conservative governance to get us back on the right path again.

  • jaykali

    Perry/Cain/Bachmann/etc split their votes. Romney keeps all of his. Unfortunately that’s the breakdown. Romney doesn’t have a huge percentage of the vote but the ‘conservative’ vote is split a bunch of different ways.

    Romney wants to keep as many opponents in this race as possible. If we have a bunch of drop-outs post Iowa maybe that makes things interesting, who knows. You really need a consolidation of the so-called conservative vote very quickly once the primaries start to really challenge Romney and I am doubting that will happen quick enough. I feel like Romney has been getting momentum and is starting to look like the ‘inevitable’ nominee.

    People want to compare him to Hillary. OK fine, so is he going to run against Marco Rubio this year? Well that would complete the analogy. The young charismatic newcomer who everyone loves. Cain/Bachmann/Perry ain’t it. If Hillary had run against 3/4 challengers that split the non-Hillary vote then she would have won. And that’s what is happening for Romney.

    I have a definite love/hate (prob more hate than love) relationship with Romney. He debates well, he says the right things for the most part. But you know, he’s Romney. We all know his many, many flaws. I just think the ‘business-guy’ moderate conservative could be very attractive to the masses this election season, and if it will take out Obama in a hopefully humiliating defeat, won’t that make us all smile a little more?

  • jaykali

    I mean I will probably vote for him though I doubt it will matter in the end. His 999 plan is definitely a marketing plan. It has accomplished it’s mission of making Cain a first tier plan. Once you dive into the details you know it is not something that could actually pass. But that’s fine, I mean what is definitely more realistic is to lower the rates we have now and kill all of the corporate welfare BS in the tax code.

    The 999 plan is catchier than saying ‘lets lower everyone’s tax rates’ – well a lot of politicians have been saying that for a while. It doesn’t intrigue the listener. Anywho I like Cain. I am tired of people criticizing Cain’s plan when they don’t have one of their own. Cain needs to say to Rick Santorum, um where is your bold plan again? Anyway he’s too nice for that, that is part of the ‘Cain’ appeal. Very much in the Huckabee playbook.

  • jaykali

    *making Cain a first tier candidate.

  • redmymind

    A vote for Cain = A vote for BHO-Lite = A vote for BHO

    No long words or second-order analyses really needed. The faults lines are already quite evident to those who simply choose to see.

  • izoneguy

  • center77

    I’ve read three liberal writers say the same thing, Romney is killing the tea party, and bringing back big government Republicans. The establishment rode the backs of the Tea Party to get out of the mess Bush left the party, and now they want to elect another Harvard grad, blue blood, liberal republican. It just plain make me sick to feel conservatives are doing this to themselves by backing too many people, and not the only true conservative that can win. Romney is now that.

  • sunshinek67

    Texas Legislators pushed this bill forth. Even if Governor Perry wanted to veto, I do not think he could have. My understanding is that this legislation was veto proof. It was right for Texas at the time, some argue that it still is for our state. I will submit that currently our instate polls want to see an end to instate tuition.

  • sunshinek67

    I find your statement “Similarly Perry needs to understand what matters to the voters he wants to represent” rather ironic in a way as Governor Perry was in fact representing the will of Texans. He is running for President of all 50 states now, has made clear that it is a Texas state issue and does not support the idea to extrapolate a Texas policy to the other 49 states. Fact is, there are 10-12 other states with the exact same policy, some of them considered red states, i.e. Illinois.

  • damianvincent

    Perry’s been gov for ten years, of course he’s received all kinds of campaign contributions, 95% of that went to people who hadn’t donated a dime to Perry. This is nothing but innuendo and rumors, nothing solid has ever come up, and they’ve been trying for ten years on this crony capitalism charge.

    Perry’s Fiscal record, 6 balanced budgets, the first governor to introduce a budget that spends less than the year before since world war 2, overall spending reductions, Perry is number one in job creation, by and far, Texas had its credit rating upgraded, it has one of the lowest debt per capita rates in the country, while cutting taxes, reducing regulations, and passing tort reform.

    The Enterprise fund has been very successful at luring good, high paying jobs to Texas.

  • sunshinek67

    Problem is that Mitt Romney has onerously misrepresented himself repeatedly in his political career. Have you seen the DNC’s whichmitt.com website? Not helpful~

  • gator_hoo

    Jeffress didn’t say anything about Mormonism when he introduced Perry, and Perry didn’t choose Jeffress to introduce him. There is also nothing to indicate that Perry had any idea what Jeffress’s beliefs were outside of being a pastor at a prominent baptist church (which is in Dallas, three hours away from Austin, where Perry lives).

    There has been a lot of bad and misleading reporting in exactly what happened, but the idea that Perry involved himself in any way with what Jeffress said is not correct.

  • gator_hoo

    But conveniently, you have not made a single pro-Perry post here, and you make a habit of showing up to make anti-Perry comments. As Romney is fond of saying, “nice try.”

  • courtwitch

    Newt has always had my vote. I watched him make promises as speaker and he kept them. He announced the first 100 days that the congress would complete the Contract and it did. At that time, I said if he ever runs for president, he’s got my vote. His “baggage” is nothing compared to the sludge of Wachington D.C. I think the one’s who keep referring to his “baggage’ probaly had their foot stepped on while he was taking care of conservative business.

  • redmymind

    There is one candidate that the Washington ComPost keeps trashing and belittling. They wouldn’t be doing this if they didn’t fear his rise and eventual nomination, despite the current hype about BHO-Lite/Gumby and Thin Crust.

  • ammy

    You are either misinformed or just shilling. Perry knew about Jeffress’ beliefs based on comments he (Jeffress) made about Romney and Mormons in 08. Also, Perry had approval over Jeffress and could have vetoed the choice. Also, Perry could have distanced himself from Jeffress’s remarks right then and there and still hasn’t denounced his bigotry. Sorry, Perry is guilty as charged and his wife’s whining is especially grating.

  • ammy

    You’re going to call me out and then call my methods Alinsky? Overreact Much!!!! Sorry, I was willing to look at Perry but his debate performances and over the top language (which will kill him in the general) have led me to conclude that he ain’t that bright. And calling it as I see it is not a liberal tactic – it’s the truth. Perry’s weak in several areas, couldn’t debate a rock and comes across as dumb. You don’t have to like it but this tea party member thinks its the truth.

  • ammy

    Please stop it. Your rationality will spread and soon others will stop foaming at the mouth and then there will 4 or 5 people on this thread who actually want to beat Obama in ’12. Please no more – Romney is dirt on Obama’s shoes – don’t you get it?

  • ammy

    So glad to read a little sanity here. All these “true conservatives” who will be so happy when Obama beats a “true conservative” in ’12 and Obamacare becomes carved in stone. Yeah, guys – keep telling us how terrible Romney is. Obama must be loving this.

  • ammy

    The same people who elected Obama – the middle – they are polling as being for Romney. But that doesn’t matter does it. Obama in 12. Get your bumper stickers here.

  • ammy

    You are going to be part of the reason Obama wins if you continue with this logic. Perry will LOSE and Obama will get four more years and then it won’t matter anymore.

  • ammy

    No, I’m not. Romney is a moderate conservative, he was in 07 and he is now. He changed his positions a long time ago. Just like Perry and Reagan and others. And frankly, there is nothing he would do that could come close to the disaster that is Obama. And……..he is the only one who can beat Obama. I care about that and so should you and everyone else on here. Maybe Perry can win the nomination, but he sure can’t win the WH. Period. End of Story. Romney can and he would issue waivers and repeal Obamacare. Otherwise it’s over and it’s the law and not reversible. You’re really willing to risk that? I don’t know who’s crazier the dems or the rabid Romney haters on here.

  • ammy

    The DNC? Really? Way to go conservative there.

  • lizaz

    the current incumbent. We like Herman Cain, but I’m worried about a 9% sales tax on top of the 8.8% we currently pay for state/county/city sales tax…that would be 17.8%! We currently pay no sales tax on food…if we had to add 9% on food plus 17.8% on everything else including gasoline, we could not afford that. (in addition to county property tax and state income tax and dozens of other taxes/fees on energy/telephone/DSL, etc.) Rick Perry lost us when he said he was in favor of instate tuition for illegal aliens. My grandchildren would have to pay out-of-state tuition if they wanted to go to UT and my father was born in TX. We wonder if Mitt Romney can beat the incumbent…in 2008 he lost the nomination to John McCain and John McCain lost the election!! We think Romney wants to repeal obamacare, but it worries me he supported his health care program in MA. We are not in favor of government-run health care, period!!! We are independent voters and still have a lot of questions. We haven’t found our candidate yet.

  • ammy

    Great idea guys. And then he can round up all the illegals who are getting tuition assistance from Texas and they can endorse him as well. They could line up along the border but they might actually end having to go into other states to get all of them. Yeah, that’s the ticket – and then he could talk about fiscal conservatism. Yes, Perry the truth conservative and don’t forget he’s the real christian too.

  • ammy

    You can’t change the rules in the middle of the game. If it’s okay to bash Romney and make no other points, then its okay to bash Perry as well.

  • ammy

    Good for you Ava – have you gotten your tickets to Obama’s next Inaugural ball yet? You should definitely be on the list, because you will have helped him to keep living the dream while we keep living the nightmare.

  • californiagold

    I’m starting to believe that the establishment wing of the party would rather see Obama get reelected than have a conservative win. Afterall, if they can’t have Romney in 2012, they will just wait until 2016 with Jeb Bush. To big government republicans, the tea party is an like a fly that won’t go away.

    All these unelectable candidates like Santorum, Bachmann, and even Gingrich are there to divide the vote in Iowa, clearing the way for a Romney win. I wouldn’t be surprised if one, or all three, of those candidates ended up with a position inside a Romney administration – or maybe even a nice gig on Fox news.

  • gekster

    do you know what the Texas Dream Act entails.

    Well, I lied, two questions.
    what is wrong with the universities in your own state that you have to send your child to Texas.

    The illegals have to have lived in Texas for at least three years, graduated from a Texas high school, pass the entrance exam to get into the university,
    have to pay thier own way, no afirmative action of any kind, have to apply for US citizenship.

    On the other hand, your child only has to live in Texas for 1 year to qualify for instate tuition.
    And since the law was passed in 2001, with only 4 no vottes out of 187,
    only 1% of Texas university students have qualified.
    Now can you tell me what is the problem with the law.

    Now you have got me to ask three questions of you. :)

  • redmymind

    I enjoyed reading your thoughtful commentary. Decisions, decisions! I hope you’ll come to support someone you think could defeat the current occupant of the White House.

    Here are some basic reasons why I think Governor Perry is the one:

    1. You may not agree with him on everything, but he is a serious conservative with an impressive record of job creation, along with proven executive experience. (This alone eliminates his rivals at the outset.)

    2. He is by no means perfect, but he sticks to his conservative principles regardless of which direction the wind blows. He is not a flipflopper or a “conservative-out-of-convenience” like Governor Romney.

    3. Governor Romney may be the more “polished” speaker and the one with the quick come-backs in a debate, but there is someone already in the White House who, in turn, could run circles around Romney himself on his best day–and with the electrifying style and charisma that Romney simply does not have and in fact is flatly incapable of. Being that Romney really has nothing to offer, as far as an impressive record to pit against Obama’s, where can he go? . . . Obama already being the far superior orator.

    4. Regardless of how the pundits and the popular media try to sculpt the public’s perception, the very last thing we need during these dire economic times is another rhetorician skillfully bobbing and weaving and making eloquent denials–sounding smart but not really delivering any substance. But if that’s what “winning” debates is all about, we indeed have a nation of shallow minds no longer capable of discerning true substance and leadership.

    5. No matter what folks may “dislike” about Governor Perry, he comes across as a man of his words–speaking from the heart and thereby inspiring trust. He is not the sterile and disconnected elitist with the quick come-backs that’s really the extent of Romney’s qualifications.

    6. There is certainly a lot of talk about “plans” out there, ranging from Cain’s simplistic and highly suspect 9-9-9 to Romney’s 59-point plan. Yet, I’d gladly choose Governor Perry’s real, proven jobs record over any piece of aspirational scribble that has obviously not exceeded the bounds of the paper it is written on. As they say, “If you’ve done it, it ain’t braggin’!”

    7. People are entitled to grow and change their views and beliefs as they progress through life. Admitting as much can in fact be seen as a refreshing sign of maturity and openness. However, Romney’s horrific flipflopping, followed by eloquent denial should serve as a clear warning sign as to whom NOT to elect. Trust should matter, especially where so much is at stake.

  • paladin1

    or untrue in the analysis. Their own words indict them. Conservatives are fed up with compromising with the Democrats and their big government ideas; why should we settle for big government Republicans who support TARP and bailouts? We must grow a spine and insist that the country be taken a different direction. The establishment is doing everything it can to annoint Romney by moving up the primaries, possibly New Hampshire into early December. Harry Reid is now so afraid for his party that he forced the nuclear option for the China bill. Is this the people you want to compromise with? This election of all elections we don’t have to settle for the leftovers from the last Republican RINO defeat and the fact that Romney can’t move in the polls no matter what he does shows how unsatisfactory he is as a candidate. I’ll vote for him in the general if I have to but I should’nt have to!

  • jlsankot

    will he be what the establishment wants him to be? If you think he’ll go one way, what’s to keep him from going the other way, just to be popular? As was mentioned above by msjallen, this is not a high school election.

  • http://www.voteforteri2010.com teridavisnewman

    As I take my Congressional campaign to the people, everyone I meet in Illinois is becoming more and more enthralled with Herman Cain. I haven’t met anyone in the last week that isn’t asking me about him and I admit to liking him a lot. I wanted to like Rick Perry, but I can’t live with a lot of his policy. I’ve become a Cain-iac with a lot of my constituents and I never wanted Romney who is another go-along get along garden variety RINO which is not what America needs. Romney’s constant flip-flopping has cost him the support of everyone I talk to and he has a serious credibility problem. I’ve got video of the now “PRO-life” Romney swearing to defend a woman’s right to choose. I voted for Romney in the 2008 primary but I won’t be doing it again in 2012, I have no need for a President who tells me what is politically expedient for him. I tell my constituents the cold, hard and sometimes ugly truth; and I expect no less from my President.

  • avagreen

    Google (Almost) Anybody but Cain to see all of them.

    His 999 plan doesn’t work, either. Too many unansnwered questions, such as what happens to SS and Medicare under it (and thet people currently on those programs). Maybe not a worrisome thing for a millioniare wanting to be elected to office, but it is to the retirees.

    Your folks need to look into this small problem.

  • bzip

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/did-cains-9-9-9-plan-come-from-a-video-game/

  • avagreen

    Errrmmmm……..for those that say Perry has “no plan”. Wrong!

    K?I?ve read the posts. After the Indies went for Obama, didn?t object to the non-vetting process?they just wanted to be out of GWB?the fundamentally transform America was soothing to many people. The problem was?they didn?t know what this country was being transformed into. So..we have record unemployment, 1/2 the families on government assistance, fast & furious, Government Motors; Dodd Frank, Obamacare, Stimulus; Solyndra, the GPS company that could interfere with our defense, mega bucks on vacations while we went out of work, Blaming other people for his choices. I think you get the point and you could probably add a whole lot more. So?I ask??next time the election comes up?I?m going to look into the record?. ?I?m going to look for the proof?. I?m not going to let this happen again and I?m going to try to help others realize that we can?t afford to let an ?empty suit? lead us.

    So?Romney?Nope-Obama-Lite; Cain?Nope- he?s made some remarks that are not called for, i.e.,” Perry and Obama are alike”;
    Newt ? He has some really good solutions?he has evidence?balanced the budget..held Clinton?s feet to the fire and left us with a surplus. He knows the in-outs of government?BUT?would he be a GOP Guy?

    Then here is Perry. I like Perry and right now?I will stay with Perry until he leaves?if he does. WHAT IS PERRY?S EVIDENCE?

    1. JOBS. Wow?that?s not what Texas’ problems are.
    2. Against Abusive Regulation
    3. Passed Tort Reform ? Loser Pays
    4. Healthcare Plan in Texas now ? called Healthy Texas.
    5. Served in the Military
    6. No baggage as far as family problems.
    7. Wants MOST?I did say Most government back in the hands of
    the States?so that the people have more control of the government instead of the other way around.
    8. Wants Energy Independence
    9. Strong on BORDER SECURITY?Yes he is?check it out. Did not give Illegals driver?s license; did not grant sanctuary cities.

    Took out of the State budget what the FEDS are supposed to do?protect and secure the border.
    10. Wants the education system more in control of the States.
    11. Does not apologize For America
    12. Has the humility to admit when he was wrong (HPV)
    13. Can identify with the poor as well as the rich. His mother made his clothes. He is the American Dream.
    14. Shows conviction?in his beliefs and in his country.
    15. Wants to reform SS, leave those approaching SS and on it to stay and also allow options for younger people.
    16. Wants to reform Medicare ? means testing
    17. Believes in Peace Through Strength and wants our service-people home from Afghanistan/Iraq.”

  • defenseconservative

    but I won’t believe this until I see proof.

  • gator_hoo

    First of all, you acknowledge that you mislead people about Perry expressly approving Jeffress’s Mormon comments, so good start.

    Secondly, do you know everything every pastor in your state believes and has advocated in the past? Why should Perry be held to that standard? Unless you have something saying, “we knew, but….” that is a ridiculous standard to hold someone to.

    Lastly, even if he knew Jeffress said Mormons aren’t Christians two years ago, so what? I would guess that most Catholic and Protestant ministers would say that Mormons aren’t Christians if they were directly asked. It would have caused a greater uproar if he would have vetoed a pastor merely for holding that belief, and rightfully so.

    So unless you have something showing direct approval, your connecting Perry to Jeffress’s comments holds him to a ridiculous standard.

    It was stupid for Jeffress to answer the question at a political event.

  • gator_hoo

    So you are denouncing a pastor for his sincerely held religious belief? And that is not bigotry? And denouncing someone for not denouncing that pastors religious beliefs? But his belief that someone else’s religious beliefs are wrong is bigotry? Hypocrite much?

  • streiff

    which Jeffress is not because he expressly said he would support Romney in the general, with a theological statement of fact. Mormonism is not traditional Christianity. Mormons do not believe traditional Christians are actual Christians. This is theology.

    Religion does have a place on this blog. It, as both Erick and I have posted, goes to the very core values a person holds.

    If you don’t like it, shove off. If you accuse another person of bigotry you’re gone.

  • paperhawk

    “They say Republicans are for the rich, Democrats are for the poor.
    If they need more voters,
    then they have to make more of who they are for.”

    Are these your original words? As a songwriter sounds like part of a folksy Americana ditty.

    Here is one I did a few months ago: http://soundcloud.com/jonhanson/

    If it is yours, I’d like permission to use it.

    Jon Hanson http://ohiosongwriter.com

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    He stated that he would vote for Romney over Obama should Romney get the nomination. He was quite clear on the matter that he would prefer a competent Christian over a competent non-Christian, but he would also prefer a competent non-Christian over a Christian that espouses unbiblical policies.

    Nowhere in his remarks did he show any degree of intolerance due to religious differences.

    Perry isn’t guilty of any charge toward any Mormon. Trying to paint with broad strokes through guilt by association, where there is no guilt even by association is disingenuous.

  • sunshinek67

    and check out those videos on Rick Perry that was posted on redstate.com and can be found on youtube since you seem to have a problem with Governor Perry’s articulation skills. Debates are one thing, unquestionably so, but the ability to have charisma and work a room unscripted with a command of the issues is another. This is one reason why Perry has diehard supporters. He reminds me of Reagan~

    Gov Rick Perry (R-TX), Part I & Gov Rick Perry (R-TX), Part II

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwD79Yu-ri0

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SDFnGky0io

  • tnguy

    Maybe I’m in the minority amongst conservatives, but if Romney is the nominee, I’m voting 3rd party, writing someone in, or staying home. I cannot and will not support him. My impression of the majority of conservatives is that they’re fed up with the establishment and it’s liberal republican candidates.

    Having said that, I’m not sure who I can support amongst the others. I had hope in Perry, but his ineffectual campaigning has me thinking he’s this cycle’s Fred Thompson. I can no longer support Bachman, because her ridiculous gardasil attack showed me she’s either a moron or was more interested in attacking Perry than addressing the issues of our time. I then invested hope in Cain, only to see him play the race card on Perry. Frankly, that tactic disgusts me to a degree that, at this point, Herman Cain is not a possibility.

    It’s frustrating to me that in such a crucial point in our nation’s history, with an imminently beatable incumbent, we have a horrid field. I’m not sure what I’m going to do at this point, but I know that if I’m alive and kicking a year from now, I’m not holding my nose and voting for Romney.

  • sunshinek67

    GOP needs a strong candidate to face Obama, one that will inspire the conservative base to get out the vote. That was McCain’s problem, he failed to rouse this part of the base in large numbers to offset Obama’s rockstar posse’s that bused in their constituents by zillions. Like Romney, McCain was seen as too moderate-liberal by many conservatives. I realize that many feel that independents will sway over to a Romney candidacy. But their numbers are somewhere around 10% of the voting electorate. Cannot win without a substantial percentage of the conservatives. It didn’t happen for McCain, and I fear, it won’t happen for Romney. When reconciled, a vulnerable sitting incumbent, who still has 80%+ of his Democratic base & some of the independents, in contrast with a GOP candidate that appeals to independents and GOP establishment figure heads and media elites alike but does not have unified strong enthusiasm from conservatives, I just fail to see how a Romney candidacy can get there.

    I am mindful of the huge disappointment felt when I saw the numbers on Election night. I could not believe America, by many millions more in the popular vote, elected a smooth talking well scripted (teleprompter) community organizer with 2-3 yrs senatorial experience & zero executive experience. While Romney has some executive, and arguably much more private sector experience, some of his business ventures are suspect to conservatives, his political rhetoric in every single campaign he has petitioned for reveals perpetually switching positions. Why should conservatives not feel passionate to get the best candidate?

    Not a Romney hater, just want a strong candidate. Romney seems like a very opportunistic cadatandidate satiated with money and ambition. I wonder sometimes if he is blinded by this ambition, does he even know what he believes or just what the prevailing political winds instruct him to believe on any given day just to get elected. It’s obvious to anyone paying attention that in these debates, you bank and he knows he is going to deliver Godspeed. This equates to competence. He is a commanding force on a debate stage. Actors in Hollywood have the same abilities, look real good, rehearse their parts and make an insane amount of money at the same time. Obama has the same gift.

    I respect yours, and anyone else’s right to be pro-Romney, please respect mine to be pro-Perry~

  • sunshinek67

    GOP needs a strong candidate to face Obama, one that will inspire the conservative base to get out the vote. That was McCain’s problem, he failed to rouse this part of the base in large numbers to offset Obama’s rockstar posse’s that bused in their constituents by zillions. Like Romney, McCain was seen as too moderate-liberal by many conservatives. I realize that many feel that independents will sway over to a Romney candidacy. But their numbers are somewhere around 10% of the voting electorate. Cannot win without a substantial percentage of the conservatives. It didn’t happen for McCain, and I fear, it won’t happen for Romney. When reconciled, a vulnerable sitting incumbent, who still has 80%+ of his Democratic base & some of the independents, in contrast with a GOP candidate that appeals to independents and GOP establishment figure heads and media elites alike but does not have unified strong enthusiasm from conservatives, I just fail to see how a Romney candidacy can get there.

    I am mindful of the huge disappointment felt when I saw the numbers on Election night. I could not believe America, by many millions more in the popular vote, elected a smooth talking well scripted (teleprompter) community organizer with 2-3 yrs senatorial experience & zero executive experience. While Romney has some executive, and arguably much more private sector experience, some of his business ventures are suspect to conservatives, his political rhetoric in every single campaign he has petitioned for reveals perpetually switching positions. Why should conservatives not feel passionate to get the best candidate?

    Not a Romney hater, just want a strong candidate. Romney seems like a very opportunistic candidate satiated with money and ambition. I wonder sometimes if he is blinded by this ambition, does he even know what he believes or just what the prevailing political winds instruct him to believe on any given day just to get elected. It’s obvious to anyone paying attention that in these debates, you can actually see the mental wheels in motion retrieving answers from his data bank and he knows he is going to deliver Godspeed. This equates to competence. He is a commanding force on a debate stage. Actors in Hollywood have the same abilities, look real good, rehearse their parts and make an insane amount of money at the same time. Obama has the same gift.

    I respect yours, and anyone else’s right to be pro-Romney, please respect mine to be pro-Perry~

  • sunshinek67

    Mitt’s 59 point plan, Cain’s 9-9-9 plan, Rick Perry’s ONE plan. Simplicity at it’s best~

  • bzip

    http://www.thecypresstimes.com/article/News/National_News/GOV_PERRY_UNVEILS_JOBS_PLAN/51698

    http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/14/rick-perrys-extensive-energy-plan-echoes-palin-drill-baby-drill/

    Hopefully Redstate will offer some coverage of Perry’s Plan

    http://www.politico.com/morningscore/1011/morningscore437.html

  • mattwaters

    Erick, Rick Perry will not be the nominee. It’s time to move on fella. And Ron Paul’s new Pro-Life ad may be the last piece of the puzzle for his big win there. Then on to NH where Paul finishes 2nd. This is unless, of course, NH is first, then Iowa, so, Paul comes in 2nd in NH, then wins Iowa. Hummm….

    Then what? We’re in SC….and Perry is still trying to complete a sentance, or to start and finish a thought. He is Winnie the Pooh. “Hummmm where was I…oohhhh dear….”

  • lizaz

    Sorry,gekster….just thinking out loud. My point about in-state tuition for illegal aliens was they are given more rights than U.S. citizens so many times. They are ILLEGAL, and that’s the problem with the law. Why do we only enforce some laws?? Is it to pander for votes??? Until there is a secure border and an immigration policy which is enforced, they are still ILLEGAL aliens. and there’s nothing wrong with the universities in the state where my grandchildren live..one has graduated and one is attending right now. I read all of these postings, hoping to get some ideas regarding the Rep candidates. We are so afraid of another four years of the current administration….we just want to have the best candidate we can get…and it that doesn’t work, so be it. I apologize if you think I’m off base. I feel listening to others can help in the decision making.

  • poquinn

    in the general election, even Romney. However, Romney is McCain II (Obama Lite), whatever you want to call him. He’s the worst of our choices. You say he moved to the right. I say he did that to win the nomination. Once accomplished, he would move left again to win the White House. The further left when he wins that. Just look at his record in Mass.

  • tyman

    Romney and Obama, not so much.

    I have my doubts about Cain, too.

    Ron Paul will NOT be the nominee. Not sure I trust him either.

  • tyman

    But at least Winnie the Pooh is loyal and you can trust him.

    Romney and Obama, not so much.

    I have my doubts about Cain, too.

    Ron Paul will NOT be the nominee. Not sure I trust him either.

  • thirstyboots

    I have very little patience for ad hominem remarks. I won’t reply to another comment of you as long as you don’t apologize.

    It’s quite hilarious to say that by January 2007 the field was defined. Even more when you don’t even mention, say, Fred Thompson.

    The idea that DeMint’s support for Romney wasn’t enthusiastic is truly bizarre considering the link I provided above.

    Plus, why on earth was Giuliuani’s record dismal for conservatives and Romney was tolerable? Giuliani’s record was far more conservative than Romney’s (and the same was true for McCain, Fred Thompson and Tommy Thompson – who was a Tea Party governor before the Tea Party even existed). If we’re talking about record.

    The truth is that lots of conservatives care for identity over policy. That’s why many here consider Perry more conservative than, say, Mitch Daniels, arguably one of the most conservative governors in America in the last 40 years – and with a record of implementing an incredibly conservative agenda. But Perry talks louder and uses religion on his sleeve, so he becomes the favourite of the “I want something to fight for me, darn it” crowd.

    Anyway, I digress. I’ve predicted that DeMint will endorse Romney and sooner rather than later. We’ll see who’s right in a few weeks. Then I’ll be delighted to read your spin.

  • tnguy

    at random internet Ron Paul guy. Amazing he has managed to cobble together a small but fiercely loyal cabal of dopeheads, independents, and libertarians. It might make a good made-for-cable movie one of these days, but it’ll never equal more than 5% in a republican primary.

  • thirstyboots

    And presents any sort of proof for her claim or else apologizes for being a liar.

  • thirstyboots

    My point is that arguments like “X is from there so he must be good/bad” are stupid.

    Apparently you agree with me and disagree with the person I was replying too. Thanks for your support.

  • APA Guy

    refers to an attack on an opponent’s character. Scope’s challenge of the accuracy of your posting information is an appeal for better and more informed information, not a personal attack.

    Learn the difference.

  • APA Guy

    Yep…that’s definitely viable…

    (HEAVY snark)

  • powertothepeople

    apologize for pointing at a moron, and in your case, a liar. So by all means, do not waste my time by replying to my comments with your nonsense. As far as being civil, get a life. I am not your friend and when you come onto a conservative board spreading plain out lies, I am going to be as uncivil as the site allows. If that hurts your feelings, go get a hug from mommy.

    Now, to restate the actual truth which you seem too stupid to understand, there was never an enthusiastic endorsement and your link proves nothing different, there were choices between crap and smellier crap Demint chose the least smelliest. If you are too dense to understand that, not my problem. DeMints record shows he would never enthusiastically support a moderate republican at best if not a left leaning republican. Again, if you have fallen too many times on your head and the remaining functioning cells are unable to grasp this fact, your problem not mine.

    And if you think DeMint will endorse Romney this time, you are too stupid to walk much less post on any legitimate site.

    Civil enough for you?

  • powertothepeople

    Fred Thompson was 2008′s version of this years Sarah Palin. So please do not play coy, you are not smart enough to pull it off. Other than website fanatics, no one was willing to get behind a guy who waffled back and forth for months and when he finally did get in, never took it serious.

    God I hope your stupidity gene does not pass down to further generations.

  • Xasteius

    entered the race. While I support him because he has the best character of any person currently running, he needs to realize he’s not in Texas anymore.

  • n2sooners

    By giving perks to children of those who come here illegally. His greatest sin though was personally attacking anyone as heartless who thinks that the children of illegal aliens should have to pay as much as most American children if they wanted to attend a college or university in his home state.

    When you hold a position that goes against the majority of the voters whose party nomination you are seeking, it is never a good idea to personally attack those who disagree with you.

  • Scope

    Perry does not encourage illegal immigration. He signed a bill that was passed by his state’s legislature with only 4 dissenting votes, and which was supported by 75-80% of the Texas citizens. If your tender sensibilities were shattered by his heartless comment, were you as outraged when Cain said that any blacks that continue to vote for Democrats are brainwashed? Were you as incensed when Cain said that he wouldn’t have any muslims in his administration?

    Out of all three of your comments on this site, it is obvious you have another pony in the race, and have come here for the sole purpose of bashing Perry with still more idiocy.

  • sunshinek67

    puerile~

  • Danielle Davis (ocleverone)

    unless Romney repudiates Romneycare.

  • APA Guy

    Funny stuff…Martian Land is thataway

    <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

  • defenseconservative

    She’ll just move on to the next lie.

  • Danielle Davis (ocleverone)

    My bad.

  • defenseconservative

    I’m still surprised that some people are giving Cain a pass on them.

  • n2sooners

    Make them pay the same rate every other student who isn’t a legal Texas resident has to pay. Then if they want special treatment they could always go to California and live on California taxpayer’s dime.

  • tyman

    simply does NOT understand.

    Illegal immigration is a TERRIBLE drain on the state. Perry simply has no authority to stop it, nor does he have the power to deport.

    Regarding in state tuition, Texas has tried to make lemonade out of the lemons that the Feds have given them.

    When I hear people talk about the “I don’t think you have a heart” comment and how they’re bothered, I think they’re letting their emotions get the better of them. Instead of just getting offended and picking another candidate, do some research and try to find out why Perry signed the bill. Perry’s more of a pragmatist than people give him credit for, and that makes him more like Reagan than any other nominee.

  • Scope

    loser. You can’t accuse someone of being a liar when you know that what was posted was the truth. Here is your proof, right from the lefties themselves-

    a href=”http://mediamatters.org/blog/201101030042

    “But here’s the thing: The Cato Institute is a Soros grantee. Indeed, a simple Google search reveals that in 2010 Cato received a grant from Soros’ Open Society Institute for “$80,000 over 2 years to support a public and policymaker education campaign on the threats to civil liberties that a national system of identification would pose.”

  • n2sooners

    Do you not believe that offering Texas students lower rates to remain in state to attend a tax payer funded college or university is any incentive to them to stay in state? If so, how could offering those rates to children of illegal immigrants NOT be an incentive to remain in state? And if not, then why should tax payers offer any reduced rates and not just average the rates out leaving a single rate for everyone?

    As for Cain, I am not offended by the brainwashing statement since I agree with him and I’m not a black democrat. I think the Muslim statement wasn’t as smart, but I don’t find it offensive. I did find his statement attacking Perry over the name of the property his family leased offensive and stupid. Likewise I found Bachman’s statements attacking Perry to be offensive and stupid. I think conservatives personally attacking other conservatives is stupid, and Perry’s statement not only personally attacked his conservative opponents, but all conservative voters who disagree with him.

    I had high hopes for Perry getting into the race, but he so far has failed to deliver. I still have him in my top three and he is well above the likes of Romney, but I call them like I see them. Lower rates are an incentive and I take personal attacks personally.

  • gekster

    be sorry. Until I did the reaserch, I didn’t have a clue about it either.

    And if you look at illegals given so many rights, it is from the Federal level that those rights are given.
    The feds say you can’t deport them,you have to give them welfare and healthcare and educate them.
    When Arizona passed a law trying to deal with them,
    it wasn’t another state that sued them.
    It is at the federal level that is dragging thier feet on sealing the border.
    Texas has done more to seal it’s border in the ten years that Perry has been Governor than the feds have done in the same ten years.

  • defenseconservative

    What next? DailyKos and MSNBC as sources?

  • Scope

    As I said, here is your proof, “right from the leftists mouths.”

    Again, there’s your proof creep. And actually, if you read the piece, they say you can find the Soros donation anywhere on Google. So if you want more proof, just Google it.

    You owe me an apology for falsely calling me a liar.

  • lizaz

    who would know better than us in AZ. I still don’t agree with the TX policy, but if it’s working, then good. We are 100% for legal immigration, not those sneaking in….it’s so costly to every state where they abuse the welfare, education and medical systems. I still feel it’s wrong for the Feds to only enforce the laws they agree with. Just like the Solyndra deal…the Feds changed the bankruptcy payoff order to put the individual investors ahead of the taxpayers….I believe the law gives taxpayers the first right to any proceeds. If so, how is it this can stand??? We are “involved” because we vote, and try to do so in an informed manner. We don’t “whine”, we ask questions. Thanks for your thoughts….

  • Scope

    According to this article,

    “In a 1994 debate with Ted Kennedy, Romney said that he was an Independent during the time of Reagan/Bush, and that he wasn’t looking to return to the Reagan/Bush years.”

    Ain’t that the truth.

  • carolynr

    Thank you Avagreen…you picked that up from me on this blog or on the WaPo.

    Fact – Romney is a RINO. In fact, that description is a step up seeing how he ran left of Teddy in MA for the Senate seat. This man will ruin the country even further. He is incapable of making hard decisions. As Erick pointed out…he used Michelle for his own end game…I am sure most of America saw it…either that or he wants her as VP to get hold of the TPM. Either way…if Michelle goes with Mitt…she is not Conservative. In fact, any of these candidates that back him that call themselves Conservatives…are really wolves in sheep’s clothing. Christie…sure…he even goes for appointing judges that approve of Sharia Law. Forget principles Chris…they are a big voting block in NJ. I’d like to hear where Ann Coulter comes down with Romney.

    I listened to the debate again…as was suggested on this board. The one that really won the debate was Newt. However, Perry held his own and also answered the Reagan question with Mr. Brain (Mitt) could not. In addition, at the very end, Perry summed it up…This is about JOBS, deregulation, getting rid of Obamacare and ENERGY INDEPENDENCE. The rest will follow…and with Perry…it won’t take long for that to happen…Democrats and all.

    Cain got hammered and I don’t think his plan will fly..even with Art Laffer. Like they said in ’92…it’s the economy stupid…and an extra sales tax will kill us financially. So, because he continues to use 9/9/9 as the ONLY solution…it now becomes the NON SOLUTION.

    Bachmann made a mistake about Medicare. I think she is done.
    Huntsman – he is done…too prissy. Isn’t that a good description of him?
    Santorum – Rick…are we going back to the Industrial Revolution with union workers? dud…dud…dud. It’s nice to have manufacturing come back to the USA…but all the cities in PA will have to file bankruptcy in order to get rid of out of control union wages and benefits.
    Paul – he’s right on the FED…but there are other things affecting our world.

    If this is a center right country…then to offset people like these Wall Street Nuts, we need a REAL CONSERVATIVE to bring this country back to center right…because we are going off the left hand cliff.

  • gekster

    I didn’t know that you are in Arizona.
    You obviously have first hand knowledge of the situation.
    Just to let you know, Perrys’ stance on imigration is to enforce the laws on the books at the federal level.
    I have been saying that for awhile.
    We don’t need imigration reform,
    we need imigration enforcement.

  • barleycorn

    to describe your feelings about His Mittness.

    Hate is a very harsh word.

    I don’t hate Obama (I hate his politics) so I surely don’t hate Romney.

  • defenseconservative

    I didn’t call you a liar, I merely said that you move on from one lie to another. that is true regardless of the subject, including the issue of financing the Cato Institute. An article from a lefty website like Media Matters is not “proof”. Financial statements would constitute proof.

  • Scope

    I’ve just read an article about the Perry energy plan over at Ace of Spades. I mostly agree with his points. Most importantly I agree that this is a plan that is tangible. Everyone uses oil and/or natural gas every day.

    I sat in the horrible odd/even license plate gas lines during the days of Jimmy Carters austerity. I owned many of those dang sweaters he was pictured in in front of the fireplace.

    I remember the sharp rise of food prices just a few years ago when farmers like archer daniels midland etc started growing corn for ethanol, which removed much of the food corn production lands, and increased the price of everything containing food grade corn, including feed for our cattle, chickens etc. Shortly after, we were paying $4.00 per gallon for gas. That seemed to be the breaking point for many.

    In my area the gas price has fluctuated between $3.25- $3.50 for the last few months. Obama opened the strategic reserve, and flooded the gas market with about 4 days worth of auto fuel.

    Drill here drill now is something that is right in front of your eyes on a daily basis, unlike a tax plan, which has not yet been completely articulated, or rated. As stated in Ace’s article, it’s hard to wrap your arms around something that is still not fully known or explained.

    In Perry’s speech he said his plan would revitalize American manufacturing. Ace isn’t sure how that works out. I would suggest looking at the partial list of products that utilize petroleum in their manufacture. With much lower costs for the purchase of this product, in addition to much lower transportation costs, it makes sense that with much more domestic energy production, the costs for many items goes down. We are also not dependent on hostile foreign countries that this country will no more transition away from than bacon and eggs for breakfast.

    Perry’s rollout- “Make what Americans buy, buy what Americans make, and sell it to the world.”

    Who knew that petroleum was in Dentures?

  • Scope

    We are also not dependent on hostile foreign countries for our oil supplies, and this country will not transition away from fossile fuels than they will transition away from bacon and eggs for breakfast.

  • Scope

    a man of honor or honesty.

    You are like a flea buzzing around causing nothing more than some annoyance.

    Smack, no go away.

  • defenseconservative

    In other words, it’s a typical Blairite product.

    Perry says he would strip the EPA of its authority to regulate coal.

    Excuse me?

    What Constitutional authority does the EPA have to regulate coal? None!

    What Constitutional authority does the federal government have to even maintain an EPA? None!

    The entire subject of the environment is OFF LIMITS to the federal government, as the Constitution does not authorize the federal government to handle that issue at all!

    The Constitution does not authorize the federal government to handle ANYTHING not explicitly entrusted to it in the Constitution!

    The Constitution states clearly that anything not explicitly authorized to the federal government is reserved to the states or to the people!

    Perry clearly does not believe in a limited government of enumerated powers. He’s no supporter of states’ rights, despite his claims to the contrary. If he did and were, he wouldn’t have been calling for trimming the EPA’s regulations around the edges, like Congressional Republicans are trying to do. Instead, he would’ve called for a total abolition of the EPA (and replacing it with nothing) along with all other unconstitutional federal agencies, including the Education Dept., the DOE, the DOI, the DHS, the DHHS, the DOT, the DHUD, the DOC, and the DOL.

    Perry clearly does not believe in a limited Constitutional government. Of course, to us Texans, it’s not surprising, because we know him first-hand and we know that he’s a big government liberal.

  • defenseconservative

    then why do you even bother to reply to my comments? Hey, I’m just a fly buzzing around! ;)

  • izoneguy

    In this case Nixon….

    If a President has the power to create a dept then he should have the power to get rid of one. Reagan tried to get rid of the Dept of Education.

    It will take Republican control of the Senate & the House to gut an agency.
    I am sure Perry wants to abolish the EPA. He cannot come right out and say it
    or he will be accused like he was on the SS ponzi scheme.

  • bzip

    Perry’s plan sure does believe in limited gover’t and take that into consideration.

    Though my guess is you are more interested in the pizza man’s plan that not only increases gov’t by now adding yet another tax stream but seems to be the general interest of the cain folks.

  • defenseconservative

    And it would not cause the repercussions that the “Ponzi scheme” remark caused him.

    He will not call for the EPA’s abolition because he doesn’t believe it should be abolished, and that’s because he’s a Big Government Liberal.

    As for the lie that the President can’t get rid of an executive agency – in Texas, we have a saying that applies to it: “Don’t urinate on my leg and tell me it’s raining.”

    The EPA, the DOE, and the ED were created by Executive Order and therefore can be abolished by an Executive Order.

    Any executive agency can be abolished by an EO, because all exec agencies are controlled by the President.

    The President also can, and should refuse to maintain any unconstitutional exec agencies and to disburse any funds appropriated for them by the Congress. That is his DUTY as a result of his Presidential Oath.

  • Aaron Gardner

    Serious question.

  • gekster

    And we know what a flys favorite food is.

    And you do owe Scope an apology, you did call her a liar.
    Soros does give money to Cato, and they let him give speaches there.

  • Scope

    Romney.

  • gekster

    That is, besides it being Perrys.

  • evilleramsfan

    That these agencies exist and one can’t just suddenly close all the buildings and tell everyone to go home. It needs to be a slow but continual process. His energy plan is spot on and will give the economy and immediate boost which will grow as production expands.

  • bzip

    the lap dog, Cain ;-)

  • evilleramsfan

    The one thing that not many have mentioned is the residual benefit nationwide. The ability to extract more oil and at will?.. will slash the cost of crude. Even if OPEC cuts all production, the cost will by no means exceed what it is currently. The benefit is that the cost of shipping, refining, and distributing will drop precipitously since it will be done nationally instead of internationally. Take out the other items that add to the price due to EPA interference, and we will see a big drop in petroleum products. This, in turn, leads to cost saving for production of goods and services. This allows for lower prices for consumers, chances for expansion of businesses, and enhanced economic spending.

    That is just from the petroleum angle. By cutting back EPA to being a monitoring agency, it allows the coal, electric, nuclear, and raw materials industries to expand and become more competitive internationally?.

    BTW- ?the sky is falling? angle from the activists doesn?t cut it and their actions comes at the expense of out economy. They can go picket China and India and come back when the violations of those countries doubles that of this country (which will never happen).

  • Jim Tomasik

    In the middle of a work .

  • Jim Tomasik

    In the middle of a regular work day.

    He’s got to be happy with that.

  • Scope

    Cavuto asked him about the criticism he is getting in many placed about his 999 plan. The usual unflappable Cain was very defensive. It may just be the period when we see how Cain reacts to negativity and questioning of his ideas. He said that if anyone wants to know how they did the analysis on his plan, they could call his campaign people for the details. ??? I thought he was releasing that to the public.

  • earlgrey

    I was just asking my husband on the phone if he wanted to go see Herman Cain at the Freeman park tomorrow. I didn’t know it was today.

    I definitely could have gone. I had a terrible work week, but today is quiet. Bummer. I guess that is why they make calendars. My bad.

    I am really bummed.

  • bzip

    The pizza man isn’t very transparent in addition to it being a disaster of a plan will add a new national sales tax, can we say a bigger gov’tt, it will be a dream come true for the liberals.

  • Jim Tomasik

    I was worried a hundred people might not show up.

    When my crew showed up to meet the parks people, the parks guy said they had 50 or sixty people standing in a group because they thought it was yesterday.

    A couple hours early on, I saw we had 200 people already there so I was real happy. Then the crowd started pouring in. If we had this event here in Memphis on a Saturday, I bet we could have topped 10k.

  • Scope

    The amount of money that has been spent over the last several years to develop clean coal technology, including government subsidizing of that research, in order to sequester the bad stuff from poluting our air. Before Obama even won the presidency, and unfortunately to close to the election, a tape was released with him saying that he planned to bankrupt the coal industry.

    There is another beauty in the Perry plan. He is against the government subsidizing any energy industry initiative in order to level the playing field with energy companies and innovators. He is for all of the above, and either the industry sinks or swims on their own. The solar industry, with the recent investigations into Solyndra and now SunPower, apparently can’t survive without green energy subsidies. The wind energy projects will probably meet the same fate. Perry isn’t for bankrupting companies, he is for allowing the private industries to either advance their technologies, at their own expense, and if they can advance a source that is affordable to the American citizens, have at it.

    Yes, Perry’s plan will unleash job creation, cut out the roadblocks, and I believe there is a section in there somewhere where he blocks the entire initiative from being delayed, stopped, and/or controlled by crap lawsuits. The environmentalists have been succeeding in preventing us from doing anything by holding projects up in courts for years.

  • acat

    Why do you believe Perry is doomed?

    Mew

  • pttx333

    you do NOT speak for me, neither do you speak for the majority of Texas. And IF you truly are from Texas, you also know that Perry’s energy plan would create untold numbers of jobs. These jobs would cover most industries across the board all over the entire nation, not just oil and oil-related companies.

    A small suggestion – you might gather more listeners if you didn’t slather what you say with very bitter vinegar.

  • pttx333

    you do NOT speak for me, neither do you speak for the majority of Texas. And IF you truly are from Texas, you also know that Perry’s energy plan would create untold numbers of jobs. These jobs would cover most industries across the board all over the entire nation, not just oil and oil-related companies.

    A small suggestion – you might gather more listeners if you didn’t slather what you say with very bitter vinegar.

  • rightwingmom52

    .
    .

  • rudyt

    Both Romney and Obama are slick, articulate “government to the rescue” politicians, who think that the best ideas of how you should live your life eminate from the capitol building.

    I only caught a piece of the exchange, but I heard Romney praising his healthcare plan while comparing it to the situation in Texas (something about 2 million uninsured children). He clearly believes that his solution is the best. So, how exactly does he go about dismantling Obamacare IF he’s elected? In sort, he doesn’t. He’ll try to “fix it”.

    The only way that Romney gets my vote is if it’s him against Obama. I’ll hold my nose and vote to take a small step away from the unmitigated disaster that the current president has been. If I understand his track record correctly, Romney would be, at best, only a small improvement.

    Perry still has my vote. Nothing that he’s done as governor has disqualified him of my vote.

  • Scope

    If the 999 plan was ever instituted, wouldn’t that require more IRS workers to work the national sales tax angle, or another government agency to collect the sales tax?

  • gekster

    The poster you replied to supports Perry.

    (unless you hit the wrong reply to button)

  • carolynr

    Look…abortion is not in the Constitution either…and not that I want to make it a talking point…but…we are paying for it in Obamacare…whether we agree with it or not.

    Now…about the EPA, having had business with them…these people are off the charts these days…but I will get into that later. The SCOTUS gave them this power to do whatever they want and they are doing it. Ask what happened to the farms out in California…they dried them all up to save some minnow.

    Your argument…NOT PERRY’S does not hold water. What about Cass Sustein, the Regulation Czar…according to our Constitution, Congress makes the laws. ACCORDING TO OBAMA…HE REGULATES instead of allowing Congress to do what they are supposed to do. What do we have…Taxation without representation because regulations have taken the place of laws.

    Before you go pointing the finger at Perry…better look at little closer into OUR PROGRESSIVE, MARXIST, GOVERNMENT. Perry is not a liberal either.

  • carolynr

    With what I believe to be one of the biggest components to getting us going again…how much time do you think that ANY OF THE NETWORKS, including Fox will give this? I am waiting Fox…your fair and balanced doesn’t play anymore.

  • porkandcheese

    It’s getting rave reviews on Pajamas Media.

    http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/10/14/rick-perry-unveils-energy-plan-to-get-government-out-of-the-way-and-get-america-working-again/?singlepage=true

    Perry?s plan calls for using the power of the executive to rein in the EPA, while also opening up more land to energy exploration and use. This plan is smart, hitting our economic problems from more than one angle at once, and in a way that can be implemented quickly. The Achilles heel of the Cain 9-9-9 plan is that it requires Congress to approve it. No matter how good that plan is, Congress will monkey with it. Congress will mutilate it. 9-9-9 will soon become 10-10-10, or 15-12-18 or worse. Or, after Congress messes with it, it will end up getting vetoed. The chances of such a plan surviving contact with Congress intact are remote.

    This is what we’ve been waiting for from Perry, and it couldn’t come at a better time. He has established that he is a distinct alternative to Obama. He has reached out to Hispanics instead of pandering to moderates. Now that Cain has been in the spotlight, voters can examine his 999 plan. Nobody is going to support a new tax during a recession. Perry’s plan tackles inflation and unemployment. Cain and Romney are running as technocrats, as opposed to Perry who is running on kitchen table issues. Now he just needs to throw the kitchen sink at these conservative pretenders.

  • bzip

    Thanks much. Perry has a great plan, something straight forward and can get jobs going quickly. Drill baby drill.

  • avagreen

    http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000051131

    http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-friends/index.html#/v/1217880969001/perry-unveils-jobs-plan/?playlist_id=86912

    http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/14/rick-perry-i-hope-i-make-progress-every-day-in-my-debate-performances/

    Of course, I’m assuming you can drop your prejudice against “rocks” and against Texans! LOL!

  • windwaker24

    Here’s what I think: Obama will have nothing to say to Gov. Perry concerning jobs and the economy. Texas, under his leadership, is growing jobs while Obama is losing jobs. Both were handed a bad economy but Texas is thriving. Obama’s America is not. Perry will be able to showcase that getting the government out of the way grows an economy. Obama’s big government solutions cannot boast the same. I think Obama is the one that will be speechless. Also, Obama is not too “inspiring” when his crutch is taken away–the teleprompter.

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

    I would certainly support Cain, or Newt, or about anyone else over Romney.

    The more I look at it, Romney is running for the GW Bush, third term.

    There are a lot of similarities, Both sorta conservative but not really, both rich kids with an elitist view of government and policy,

    It could be very bad for us to pick Romney.

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

    nt

  • earlgrey

    nt.

  • wearethevigilant

    Who of theses folks has the most conservative record?
    Who along with Congressman and future Indiana Governor Mike Pence has argued for conservative principals regarding honest money?
    Who has been the most ardent advocate for the unborn in congress?
    Who has NEVER voted for a tax increase
    Who, on conservative principals, voted against the Patriot Act that subverts the Regan admonition of the maximum amount of liberty within the bonds of traditional law and order?
    Who along with Constituition Institute President and former Congressman John Hostettler opposed the Intervention into Iraq on grounds that it didn’t meet the principals of the Christian Just War Doctrine?
    Who opposed the bailouts, TARP?
    Who has NEVER voted for any unbalanced budget
    Who, Along with Michelle Bachamann, stood against the recent raising of the debt ceiling?

    His record speaks for itself.

  • gekster

    Who wants to let Iran, who have stated time and again, that Isreal and the US must be destroyed, have nuclear missles.

  • Scope

    and brings on a guest, who states outright he is a “strong” Romney supporter, and the guest says that Perry’s energy plan is just a bunch of noting. It’s all just something on a piece of paper that means absolutely nothing.

    I love watching these Fox hosts slam Perry any chance they get.

    I am looking at you poster here at RedState that claimed that Fox is not partial against Perry. Now tell me Rightwingmom that Fox has no animosity against Perry.. Tell me that again, and again, while Fox couldn’t have Cain on more often than they do. They rotate him out with Ron Paul. Tell us that again rightwingmom. I dare you.

  • Flagstaff

    That’s why Democrats can say whatever they want–they are never held to account for it.

  • izoneguy

    Romney’s 69 point plan is just written on paper -

    Drilling is something that the oil companies are dying to do.
    But they want to know it will payoff in the end and that
    Maxine Waters won’t socialize them.
    America has to produce – all Cain’s & Romney’s plans do
    is trim around the edges and re-arrange the decks chairs.
    You are not producing anything by taxing it in a different way.

  • conservative_dan

    our answer.

  • Scope

    it is Tangible. But hey, according to the Fox hosts, it just might not be good enough to get him back up in the polls. Hey. his debate performances are so much more telling about the loser, this plan is just a little too little, a little too late.

    Going to bed now. Ready to puke at the dismissal of the best plan to come down the pike from any of them. Hey, but 999 rules.

  • intensity

    …a flash in the pan. He will not get the support nor has the stayingpower to go on to the end of the republican fight.

    Romney is a flip-flopping RINO who will not draw a majority of conservative support and will not win the nomination.

    Perry, after the others drop out, will see his poll numbers start to rise again.

  • Flagstaff

    Scope and Tyman are pretty much right.

    **”how could offering those rates to children of illegal immigrants NOT be an incentive to remain in state?”**

    The argument with Perry is more like “in-state tuition is a magnet attracting illegal immigrants from Mexico to Texas.” That argument may be true enough logically, but in the real world it’s a very weak magnet. It isn’t really something that attracts new illegal immigration to Texas, and if it were, you could argue that the people it would attract are the ones that we should be asking to come in legally–people who are concerned about getting their kids a college education years before they can enter. And as you must know by now, it passed by a veto-proof majority.

    Perry does have some problems, mostly caused by an apparent tendency to shortcut his statements in a way that is both easily parodied and easily misunderstood, as well as being over the top at times. “Heartless” was a “thoughtless” epithet, but as with the comments of Herman Cain, I’m willing to give him a second chance and chalk it off to hyperbole and national exposure inexperience. He needs to clean up that act.

    Winning the Presidency requires both superior product (which we have) and superior packaging (which is what these ‘debates’ are testing).

  • powertothepeople

    guess she was right, you were wrong. Seems you were not ready for the debate instead of her, right Mr.”researcher”

    Guess this will be one more apology you never get. Wonder with all you mommy issues and begging for apologies if you will give what is rightfully deserved to scope considering you ask for one yourself when it was not deserved.

  • wearethevigilant

    I happen to be very pro-Israel. Are you aware we used to be friends with Iran. In 1953 we overthrew their leader and installed the Shah. The blowback came in 1979 with the Islamic Revolution. The dictator they have now wouldn’t be there now if we hadn’t interfered with the ruling authority they had prior to 1953. We’ve sown intervention and we have reaped the kinds of leaders of foreign nations that make Hitler look like a choirboy.

  • rightwingmom52

    Hope you feel better in the morning. Or why don’t you put that pent up frustration into doing something constructive like the precinct project? That’s what I’ll be doing tomorrow at our the Shelby County Republican Women’s meeting where I’m sure all the talk will be about how great Cain is doing, and how happy we are about it. That is, when we’re not talking about how great it is that Fox is in the tank for Cain and is so anti-Perry.

    Or if watching Fox upsets you so much, how about you just quit watching it. Just like I quit reading your posts a while back when you stopped saying anything constructive. I wouldn’t have even seen this if someone hadn’t pointed it out to me.

    It’s sad that you feel the need to antagonize anyone who doesn’t see things your way. Maybe once the nominee is chosen, you’ll realize that we’re still on the same side.

    In the meantime, you’re not doing Perry any favors by calling out those of us who like him and are hoping he surpasses Romney, but just haven’t anointed him as our top choice for the moment. Maybe you should write a diary about why you support Perry rather than complaining about those whom you perceive don’t (which is not the case where I’m concerned).

    Rail away if you want. I’m quite satisfied with what I had to say about Fox the first time around which is here if anyone else cares to read it. Otherwise, I have nothing more to say now or in response to any other “dares” you care to throw my way.

  • lineholder

    at Hot Air and thought you might appreciate it.

    “I saw Herman in the Memphis area today and he gave a barnburner of a speech. They anticipated 200 event attendees, but more than 2,000 showed-up. He had more than 3,000 at another rally 80 miles up the road. Hundreds of blacks were there to support Herman. The last time so many Memphis blacks were supportive of a Republican was when MLK, JR. was still alive. That they are supporting Herman Cain is historically significant.

    Herman is one of three that I am rooting for, Perry and Gingrich being the other two. Not one of them is perfect, but after watching Herman in action, I donated to his campaign. As I left the rally I overheard an older black lady say that Herman Cain gave her someone to vote for rather than someone to have to vote against. I found that interesting.”

    flyfisher on October 14, 2011 at

  • rightwingmom52

    A friend who’s in the local GOP and tea party invited me to attend a training session in a nearby town next Saturday. She just sent me this link here, and I noticed there’s one in Bartlett on the list. Just thought you might be interested or could share it with somebody else who might could go. I already gave earlgrey a heads up.

    I don’t know anything about this group except what I read on the site. Not sure if I’ll be able to go, but if I do, I’ll post some info about it if it’s worthwhile since the session in Bartlett is after the one here.

  • gekster

    Thanks to Jimmy Carter, all that changed.
    He took a very good friend, and helped install an enemy.
    Just because you are Christian doesn’t mean you have to be nieve.

  • redmymind

    Fox Noise is clearly for Romney and in the tank with the GOP establishment. They entertain these lesser, go-nowhere candidates who clearly have no shot at the nomination precisely to help dilute the field in favor of Romney. I don’t even take them seriously, unless I’m in the mood for a good laugh.

  • Jim Tomasik

    We are doing it with the help of TEA Party Patriots.

  • Jim Tomasik

    He said some folks will call for an investigation to find out who paid for the Bartlett campaign stop.

    I was busy and not able to listen intently to the speech but I don’t remember him mentioning the book.

    The only thing Cain had to pay for was the cost of getting himself there. These fools just don’t get it.

  • avagreen

    What you are saying is sure news to me.

    I’m not aware of anyone that lives here believe as you say about Perry’s being a big government liberal. And, I’ve lived here for 30+ years.
    Where in Texas do you live?

    “Given that the Texas economy has grown so much and private sector jobs have grown so much, that doesn’t strike me as an unsustainable growth in the public sector.

    But, just in case you’re really worried about it, you can lay your fears to rest because in the last year the Texas public sector has shrunk by 26,000 jobs. In the last 12 months, Texas lost 31,300 federal employees, trimmed 3,800 state jobs, and increased local government jobs by 8,400 jobs.

    (To be fair, this was partially driven by the role Texas employees played in the census, which inflated federal job numbers this time last year. Since the census numbers stabilized, federal employment has been at about break-even.)”
    http://www.politicalmathblog.com/?p=1590#respond

  • izoneguy

    But the one I REALLY like is that it would make OPEC weaker.
    It would slow down the money supply to Iran, Russia & China.
    And it makes us more secure from a military standpoint.
    All those jets & tanks don’t run on green energy.

  • izoneguy

    For 999 to work wouldn’t you have to repeal the 16th amendment?

    Passed by Congress on July 2, 1909, and ratified February 3, 1913, the 16th amendment established Congress’s right to impose a Federal income tax.

    In 1909 progressives in Congress again attached a provision for an income tax to a tariff bill. Conservatives, hoping to kill the idea for good, proposed a constitutional amendment enacting such a tax; they believed an amendment would never received ratification by three-fourths of the states. Much to their surprise, the amendment was ratified by one state legislature after another, and on February 25, 1913, with the certification by Secretary of State Philander C. Knox, the 16th amendment took effect. Yet in 1913, due to generous exemptions and deductions, less than 1 percent of the population paid income taxes at the rate of only 1 percent of net income.

    This document settled the constitutional question of how to tax income and, by so doing, effected dramatic changes in the American way of life.

    So, Herman Cain would have to reverse all of this and pass through Congress a repeal of the 16th amendment and then get 3/4 of the states
    to ratify that.

    Who came up with his 999 plan?

    ?Every CEO says the reason they?re not hiring is because they?re not seeing demand,? says Rachelle Bernstein, a vice president and tax counsel at the National Retail Federation, a lobbying group, in Washington. ?An additional tax on consumer spending will negatively impact that already weak demand.?
    Some economists worry the plan would result in national tax cheating since retailers might offer items for sale at two different prices: one with tax and one without tax for people paying with cash. ?The incentive to cheat is huge,? says Nigel Gault, chief U.S. economist for IHS Global Insight in Lexington, Mass.
    Gault says this is the reason why most countries have enacted a Value Added Tax (VAT) that gets tacked on during the different phases of producing a product. As each tax gets added on, there is an incentive to pass it on.
    Since Cain would eliminate the business deduction for labor but not investment, the plan would most likely cause distortions that might add to the unemployment rate, says [John] Silvia [chief economist at Wells Fargo Securities in Charlotte, N.C.]. ?This would favor heavy industries that use lots of capital and penalize companies where labor is significant and capital is small,? says Silvia. The entire service sector would be disadvantaged, he adds. …
    But probably the largest economic impact would be shifting the tax burden. ?It?s a huge tax reduction on the very top and a huge tax increase for moderate and low income people,? says Michael Graetz, a professor at Columbia University who has testified before Congress on taxes.

    Mr. Cain?s 999 plan is on the right track with its goal of a lower, flatter, simpler, fairer, more transparent tax system. Nine percent would be a wonderful top rate for the income tax, compared to today?s 35% top rate. And let?s face it, abolishing the payroll tax and the death tax would simply be awesome.

    But adding a national retail sales tax on top of the federal income tax (even a flat tax) is a bad idea, because it creates the infrastructure for a federal-level, European-style [value-added tax, or VAT].

    And if Cain?s 9% personal flat tax failed to remain flat (as happened with Ronald Reagan?s promising but ultimately failed 1986 tax reform), we would end up with the worst of both worlds: a confiscatory income tax and a job-crushing VAT.

  • defenseconservative

    Currently, I am not anyone’s supporter. I have serious issues with every candidate who is running.

    For a long time I was a huge Cain supporter. Actually, to say that I was a huge Cain supporter would be a big understatement. Unfortunately, Cain has badly disappointed me in many ways.

  • defenseconservative

    I believe that, and I know that. Even if it’s a “Great Silent Majority”.

    I may not speak for a RINO like you, but most people in Texas that I know share my opinion of Perry.

    I am a native of Texas. I was born in San Antonio in 1947, graduated from a Texan HS, served in Texas with the US Air Force, and spent the majority of my adult life in Texas before I moved out of the state in 2008. Furthermore, although I don’t personally know Perry, I have several friends who do, and some of them have worked for both Perry and his predecessor.If anyone here on RS has the right to speak for “us Texans”, it’s me. Furthermore, although, as I said, I’ve spent the majority of my adult life in Texas, I can proudly say I have never voted for any person, for any office, whose last name was Bush (except in 1980 and 1984, coincidentally for VP, when I voted for Reagan).

    I don’t know who you are, boy, and frankly, I don’t care.

    Yes, Perry’s plan, if implemented, would create many jobs in Texas and across the land (except in FL), but guess what? We don’t need a President or a Congress to abolish all current federal drilling bans and moratoriums and regulations, they are unconstitutional and could be nullified by state legislatures. All Perry would need to do to accomplish that would be to ask the TX state legislature to issue Nullification Resolutions. And that’s what Perry would’ve done if he were a true federalist and believer in a limited, Constitutional government. But he isn’t, so he hasn’t done that.

  • defenseconservative

    Are you not aware of the many Texan conservative groups sending out warnings about Perry? Are you not aware of the attempt by TX conservatives to get rid of Perry in the 2010 GOP primary and replace him with Media? Are you not aware of all the people who protested against the NAFTA Superhighway and Perry’s HPV vaccine mandate?

    Are you a friend of the Bushes?

    FYI: I am a native of Texas and a lifelong Conservative republican. Note which word is capitalized in the previous sentence. I was born in San Antonio in 1947, graduated from a Texan HS, served in Texas with the US Air Force, and spent the majority of my adult life in Texas before I moved out of the state in 2008. Furthermore, although I don?t personally know Perry, I have several friends who do, and some of them have worked for both Perry and his predecessor.If anyone here on RS has the right to speak for ?us Texans?, it?s me. Furthermore, although, as I said, I?ve spent the majority of my adult life in Texas, I can proudly say I have never voted for any person, for any office, whose last name was Bush (except in 1980 and 1984, coincidentally for VP, when I voted for Reagan).

    I no longer live in Texas – since 2009, I make my home in Norfolk, Virginia – but I still have many friends and family members in TX and visit it frequently. I happen to have relatives who fought at the battle of San Jacinto. I have more connections to Texas than you ever will, and have lived in the state for far longer than you have, by your own admission.

    As for the TX state government growing – as I said, the budget of the TX state government splurged by 55% from 2001 to 2009. Here’s the graph that proves this:
    http://www.texasbudgetsource.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Untitled-13.jpg

    Even if you account for pop. growth and inflation, state spending has risen by 34% above that combined rate during these 8 years.

  • lineholder

    interpretations of both the benefits and drawbacks of the type of approach that Cain is taking as well. No offense, but in these days of media bias, I always consider the source. I don’t know where along the spectrum MinnPost might lie. I do, however, have a fairly good idea of what Town Hall’s position is on that spectrum.

    http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/larrykudlow/2011/10/15/cain_the_tax-code_killer/page/2

    Little by little, the details are being discussed. That’s a good thing, from my viewpoint, because at least we’re expanding a bit beyond the scope of what’s been considered “traditional” or “realistic” options that have come out of DC time and time again during the past few years. Perhaps it will lead to better ideas and better solutions.

  • gekster

    showing you speak for the majority of Texans.
    There are 25,145,561 people in Texas, 2010 census.
    I just see one person posting under your screen name.

  • defenseconservative

    And I was badly disappointed by what I’ve read. It’s a half-hearted, half-baked product. Ridiculous.

  • retire05

    except yourself. And to be so arrogant as to think you have the authority to speak for the “majority” of Texas, shows that your arrogance has exceeded your common sense.

    Nullification is not to be taken lightly, as some Medina followers think it can be. Also, if you have spent so much time serving your nation in uniform, it is a shame you didn’t get a course in the Constitution. In case, after case, the SCOTUS has upheld that federal regulations supercede a state’s authority based on the ambigous “commerce clause.”

    Now, perhaps you would have no objected to me, as a Texan, assuming authority to speak for you? I doubt you would blithly accept that.

    Perry’s plan to open up U.S. drilling fields accomplishes a number of things: first, it creates jobs that are well paying; second, it creates a market for support products to be manufactured here, not in China, and thirdly: it takes on the oppressive EPA and basically neuters that agency that is currently trying to crush U.S. energy production. The plan also levels the playing field among all the energy producers and would provide subsidities (tax breaks) only for R & D, preventing more scandals like Solyndra.

    If our goal is to reduce the bureaucratic burden on American businesses and energy producers, the first place to start is the EPA.

  • don12345

    You guys still haven’t figured it out. The reason: Romney already has sewn up the election all the way to the White House. Game over. He’s pitched the perfect game, and we all love winners, and has demonstrated to the right he’s the only one that can give the presidential trophy to the Tea Party and Republicans. He’s shown to the center he will fix America. He has shown to the left the writing on the wall and that they shouldn’t have used the stolen golden vessels of our children’s future for their dinner parties. Obama is scared and is already showing it. The 75% from the right care about one thing, electability, and Romney is the only electable candidate with no one else coming close. Cain, Perry and all the others lose to Obama in double digits except Romney who’s been tied statistically all this year. Now if you don’t want a strong America, you should be sad along with the Democrats, because your weak President will be leaving the White House come 2012.

  • retire05

    Assuming the Texas bi-annual budget for 2000-2001 was $49 billion (it was) when you figure in inflation using InflationData.com tables, to be equal in the 2012-2013 buget, the Texas budget would have had to grow to $67 billion.

    Add to that $67 billion a 26.1% increase in population, people who all require services (driver’s licenses, other licences, schools, personnel to man state offices, etc) that are provided by the state, you come up with a budget that, adjusted for inflation and population growth, would have to be $84 billion to be equal to the 2000-2001 budget. The current Texas budget is $87 billion, for two years.

    Your numbers only work if you don’t count inflation (so we can assume your dollar goes as far as it did in 2000?) and population growth.

  • don12345

    Romney’s pitched the perfect game, and we all love winners, and has demonstrated to the right he’s the only one that can give the presidential trophy to the Tea Party and Republicans. He’s shown to the center he will fix America. He has shown to the left the writing on the wall and that they shouldn’t have used the stolen golden vessels of our children’s future for their dinner parties. Obama is scared and is already showing it. The 75% from the right care about one thing, electability, and Romney is the only electable candidate with no one else coming close. Cain, Perry and all the others lose to Obama in double digits except Romney who’s been tied statistically all this year. Now if you don’t want a strong America, you should be sad along with the Democrats, because your weak President will be leaving the White House come 2012.

  • gekster

    Not kool.

    If you have something to say about Romney, say it.
    Don’t keep pasting the same remark.
    And we havn’t even had one primary yet, so there is no victory for Romney just yet.
    Until he actually wins the Presidency, it is anybodies game to win.
    Polls don’t elect the candidates, people who vote do.

  • retire05

    Every post of yours comes off as talking points that come from the Debra Medina/Ron Paul/Alex Jones group.

    Big goverment liberals don’t veto bills that would allow the collection of sales tax on on-line purchases from places like Amazon. Big goverment liberals don’t lobby for, and get passed, legislation that requires sonigrams 24 hours prior to an abortion, Voter I.D. laws, and the abolishment of ad valorum taxes on veterans with 100% military related disabilities. Big government liberals don’t fight with state Democrats to prevent them from imposing a state income tax.

    Why don’t you just fess up and admit that you have no clue to the mindset of Texans, and you are just pushing your talking points taken from Ron Paul?

  • lineholder

    This type of approach is not going to convince voters that Romney is the best choice for our nation’s future, especially not when you make comments such as the one in your last sentence.

    I know that people who are sold on the idea of how successful negative campaigning can be don’t seem to recognize this, but Americans in general are suffering for a major case of “sick-and-tired-of-being-sick-and-tired” syndrome. That’s reflected very strongly in the kind of political environment we’re facing. An excessive use of negative campaigning in this type of environment is something that people can very quickly add to their “sick-and-tired-of” list, because we’ve seen it used over and over and over again during recent years.

    It just isn’t as effective as a pro-candidate approach is right now. And I’m not accusing you of anything, mind you, but there’s been a lot of negativity going on at RS lately. I don’t know to what extent you may or may not have been aware of this. So I’m just giving you a head’s up. That’s all.

  • don12345

    I don’t see your foolish logic that Romney is McCain II. McCain was no conservative. Rush Limbaugh used to call Romney a conservative until Obama threw Romney under the bus with a horrible federal health care plan and pinned Romney for it. Obama did this to secure Obama’s reelection by trying to make Romney unelectable by his base. McCain’s illegal immigration stance was horrible even though his state was Arizona. Romney strong armed illegal immigration and commisioned police to crack down while he was governor in a Blue dog state. McCain practiced cronyism to benefit his current wife’s fortune which is similar to Perry. Romney worked for no salary as governor and the Winter Olympics, and has said he would work for gratis as President. McCain dumped his disabled wife for a younger richer wife once he found she became disabled even though his wife was the one who single handedly helped bring him back from Vietnam. Romney stuck through his wife’s hardships with MS and cancer and still looks at her with love.

    So please stop agreeing with Obama and saying Romney is McCain II it only lessens our cause.

  • gekster

    Or was it at the time the most conservative in the race.

  • don12345

    Would you really want to see what happens when Perry debates Obama? He would be laughed at. I’m not saying Perry is a bad candidate, he just needs more training like Romney had to go through by losing. If you really want Perry don’t put him forward this time to lose, or he’ll explode like McCain and lose all chances in the future. Let Perry continue so that he’s second in line. If Romney loses, Perry has an open field in 2016. If Romney wins, Romeny will probably step down in 4 years like he did in Mass. once the economy is fixed so Perry can compete in 2016.

  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

    .

  • retire05

    Basically what you said was time-tested political science, but all that got turned on its head with the advent of the TEA Party and the 2010 elections when time tested GOP candidates were tossed out on their ears for a new, more conservative GOP candidate. The Crist/Rubio race is just one example.

    Romney has been operating on the McCain philosophy of “next in line.” He thinks that he has already been vetted, but that is far from the truth. This is a new election, and a new game. Romney’s policy switches on conservative issues like abortion, global warming, and especially Obamacare will hinder him in any debate against Obama. When Romney says he will issue waivers for all 50 states on his first day of office, all Obama has to do is point out that he used the same health care plan advisors that Romney did.

    You have to assume that David Axelrod is so simple minded he is not going after Romney’s flip-flops. He will, and is already. Obama won’t campain on HIS record, he will campaign against Romney’s record. And the fact that the establishment GOP talking heads (like Ann Coulter) are now pandering for Romney is not going to help Romney in a year where Americans are sick of being told who to vote for. Romney can’t respond, honestly, to Obama when his record shows he is not much different philosophically.

  • retire05

    Or are you an informed voter who will take the time to examine the records of each candidates?

    You are one of these people I rank in with the American Idol fans. You want all sizzle and don’t care how bad the steak is. Had you been a voter when Thomas Jefferson ran for office, you would have turned him down. In spite of Jefferson’s brilliance, he was a terrible public speaker, so bad in fact, that he had others read his State of the Union address.

    I would have thought that after 2 1/2 years of Obama, you would realize that sizzle doesn’t equate substance.

  • Xasteius

    Or haven’t you heard of the consultations with John Holdren and the advice given to Obama by Romney’s advisor?

  • retire05

    Romney was a conservative to McCain only in the respect that McCain was a conservative to Obama.

    And Romney only moved to the right when he understood that to have any chance against McCain, he had to change the philosophy he had applied as governor and “appear” more conservative.

    But along came Mike Huckabee, and on a limited budget, compared to the money and man power of Romney, tromped Romney in the Iowa caucus at a time when McCain was dragging his own luggage through the airports on his way to the next campaign speech.

    So while you seem to want to throws stones at McCain, let’s take a look at Romney: Romney campaigned for the governor’s office saying he would end sanctuary cities in Massachussets, he didn’t. The order you talk about that affected MA police/illegal immigration came in the last two months of his term. Nevermind that the Boston Globe reported in Dec. 2006 that Romney (while governor) was using illegal laborers to clean his lawn and tennis courts or that Romney did nothing about it until it was once again reported by the Globe in Dec. 2007. His own advisory staff advised Obama, personally, on Obamacare. When Romney dropped out out of the race in February, 2008, his own campaign manager, a guy by the name of Zwick, immediately started leaning on Romney bundlers to pony up a cool $10 million each for a new venture capital firm that has so far netted Romney’s son, Taggart, a cool $16 million. Just google Romney/Solamere.

    In many ways, Romney is worse than McCain.

  • sunshinek67

    as he reports on his Fox show yesterday Perry’s energy plan and brings a self-proclaimed Romney advocate into the discussion to tear it down. Fox brings in Frank Luntz with his silly focus groups that are pro-Romney, even though they CLAIM to be for someone else before the debate (stupid). Fox also brings in Scott Rasmussen to talk about poll numbers, when he gets to the part of “If the election were held today, who do you think is going to win?” ( ! ) My 3 year old can figure that one out! GOP establishment & pinhead pundits Romney glides, Romney soars, Romney steady, Romney shines…

    Is Governor Romney paying everyone or what? Fox must be sending out the memos with the paychecks~

  • sunshinek67

    by your rhetoric. Are you a troll? NEXT~

  • wearethevigilant

    I agree with you that Carter was atrocious, needless to say is we overthrew the Prime Minister of an allied government that was democratically elected over an oil deal because the British, another ally, wanted to further encroach on Persian rights to their own oil. Churchill lied to us about the Prime Minister’s leaning towards the Soviets.

  • gekster

    I don’t even see that it was implied.
    I can hardly fault my government for something that happened when I was 3.
    It might have been right at the time, given the world situation,
    I don’t know, but I can address things that have happened since I became aware of world politics.
    Wether it was right or wrong to impose the Shah I can not tell.
    But I do know it was wrong for Carter to turn a blind eye on a friend in the Middle East.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    Are we clear? Indicate that you’re actually reading responses to your comments by telling me that we’re clear.

  • sunshinek67

    this time last election 2007, had Giuliani and Thompson in first and second place respectfully, John McCain?s campaign was down in the polls around 10 and deplete of cash.

    Unwise to adhere to the media elites that relish picking the candidate for the GOP~

  • damianvincent

    I’ve been trying to figure out how to create a diary, What I’ve read is to log in, clearly I am, but I dont’ see any button to create one. Where is it at? Top, bottom, left, right? Can only some people create them?

  • westcoastpatriette

    Click on your profile and you should see an edit icon in top right corner. Click on edit and you should see “request a diary” on the left of the page. It may take a few days to be processed.

  • tngal

    Once you’ve logged in look for the redstate rsectangle at the top left, under that you will see a Hot topics Banner. Underneath hot topics is a banner with the titles recent posts , my profile, my diary, create new diary entry and finally log out.

    You want the “create new diary entry.” Punch it once and go to town.

  • damianvincent

    You attempted to access the “RedState” dashboard, but you do not currently have privileges on this site. If you believe you should be able to access the “RedState” dashboard, please contact your network administrator.

    Can only certain people do this, or what?

  • westcoastpatriette

    If you followed my instructions, not sure what the problem is.

  • acat

    Perhaps drop an e-mail to the contact address and see what happens?

    Mew

  • damianvincent

    Recent Posts
    My Profile
    Log out

    nothing about diary, create new diary?

  • damianvincent

  • westcoastpatriette

    That should get you to the next page.

  • damianvincent

    it takes me to an all white page that says

    You attempted to access the ?RedState? dashboard, but you do not currently have privileges on this site. If you believe you should be able to access the ?RedState? dashboard, please contact your network administrator.

  • damianvincent

    oddly I went back in my emails to my first one from redstate re clicked the link to activate my account, and that took me to the dashboard, but I still can’t access it from the site itself. I sent the diary request, thanks for all your help everyone, really appreciate it.

  • circlegranch

    To the good Texans that all of sudden have come forward to warn the unsuspecting folks from other states about the evils of Gov. Perry, I ask, where were you several months ago? Your dire predictions of how awful the country would be under Pres. Perry are rather hollow since you didn’t bring up these issues during the months of speculation before he ran. That would have been the best time to set off your alarms because now, those that support him from other states have had a chance to do their own vetting and research and find that he’s quite suitable to be president. You’ve had several years to get him out of office and failed.

    Try living in a blue or purple state and a state run by a Democrat governor and/or Demcrat controlled state legislature and then you’ll have something to really complain about.

    Perry’s record outshines that of anyone else in the race. Bloomberg just supported the Perry record on jobs and dubbed him The Jobs Governor. The WSJ reported today that Carls, Jr., restaurants can get a permit to build in TX in 6 weeks and a restaurant there will cost $200,000 less than in California due to far less state regulation. It takes 2 years at least to get the building permit in CA, so guess where they build and which state gets the jobs created?

    Highways never built and injections never given may continue to keep you up at night, but facts are facts.

  • tngal

    Ordinarily, I would only call McMoe in for life threatening emergiencies, like a troll or too much pelosi hyperbole. He can whack both out. But a disappearing diary button glitch is pretty suspicious too.

  • defenseconservative

    Or you can’t read simple graphs.

    In any case, you’re completely wrong.

    The $49.7 bn figure takes inflation into account. “Unadjusted” means here that it is the ACTUAL State Budget for the given FY, rather than what it WOULD have been if the growth of state spending were to be limited to inflation and pop. growth.

    The $49.7 bn figure was the budget of the state just for FY2000, when Perry was not yet in office (he was sworn in in December 2000).

    The total budget for the FY2000-FY2001 biennium (Texas, like many other states, uses biennial budgets) was $49.7 bn + $52.7 bn=$102.4 bn.

    And, as the Texas Budget Source website says,

    “For the 2010-11 biennium, total state spending is set to exceed $182 billion, or more than $75 billion in excess of what the state?s budget would have been if growth were limited to inflation and population only.”

    http://www.texasbudgetsource.com/state/where-the-money-is-spent/historical-spending-trends/

    If the state’s budget growth were limited only to inflation and pop. growth, the state’s budget for the current biennium (2010-2011) would’ve been a paltry $107 bn ($182 bn – $75 bn).

  • izoneguy

    Log out
    Clear your browser cache
    Exit out of your browser.

    Start your browser again
    Log back in and see what you have

    If you are still having problems
    Update your software and apply
    and other patches as needed.

    Then rinse & repeat.