« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Perry’s government reform speech.

By: Moe Lane (Diary)  |  November 15th, 2011 at 01:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

So, Governor Rick Perry made a speech today where he proposed the following:

  • Ending the practice of giving lifetime appointments to federal judges (current judges would not be affected);
  • Cutting Congressional pay in half;
  • Cutting Congressional pay in half again if they don’t balance the budget by 2020;
  • Cutting Congressional office budgets in half;
  • Cutting the Congressional calendar by half;
  • Criminalizing insider trading by Congressmen (no, actually, it’s not currently illegal for them to do that);
  • Reducing spending to 18% of GDP;
  • Privatizing Fannie & Freddie;
  • Ending the funding of Planned Parenthood;
  • Eliminating the Commerce, Education, and Energy Departments;
  • Getting the EPA under control;
  • Getting the TSA under control;
  • Audit the government, including the Department of Defense;
  • Freeze incoming federal regulations, and audit all of them for the last five years;
  • Federal salary freeze for all non-military and non-law enforcement officials until the budget is balanced;
  • And cutting the Presidential salary in half until the budget is balanced

This is not red meat. This is raw meat, still steaming from the cow.

In case you were wondering, Texas state judges are elected officials, including the ones on the Texas Supreme Court (also, the Texas legislature is very much a part-time affair). Changing the tenure of federal judges will require a Constitutional amendment, however; as the consensus of commentary on Article III, Section 1 shows, the phrase ‘shall hold their offices during good behavior’ assumes a lifetime appointment on the federal level. While admittedly commentary is precisely that: commentary (it’s trumped all the time by actual court decisions, as anybody familiar with Plessy v. Ferguson, Kelo v. City of New London, and/or McConnell v. FEC could tell you), it’s noted by the Perry campaign itself that a Constitutional remedy is required.  At any rate: if anybody reading this happens to interview Perry in the future, I suspect that the response to bringing up this topic might prove of interest.

At any rate, there’s a lot in there – and it’s direct[ed] squarely at the activist base of the party, and not to the Beltway folks. Expect a large number of the latter to get duly apocalyptic about it in response; also expect most of the rest of the GOP slate to not want to touch this subject with a ten foot pole…

Moe Lane (crosspost)

[UPDATE]: Quick clarification.  Perry isn’t calling for electing federal judges; I noted that Texas state judges (including the TX Supreme Court) are elected in order to give our readers an idea of what the governor is used to in his home state.

*Mind you, I am not a Constitutional lawyer. Just in case that wasn’t completely obvious yet.

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • babykaboomer

    In a political sort of way, of course. But talk like this from the Perry is giving me goosebumps and heart palpitations!

  • daemonocracy

    Most of these proposals can be found in his book Fed Up! which he released last year. In other words, he really believes this stuff and his staunch States Right Federalism is what made him an attractive candidate to me in the first place; he isn’t just saying this stuff now to try and get attention.

    Right now I like Gingrich, we’ll see if he holds strong, but Perry is my back up and will continue to be now that he is improving noticeably in the debates.

  • izoneguy

    Counting on it….

    The wrecking ball is coming

  • acat

    I prefer my steaks to have at least a passing acquaintance with a good, hot, charcoal fire first, but .. yeah. This is pure red meat.

    This is in very stark contrast to the Blue State (nanny-state big-government) model.

    While I think Perry is on the right track, it does concern me a bit as this makes coattails in blue-purple States harder to put together. Would Scott Brown, for instance, welcome GOP nom Perry to speak with him?

    This will (or {darn} well should) resonate with the base of the party, including social and libertarian-leaners, as well as the Tea Party, and that’s really the group Perry needs to appeal to.

    Glad to see this.

    Mew

  • heraklios

    however, due to his fobbles, Rick Perry is no longer a messenger capable of pushing this agenda. Maybe we can adopt it as part of our platform at the convention and nominate another conservative to push it. I think Gingrich would sign on to most, if not all, of this agenda.

  • donald_24

    Only Congress can vote to cut their own pay. Let’s see how well that one works out.

    And eliminating lifetime tenure for federal judges would require a change to the Constitution. I’m sorry, but there is not a 2/3 majority in either house of Congress to pass a constituional amendment saying the sky is blue. The promise of new constitutional amendments are an election year gimmick that some people fall for every year. I’m not even sure there are enough votes for a balanced budget amendment or else we would have had one a long time ago.

  • CincoSolas_del_Bronx

    CEO.

    “Looks like meat’s back on the menu, boys!”

  • acat

    What would happen if, for instance, the President proposed one with half last year’s dollars for Congressional pay, and threatened to veto anything they come up with beyond that?

    Mew

  • defenseconservative

    Before you buy into Perry propaganda, maybe you would like to examine it?

    “# Getting the EPA under control;
    # Getting the TSA under control;”

    Read: these unconstitutional, bloated bureaucracies will continue to exist, they’ll just be slightly trimmed around the edges instead of being abolished completely; in other words, Perry will cut spending only where in won’t hurt his buddies;

    “# Audit the government, including the Department of Defense;”

    That proves how ignorant Perry is. The DOD is on track to have its budget COMPLETELY AUDITED in 2014, as testified by Sec. Panetta, and to have an independent audit agency audit its financial statements by 2017 (the Marine Corps is undergoing such an audit as I type this, and the Army and the Navy are on track to beat the 2017 date). In other words, Perry is promising to do something that will happen without him anyway, while simoultaneously promising to cut libertarians’ favorite bugaboo – the big bad Pentagon. Of course, that’s to be expected, given that he’s in the pocket of anti-defense Islamist Grover Norquist, who cares only about his own money. He and his lobbyist pals waste more of taxpayers’ money each year than the DOD has wasted throughout its entire period of existence.

    Here’s what is LACKING from Perry’s plan and speech:

    No clear commitment to a strong defense and to funding it fully.

    No clear prioritization of federal spending and federal functions, whether along the lines drawn by the Constitution or along any other lines.

    No mention of the unconstiutional USDA, DHUD, or FTransitAdmin.

    No mention of dozens of lesser unconstitutional agencies and programs.

    No commitment to abolish the unconstitutional DHHS, DOL, DOT, and DHS.

    No commitment to end subsidies to Israel.

    No commitment to significantly cut the budget of the DOS and of USAID.

    Perry would cut spending only where it won’t hurt his buddies.

  • donald_24

    Well, that could work. But that would be one interesting fight.

  • usedtobelib

    screwed up most of my attempts in debates to demonstrate my having thought long and hard about how I might be able to help this country as President rather than just as Gov. of Texas (since obviously I never really had given that any thought before being talked into running for Pres), will rely on my good looks and easy manner and to appeal to the conservative base, must attempt to avoid looking like another Herman Cain, so in this speech I will hit every point I think will win conservative voters to my side while hoping others considering whether or not to vote for me will not recall I said little about any of this when I announced my candidacy or had a chance to talk about these things for the last few years. I’ll just hope they don’t realize I am simply listening to pollsters who are telling me what will bump me up in those polls and revive my campaign. Hey, you don’t think they’ll see me as another Mitt, do ya? Nah. They’re desperate.”

    Sheeeeeez.

  • mrmises

    These ideas make for exciting stump speeches and talk radio fodder, but they fail to address the structural problems between the current malaise and a bright future. Also, most of them have no real shot at passing.

    If you think legislators do a poor job now, wait until their pay is cut in half and their employees’ workload doubles.

    Perry’s ideas may force a rightward shift among the candidates for a short while, but he is done as a viable general election threat to President Obama.

  • sandollar

    Heh. Cause both could apply. This is why I think Gov Perry could make a hellacious comeback. It all needs to get out there.
    Foibles like being human? The only thing I’ve been bent out of shape about was the Gardasil thing. In state tuition was/ is a state legislature thing. Oh. I’m on him about some animal stuff (pet type animal), but was that “his” fight? Not necessarily.

    I agree that Newt is likely. Lol He better!

  • Aaron Gardner

    You sure you only used to be a lib?

  • westcoastpatriette

    I would think many independents could get behind Perry when they hear about this as the utter disgust with the feds has reached a crescendo.

    The longer this plays out, the less I understand why the base does not consolidate under Perry and push him to the front of the line.

    Patience, patience.

  • donald_24

    I’m not sure how Perry expects to cut the congressional calendar in half and get all these things done. Not to mention that, under his plan, the number of judicial confirmation hearings would significantly increase if judges lost lifetime tenure.

  • proud2btexasmom

    along with a strong conservative leader in the White House can accomplish mighty things! If we have a pessimistic attitide then we will be defeated. Congress needs to be reminded that they work for us. I assure you Gov. Perry will remind them.
    Chin up… we got this! :)

  • acat

    the fight over the BBA .. because all ya gotta do is compare congressional pay increases over the last 5 years to private sector pay increases over the same time frame. Can’t be defended.

    They want to get their full pay? Fine. Pass a budget that stays under or at 18% GDP first.

    Mew

  • daemonocracy

    Long before any brain freezes he wrote his book Fed Up! and has not distanced himself from it since. This speech is in line with that book. He also has improved in his last three debate performances minus the brain freeze.

  • proud2btexasmom

    ventured nothing gained.

  • bzip

    Look folks, Perry is the real deal. He has a 10 year track record to look at, he has the experience in governing the conservative principles which are proven year after year. He has the right ideas, the best proposals – you can’t find anyone that even comes close.

    I just love the proposals Perry’s has made and he has been talking about ideas like these for sometime now.

    Perry gave another great speech yesterday. If you doubt Perry then you better research his past records and review many of his interviews.

    If you want conservative substance with conservative experience – Perry is the man.

    Perry 2012!

    Perry – Complete Interview AARP- November 14, 2011
    http://youtu.be/cCjvloLOL28

  • acat

    Did you perhaps miss the speech a day or two ago where Perry said that all foreign aid will default to zero and will only be increased based on commitments to U.S. goals?

    I think Israel will do better at that than, say, the new government in Egypt….

    Find some new material.

    Mew

  • acat

    Win the election and you’re a judge.

    Lose re-election, and you’re not a judge anymore.

    Simple. NO role for Congress here at all.

    Not a great strategy, to my mind, but .. it does make getting rid of lousy judges easier than impeaching them…

    Mew

  • mrmises

    No matter how bold they are.

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    The biggest companies in the world get audits every year, why does it take multiple years to get an audit for the Army? And what good is that audit going to do if you cannot do one every year to see trends?

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    since most foreign aid (especially the military kind) comes right back to our defense industry, I am not really sold on anyone really cutting “foreign aid” (not once the lobbyists get at it).

  • mrmises

    A Constitutional amendment to completely alter the structure of the federal judiciary has absolutely no chance of passing. Also, judicial elections are a terrible idea- especially at the federal level.

    Judicial independence is crucial to a functioning democracy. All of the complaints about crony capitalism and constant campaigning would be even more devastating when applied to the judiciary.

    Our judiciary is a model of excellence for the world, and fundamentally altering it for no clear reason is irresponsible and asinine.

  • tailfins1959

    Trying to “fix” what our nation’s founders set up is VERY risky. Let’s not make the judiciary bend to every election. The system of checks and balances was set up for a reason. It’s better not to tamper with it.

  • wbf

    http://theiowarepublican.com/2011/perry-impresses-scott-county-republicans/

    Perry had a good day in Iowa!!

  • defenseconservative

    No company in the world, not even the biggest one (Walmart) is even comparably as large as the DOD with over 2 mn military personnel, about 800,000 civilian employees (admittedly, that’s about 20%-50% too many), and an annual budget in excess of $600 bn. Auditing Walmart is like auditing your local liquor store compared to auditing the DOD (or even the Department of Education). Furthermore, auditing any large organization, including the DOD, is not easy. You can’t just say “I want to aduit it!” and you’ll be able to do so. It takes years of preparations.

    That being said, though, I wish the DOD had become audit ready years ago. The DOD’s previous leaders should’ve thought about that, and should’ve begun to make the DOD audit-ready, many years ago. Unfortunately, the Iraqi and Afghan wars distracted them. But the DOD is now on track to be audited by 2014. Better late than never.

  • acat

    then why is it that we keep hearing about which President appointed a given judge?

    Is it perhaps because the White House is appointing based on ideological rather than “independent” criteria?

    I don’t disagree that there are problems with elected judges, but .. there are problems with the current appointment system as well.

    I will note that the Illinois system uses a “no confidence” vote process, i.e. judges are voted in and then, every couple years, the people are given an option to “retain” them. Further, the campaign finance laws for judges are much tighter than for other elected positions; neither party is supposed to spend money to elect or retain judges.

    It’s a different system, and it has its’ faults, but to call it non-independent in comparison with the current system is untrue.

    Mew

  • retire05

    and what buddies would that be that you claim Perry would benefit?

    Also, I see that one appearance with Grover Norquist deems, in your mind, that Perry and Norquist are now bar-b-quing fajaitas and drinking Shinker Bocks on weekends.

    I suggest you read less Pam Geller and more Federalist Papers.

  • acat

    Many of them “tampered” with the system of checks and balances, granting women the right to vote, allowing an income tax, direct election of Senators, etc. etc.

    I have a hard time taking you seriously .. the system is deliberately self-modifying, although it is also designed to require a good bit of political will to make the changes. That’s one reason it’s outlasted so many other governments, eh?

    Mew

  • mrmises

    We keep hearing about which President appointed which judge because the media choose to report it and it plays into the lucrative R v. D narrative they thrive on.

    There are very few “political” cases in the federal courts in relation to its caseload. Political ideology has very little to do with how a judge analyzes the facts an issues in a case. Competence, experience, and a strong legal mind are the requirements for a federal judge. The politicization of the judicial appointment process is a recent development. Elections would take whatever latent political biases exist in the current system and make them the primary engine of the judiciary. Legal competence and common law traditions would be sacrificed for corruption and incompetent judges.

  • streiff

    I’d say that eliminating life time tenure for federal judges could win. The left doesn’t like Scalia, we don’t like Ginsburg.

    It has a much better chance than a BBA of passing.

    There is also a work around in creating a new federal bench like they did with Bankruptcy judges who aren’t Article III judges but an inferior court system.

  • notpropagandized

    The longer this so-called “weak” field of Republican aspirants perseveres, the better-looking it gets. Perhaps gaffes and stumblings serve enough desperation to evoke the stuff we really like, like steaming, dripping red meat.

    Ranking for the moment:
    Newt has won my mind
    Perry has my hopes
    Cain has my heart
    (Is there anyone else?…, Oh,)
    Huntsman with a reformed image/temperment toward conservatives.
    Romney (sigh)
    Bachmann/Santorum/Others
    RonPaul: What a waste, if he could only recognize evil in the world.

    Does this make sense?

  • streiff

    is constitutional. From Article II Section 2

    He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

    The idea that any federal agency is unconstitutional is just not serious.

  • streiff

    you can buy it on Amazon.

  • streiff

    are part time. I think it is hard to make a case that having Congress constantly in session is a good thing.

  • sethellis

    It’s important to note the intricacies of the insider trading issue. Supposedly the information they trade off of is considered public information. If true that still doesn’t mean what they do is ok. Perry fails to address this.

    Current proposals do not go far enough. All congressmen should be required to place their investments in a blind trust, and they should not make comments on any company, industry, or product so that they can’t give out stock tips. They should be subject to rules similar to those required of Federal Reserve members.

  • defenseconservative

    I’ve actually watched the online recording of the entire debate. And during that debate, he said that each country would have to start at zero, but he would fund Israel substantially. That’s still not good enough. I don’t want even one cent of my hard-earned money to be sent to a foreign country that uses it to bulldoze innocent people’s homes and build settlements on foreign land.

  • notpropagandized

    Suggestion: Keep reducing congressional pay while criminalizing congressional corruption compensation until about half of congress announces retirement. Then perhaps we can observe that true public servants come forth to serve their country without concern for pay, perks or ego.

  • retire05

    Yesterday is a good example:

    In the Senate:

    voted/passed Chron’s and Colitiis Week

    voted/passed COPD month

    convenned 2:00 p.m.
    adjoured 4:58 p.m. until 10:00 a.m. Tuesday Nov. 15, 2001

    In the Congress:

    renamed a national wildlife refuge

    named 6 post offices

    Obviously we are paying Congress a lot of money to name post offices and give names to weeks and months. Yet, here we are, 900 days later, without a Constitutionally mandated budget.

    Texas legislatures earn less than $8,000/yr. They are paid $128/per day in expenses, but only while they are in session. Their average income is around $25,000/yr. Yet, the government of Texas seems to manage just fine with a bi-annual Congress.

    Congress was never meant to be a full time job. Congressmen, and Senators, were citizen legislators, who had farms, shops, businesses to tend to. The business of the people is not naming weeks or months for one cause or another.

  • notpropagandized

    Suggestion: Keep reducing congressional pay while criminalizing congressional corruption compensation until about half of congress announces retirement. Then perhaps we can observe that true public servants come forth to serve their country without concern for pay, perks or ego.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57319075/jack-abramoff-the-lobbyists-playbook/

  • usedtobelib

    reader of people and Perry has never left me comfortable with his “I’ll tell you later” pronouncements.

    We are now suffering from living for three years under a President who had as a candidate only an academic notion of the world, no knowledge of how the bureaucracy of government worked (or didn’t work), no understanding of how successful politics (by this, I mean governance that actually unites rather than divides) is really the exercise of competitive but respectful and inclusive persuasion (think Reagan and O’Neil), a man who figured he could fool people with perceived elegance of language and a fawning press, a man who figured he’d get elected and be successful at governance if he simply took a list of progressive items shoved at him by his monied base, and then rammed a few from that list through Congress simply because he had the numbers to do so, not because he had enough support of the country to do so, not because he had spent any time practicing the art of real persuasion–called politics– not because he had spent time writing about or talking about his overall guiding principles of governance. In short, he took a list that pleased his base, got elected because times were tough, tried to get a few things from that list accomplished by shoving things down everyone’s throats, left his base as well as the 50% of the rest of the country that opposed his items, angry and confused, and has been a total failure as a uniter.

    Are you going to actually tell me you think Rick Perry has given thought to most of what he said in that speech? It’s a damn list of hot items meant to make him relevant in the race. You’ll not convince me it’s the result of any personal deep thinking, not the result of any Reaganesque questioning of what will bring this country back into some semblance of a united country that reduces rancor to the point that we can, little by little, once again achieve greatness. It’s a damn list that reminds me of something those on the left handed Obama. I don’t for one second believe these are things Perry came up with from any “core convictions.”

    Frankly, I am not surprised by such a speech; Perry is not much different than all pols when it comes to his lists. My remarks are mostly intended to remind those who might think “Ahhhh, here we go, the Savior, ” that a damn list of “raw meat.” given at this late date, at time when a candidate has been sinking badly, is no indication of a character that can save a damn thing. Instead it’s a reminder that this guy ran because he was told he could, not because he really wanted to, not because he had thought about it, not because he gave thought to the magnitude of it…..

    I don’t want another Obama.

  • streiff

    to EIGHTEEN FREAKIN YEARS as much of a change. The average tenure for a federal judge is about 20 years, for a Supreme Court Justice 25 years.

    Judicial independence is not affected by making the term a single one, with no reappointment allowed.

  • Change Jar Conservative

    I think judges should be lifetime appointments. I just wish we would fight better for ours that we have done in the past.

  • retire05

    Inside trading is illegal, for all but those who are elected to federal offices.

    The laws should apply to all, not just the “little” people. Congress should not be exempt from laws that would get you, or me, put in jail.

  • gator_hoo

    Just curious

  • Aaron Gardner

    Here is what he is proposing:

    There are a number of proposals which might be considered ? one would be a Constitutional Amendment creating 18-year terms staggered every 2 years, so that each of the nine justices would be replaced in order of seniority every other year.24 This would be a prospective proposal, and would be applied to future judges only. Doing this would move the court closer to the people by ensuring that every President would have the opportunity to replace two justices per term, and that no court could stretch its ideology over multiple generations. Further, this reform would maintain judicial independence, but instill regularity to the nominations process, discourage Justices from choosing a retirement date based on politics, and will stop the ever-increasing tenure of Justices. A similar model could also be applied to appellate and district courts.

    In addition, there are some reforms to the Judiciary that would not require an amendment to the Constitution. Congress has the authority under the Constitution to establish the jurisdiction of the Court. If our courts insist on refusing to adhere to the Constitution and the law on important issues ? be it school prayer, life, the death penalty or anything else of importance to the people ? then Congress should take their jurisdiction away. As president, Governor Perry would work with Congress to establish the necessary changes to the judicial system.

    Let’s make sure we aren’t misinterpreting what is being proposed here.

  • acat

    You’re asking me to accept that the appointed, every one, are legally competent and hew to U.S. and common law traditions. I’m asking you when the last one was removed for failure to adhere.

    Seriously.

    Further, using only the Supreme Court as an example, show me the last Dem-appointee who was anti-abortion or the last GOP appointee who was pro-gun-control.

    Your desire to have a non-ideological bench is admirable, your willful blindness to the flaws in our current system less so.

    Mew

  • gekster

    They always have the dim view of life, where nothing is possible.

  • acat

    A cat is corrected.

    Mew

  • Castor

    Scalia will likely outlive Ginsburg. It?s a no go.

  • Aaron Gardner

    I don’t have time for your lazy ignorance.

  • defenseconservative

    I said that there are many unconstitutional federal agencies, including the USDA, the DHS, the DHHS, the DOT, the DOL, the EPA, and the DHUD.

    I am right.

    These agencies are unconstitutional as they are beyond the Constitutional remit of the federal government (of all three branches of it). The Constitution does not authorize any such agencies.

    The Constitution does not authorize the Congress (nor the President) to create such agencies. And it is the federal government that must look for permission in the Constitution before doing anything.

    The Federalist Papers say that the prerogiatives of the federal government are limited and enumerated, while those of state governments are numerous and indefinite, the former being related mostly to foreign and defense issues.

    The provision of the Constitution you cited pertainls only to the MANNER OF APPOINTMENT of agency directors/secretaries. But there is an important caveat. The President may only Constitutionally appoint directors of CONSTITUTIONAL agencies. He may not appoint anyone as the director of an UNCONSTITUTIONAL agency.

    Your philosophy is a Big Government opinion.

  • mrmises

    The problems Congress has to deal with are much more complex than the problems a state legislature handles. Congress represents a much more diverse constituency than any single state. The results of Congressional activity are more far reaching.

  • streiff

    There would be much less incentive to make every nomination another Gettysburg if we weren’t negotiating a lifetime appointment. With 40 votes constituting a veto of a judge you are not going to get real conservative thinkers on the Court, even at the appellate court level.

  • acat

    he inspires the young upstarts to prove him wrong.

    When the respected old scientist says something might be possible …

    he inspires the young upstarts to prove him right.

    This, of course, applies more broadly than just science. Who, for instance, in 1910, would have predicted the expressway system or the internet or the individual mandate?

    Mew

  • changeforrickperry

    Gotta love some Lord of the Rings! That was pretty funny.

    P.S. Soli Deo Gloria!
    ______________________________________________________________
    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts.”–Winston Churchill

    www.changeforrickperry.org

  • acat

    Willing to cut off the Palestinians, who seem to love lobbing rockets into Israel?

    Willing to cut off the Egyptians, who seem to love arming the Palestinians?

    What of the Jordanians?

    Mew

  • gator_hoo

    A federal district judge (trial level) can only make advisory opinions on the constitutionality of a federal or state law.

    A circuit court (first level of appeal) can declare a state law unconstitutional, but not a federal law.

    Only the Supreme Court can declare a federal law unconstituional, and (this part is flexible to me) if it is a 5-4 decision, Congress can overrule it with a 2/3rds majority.

    Probably can be implemented legislatively, because the Congress has authority over the courts’ jurisdiction (authority to hear cases).

  • streiff

    Congress hasn’t passed a budget since when?

    You could cut congressional sessions down to two a year and we’d survive.

    You are correct, Congress’s activities are more far reaching and that is why conservatives who favor limited government should be in favor of truncated Congressional sessions.

    “No man’s life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session”

  • vaaztx

    ?because CBS couldn’t get their s— together to allow anyone to watch it. Did you try logging onto their web feed?

  • irishgirl

    n/t

  • streiff

    the black letter of the Constitution allows it. There are no agencies mentioned in the Constitution yet State, Treasury, War, and Navy were created in Congress’ first term.

  • curtmilr

    Perry didn’t suggest the election of federal judges, just limiting the appointments to 18 years.
    Perry has held these general views for years, and they are in his book “fed Up”. They are not new for him in this campaign. If you haven’t heard before, you haven’t been doing your due diligence, while the MSM has tried to hide and obstruct the discussion. Debating was the something new, and for an honest observer, his growth in that area is obvious. By the time we get to the actual primary voting, I expect he will regularly vying with Newt as to who is the debate winner, and they will form the GOP ticket in the end.
    Newt’s already using Perry’s “plant a flag saying open for business” lines, both are for zero based budgeting.

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    First, they are auditing them by branch, which makes the numbers more manageable. Second, Walmart has 2.1 million employees and $431 billion in revenue to account for, so I think it is very comparable. And yes, Walmart is audited every year without problem.

  • Bill S

    I KNEW there was a problem with George, Thomas, John Quincy and that crew. Freaking leftists…they were certainly not True Conservatives™

  • defenseconservative

    Is to end all foreign aid programs to all foreign countries indiscriminately.

    BTW, the Palestinians would not have been firing rockets into Israel if Israel wasn’t starving one part of the PA with a blockade and occupying another one, razing innocent people’s homes, evicting people from their own homes, and building settlements on their land, at which settlements you can commonly find propaganda saying that a gentile is worth less than a Jew, killing a gentile is a lesser crime than killing a Jew, and killing civilians who happen to live nearby targets (i.e. collateral damage) is perfectly fine.

    Hamas and Hezbollah are problems that Israel itself created with its dumb invasions and occupations of other lands. Read Stephen Walt’s “The myth of Israel’s strategic genius”.

    Moreover, it should be noted that Israel is by far the larget recipient of the US foreign aid budget, receing more money each year that Egypt, Palestine, and Jordan COMBINED.

  • gekster

    I posted the whole thing there so people could see it with no trouble.
    Don’t be shy, take a look. ;)

  • acat

    can we make Congresscritters use the VA hospital system?

    Maybe then it would be worthy of our veterans.

    Mew

  • retire05

    Article 1, Sec. 2 applies only to those things that are the purview of the federal goverment, as enumerated in Article 1, Section 8.

    Marriage, education, ect. are not part of those enumerated powers. Consequently, there does not need to be a Department of Education since education is strictly the purview of the states.

  • usedtobelib

    Now that’s reallllllly an indicator of how Governor Perry has been thinking for such a very long, long time about his guiding principles and the problems that beset us overseas and domestically.

    Gee, didn’t he just run for another term as Governor? Didn’t he say that guiding Texas was what he wanted more than anything else? That he had no desire to run for the Presidency?

    Wonder what changed his mind?

  • mrmises

    I agree that government is not functioning well now. I agree that less government is better government. However, if the legislature cannot reach a consensus on its current schedule, reducing the sessions would not fix the situation. While there would be a stronger incentive to act in any given session, when you reduce the number of sessions, Congress is going to accomplish even less.

    Right now, there is way to much quantity of action on the federal level. Most of what the federal government does is also of low quality. First priority is reduce the scope of the role the federal government plays. That will require a concerted effort on behalf of congress and whoever we elect in 2012. It will take time. What remains of the federal government should not be dismissed. A full session means that the legislators can competently perform their Constitutionally appropriate jobs.

    Congress has too much on its plate. I want them to empty that plate. Still, I want them to do a good job with what remains. Stasis is James Madison’s greatest gift to our country, and it will take a full Congressional schedule to competently handle the role he envisioned for the legislature.

  • streiff

    I’m saying that view of the Constitution flies in the face of the history of the nation. The Congress can create departments to do anything it wishes, the president, with advice and consent, appoints the secretaries or administrators.

    Education stopped being an exclusive state function when the Congress decided to give federal money to the states for Education.

    So I simply reject the Paultard notion that wide swaths of the government are unconstitutional because some yahoo somewhere says so. That way lies madness.

  • gator_hoo

    Anybody? Bueller?

  • retire05

    you are a Ron Paul supporter? Because you are just as crazy as he has become.

    Now, perhaps you think that Palestine should be its own nation, but maybe you would like to give us all a history lesson in where that concept came from? Who inhabited that land before the crazy Islamists got there?

    Yes, we fund Israel. Because if we don’t, there will be NO Israel, which I am sure would suit you just fine.

  • defenseconservative

    No, the black letter of the Constitution doesn’t allow the agencies I mentioned. The Constitution does not authorize ANYTHING beyond what is explicitly listed in the Constitution.

    The Depts., of State, Treasury, War, and Navy were all constitutional as they are EXPLICITLY authorized by the Constitution, which even mentions the Treasury by name:

    “No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law…”

    As for the other three: The Const. authorizes Congress to “raise and support armies” – that authorized the Dept. of War (today called the Department of the Army). It authorizes Congress to “provide and maintain a Navy” – that authorizes the DON. It authorizes both Congress and the President to manage America’s foreign affairs (incl. foreign commerce), so that authorizes the Department of State. State, Treasury, and War were proposed by James Madison, the Father of the Constitution.

    And BTW, get your facts straight. The Department of the Navy was not created in Congress’ first term. It was established in 1798.

  • Bill S

    Aaron called it the first time.

  • acat

    Please see gekster’s numbers here…

    I snip the following:

    Israel 2,432.30

    Egypt 1,784.60 *
    West Bank/Gaza 917.84
    Jordan 816.30 *

    Looks to me like they’re pretty close… and just what are we getting for our dollars in Egypt these days?

    Mew

  • mrmises

    Thomas Porteous was removed from the bench in 2010. This is a rare occurrence because Senate confirmation and rigorous appellate review are adequate protections against judges ignoring the rule of law.

    Judges do not express political views in their opinions. They do not judge the wisdom of legislative decisions. They judge whether a law conforms with the Constitution as it has been interpreted by the Supreme Court (or controlling circuit court) precedent and whether that law was correctly applied in a given situation.

  • defenseconservative

    The concept of a Palestinian state goes back to 1947, when the UN divided a part of the former BMP into one Jewish state and one Arab state. Since then, one nation got its own state and one did not.

    Folke Bernadotte tried to reconcile the two sides by proposing an equitable peace agreement, and it wasn’t the Arabs who killed him. Israeli PM Yitzhak Rabin tried to make peace with the Palestinians, and it wasn’t the Palestinians who killed him.

    If we cut off funding to Israel, it will still continue to exist and do just fine – it will just have to stop the oppression of the Palestinians and stop colonizing the West Bank – which is long overdue.

    The only thing smaller than your and streiff’s ignorance is your unlimited, unbrindled arrogance. You would be well advised not to comment publicly anywhere again, because every statement you make discredits you.

  • acat

    Seriously.

    Mew

  • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

    …and I believe we have contended in the past.

    Rather than obliging you even with a short-course in basic history, let’s just say that the antipathy towards Israel is comparable to that towards America; those who say 9-11 was somehow provoked are the same people who say [as did you] that Israeli policies are heinous and provoked.

    I would strongly suggest–although I have no influence over RS-policy–that you reconcile your accusations with a smidgen of reality-testing…unless, of course, you also don’t believe the IAEA report on Iran [in which case you're hopeless].

  • daemonocracy

    At least with the internet, he pretty much nailed that 100 years ago.

  • defenseconservative

    The annual payment from the FMF program to Israel is $2.7 bn, scheduled to rise to $3 bn per year in this decade. On top of that, they get $1-$1.4 bn per year from the DOD for “Israeli cooperative programs”, including $106 mn per year for missile defense programs.

    What do we get from Israel, hmmm? Sinking unarmed American ships in neutral waters, Caterpillar bulldozers, evicting innocent civilians from their homes, bulldozing their homes, and settlements on Arab land. No, thanks.

  • streiff

    Navy was an adjunct to War from 1789. So get your facts straight.

    Your entire argument is based on your narrow, distorted, and anti-historical view of the Constitution and American history. Fortunately, your views on the Constitution are not the ones that have triumphed.

    I’m not going to argue this Paultard nonsense. It is dumb, It isn’t the way the government works and thankfully it isn’t the way the government will ever work.

  • daemonocracy

    …yet not a reader of their books.

    Is there an ignore list on here? This guy’s posts are taking up too much space.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    Which is why I referenced it. :)

    I actually can see both the pros and the cons on the idea itself. I wonder if anybody’s ever written a paper on the idea?

  • streiff

    your views on the Middle East are as batsh** crazy as your views on the Constitution.

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    …over which word to use.

  • JSobieski

    There was no effort or interest in creating “Palestine” until after moden Israel was created.

    No clearer proof can be provided that the whole Palestinian movement is just a vehicle to crush Israel.

    Find a map in the Arab world made prior to 1947, and you won’t find “Palestine” on that map.

    Find a book in the Arab world written prior to 1947, and you won’t find “Palestinian” referenced in the book.

    These facts speak for themselves.

  • acat

    As it is, you’re difficult to read.

    I assert, by the way, that the “field is weak” meme is from the MSM and decline to buy into it. The field is pretty decent, compared to 2008 or 2000.

    Mew

  • streiff

    think it was before 2010?

  • daemonocracy

    There is nothing independent about this judiciary anymore. Judges are a back door for unpopular policy legislation to turned into law.

    Appointing judges to extended but not lifetime terms should not jeopardize their independence.

  • Raven

    I don’t complain so much about the pay congressmen and senators get paid because it’s directly tied to what soldiers get paid.

    Now… Cutting the budget for congress’s Benefits…

    And/or changing in the military’s favour the discrepancy between a Congressman’s pay and a PV1s…

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Fed Up is right here.

  • acat

    And by “interesting”, I mean “I’d be interested in a couple shovelfuls of that for my garden”.

    Mew

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    We don’t particularly like apologists for terrorist organizations like Hamas and/or Hezbollah. Aside from everything else, we find that they typically have other nasty personality/behavioral patterns.

    Blam.

  • JSobieski

    it isn’t viable.

    Even people like DeMint and Coburn don’t support shutting down the EPA. Most people put such things in the same category as SS—things to be reformed, not things to be eliminated.

    Is this website trying to build support for things that can actually be enacted. or it is a place where we have mere philosophical discussions with zero chance of anything actually happening?

    Why not focus on actually improving things, rather than attacking the good for lack of perfection?

    One of the reasons why the libertarian movement is such a failure is that it is utopian its thinking and its approach. Instead of trying to move methodically in an incremental manner, people spend their time arguing who is the most pure in their libertarian beliefs and arguing about what is the “best” way to maximize liberty.

    Such behavior is the equivalent of discussing Moby Dick on the deck of the Titanic.

  • westcoastpatriette

    nt

  • JSobieski

    You argue that the Constitution provides enumerated power and enumerated agencies.

    A better reading of the Constitution suggests that Constitution provides enumerated powers and leaves it to the Congress/President to form/organize departments.

    For example, the Constitution clearly empowers Congress re: patents. Does this mean Patents had to be their own department in the government?

    Where do patents fit in your limited list of 4 departments?

    There are other examples of this flaw in your logic.

  • Bill S

    At least as of now, retire05 will be happily commenting publicly here, but you, on the other hand, won’t.

    Shilling for terrorist organizations has a way of doing that to commenters here. Go figure.

  • Scope

    From the diary above-

    “Federal salary freeze for all non-military and non-law enforcement officials until the budget is balanced;”

  • daemonocracy

    Our government is meant to be a bottom up government where the closer the government is to the people, the more accountable it is. State Rights and State Sovereignty are supposed to be recognized and respected and there is no need for the Federal Government to be the busybodies they have become.

    Congress has no business reaching a “diverse constituency”; their representatives are there to represent their own unique constituencies in a limited Federal Government.

  • streiff

    not that it matters because this guy is history because of his anti-Semitism, is the idea that you would create Heads of Departments but be prohibited from creating Departments.

    Carried to its logical conclusion, conservatives who are arguing for the privatization of the US Postal Service are acting unconstitutionally because that is one of the enumerated responsibilities.

  • daemonocracy

    The fat cats in Washington shouldn’t have so much on their plate to begin with. They don’t need it and this country doesn’t need the Feds in session for as long as you seem to think to function.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    The CNBC debate… the CBS/National Journal websites both made streaming available, and it was well televised on a network channel.

    At any rate, if you want to see them go to youtube, and type in GOP debate moxnews… they’ve made available every GOP debate on their youtube channel.

  • center77

    scene as a lobbyist. Some lady said Perry was just trying to step down gracefully, that he no longer thinks he can win, because of the bloomberg poll, but they only showed the poll for seconds, and forgot to mention its a Iowa poll. With the way the polls have gone the last few months, you would think they be honest and say anything can happen.

  • carolynr

    Their job is to interpret the law as it is written…not rewrite it. This would be my biggest suggestion, especially on local and state levels. I want to know if the judge I am voting for is a Conservative or a Progressive. I think they should have to put R or D or I behind their name. Who the heck do they think they are. I am sick and tired of having the judicial system rewrite what the Congress has passed because of THEIR AGENDA. Let America…its people, decide how they want things interpreted…not some judge who has decided that he/she sits at the right hand of the Father.

    I agree totally with Perry concerning his ideas with the judicial system. Look at what that nut did in NJ…Sharia Law…EXCUSE ME…WE LIVE IN AMERICA…under our laws. These progressives talk about freedom of (big word there) Church and State…well…religion doesn’t belong in court except as outlined in the Constitution. So…much of our legal system is based on the Ten Commandments…in so many words…So…it is illegal and unlawful to kill someone. With Sharia Law…their religions allows it!!

  • pttx333

    fiefdoms and playhouses! Music to my ears. That is all any of their moaning and groaning is about anyway – both sides – taking care that their own personal little nests are getting the proper “feathers.” Bah … let ‘em rot!

    This is vintage Perry and what he is all about. Gotta love the guy.

  • center77

    is a awesome idea. it is what we need, these people have too much power.

  • streiff

    is a bad thing.

    Parkinson’s Law states “Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.”

    I think most of us would argue that cutting the legislative year by 25-50% would make Congress focus on what is important.

  • Tbone

    usedtibehere?

  • Tbone

    That would straighten them up.

  • sethellis

    I don’t think you understood my post. I will try to explain better.

    You are wrong. There is no special loophole for congressmen. They are subject to the same rules we are. For instance, if I know what Apple’s quarterly numbers are before they are released, I cannot trade on that information. Your state senator is subject to the same rule. If he traded on that information he would go to jail.

    What is at issue is relevant public information that congressmen deal with on a daily basis. In theory we can gain access to that same information, but in practice it doesn’t work that way. There is context that can only be gained from being in congress. That’s why they have an unfair advantage.

    This doesn’t even address all the conflict of interests issues involved. That’s why I say they shouldn’t be able to trade at all. Force them to put it all in a blind trust.

  • streiff

    when you hit the O-8, O-9, O-10 level the pay is capped below the pay scale though your retirement is based on the pay scale.

    I’d be shocked to find that changes is Congressional compensation affect military pay one way or the other.

  • cheetah2

    haz the best plans.

  • wennejunk

    and as another pointed out earlier – much of the conservative base has apparently made immigration their litmus test over the much more important other issues.

    They are still sulking over Perry’s “you have no heart” comment.

    I’m assuming if he can hang on long enough they will pull their heads out of where ever they have it placed and get over their wounded feelings.

  • miconservative

    Most of it is awesome, but I am concerned about cutting Congressional pay and time in half. Not because we need Congress to pass more laws, but with the size and scope of the federal government we need more oversight. If we cut budgets in half would Congress be able to do appropriate oversight on things like Fast and Furious and Solyndra? How about oversight of EPA? Would probably be fine if Rick Perry is President, but what if we get another Obama?? Our system of checks and balances requires Congress to be a co-equal branch of government and that means checking the executive branch.

  • wennejunk

    If a military retiree is convicted of a federal crime they lose their pensions.

    Congress critters do not.

    Change that law and press forward on corruption investigations and you will begin to drain the swamp.

  • Langley

    Looks like Perry explicitly calls for restructuring the EPA, not shutting it down.

    Nice straw-man though.

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

    More of what is killing you is not an example of good medicine.

  • cheetah2

    I was thinking they are mostly a very creditable bunch. IMHO, Cain didn’t belong there ( he is supremely unqualified). But all the rest have a lot to offer. Mitt is articulate and says a lot of good stuff. Newt is brainy. Perry is passionate and has big visionary ideas, Bachmann and Santorum know their facts, Paul is committed to his beliefs and a lot of what he believes is absolutely correct. There are too many of them, but they do not disgrace us by any means.

  • center77

    does no interviews anymore, he is trying to be the adult (Obama) in the room. Didn’t mean to change subjects. I simply love that Perry has declared war on Washington establishment. They have started with the innuendos again today, trying to make it seem like a vote for Perry is a waist of a vote. The way you can tell they ate frightened is by watching them attack the most successful gov. in the race. Fox wants Romney because they still get to be the anti Washington news site, they won’t be able to attack a true conservative like that.

  • center77

    its gaffe. My Droid hates me.

  • mrmises

    I want Congress to do less. The goal is fewer responsibilities for the federal government. Still, I think to carry out its appropriate, Constitutionally mandated responsibilities will take longer than 2 sessions would allow.

    I think that more time for less work will result in an improved product.

  • JSobieski

    Someone up threat criticized Perry for merely wanting to fix the EPA, not end the EPA.

    Nice drive by misread though . . .

  • retire05

    Where in the Constitution does it give the federal government authority over education? It does’t. The authority of the federal goverment is well outlined in Article 1, Section 2. They are few and enumerated whereas the powers of the state, and the people, are many.

    The process by which a president started to usurpt the Constitution started with Jefferson, himself. Jefferson was a dichotomy when it came to presidential powers, feeling that the president should adhere strictly to the Constitution until he became president and then decided that he had the authority to use the power of his office to do what should have been the purview of the Congress (the Louisiana purchase).

    That over reach of power was culminated in the election of Woodrow Wilson, the most evil man to ever hold the office of president. But like FDR, there was no one to stop him, and so for the last 100 years, presidents have taken power that is not legitimately theirs.

    Because agencies have been created doesn’t mean they are Constitutional. And all the things you mentioned, Treasury, Navy, War etc, ARE mentioned in the Constitution.

  • superpatriot

    What do the chances are of Perry announcing and giving details of his plan and Sarah Palin announcing her endorsement for president on the same day??

    Very interesting…………..

  • streiff

    The speech and debate clause gives them a lot of cover if they learn that inside information by way of their duties.

    A state senator is probably in jeopardy, a US Senator or a Congressman really isn’t.

  • avagreen

    At one time I was the medical social worker for the Med/Surg floor.
    I was approached by my supervisor……..get this…….”spending too much time with the vets” (trying to help them with their problems).

    The emphasis was seeing as many as possible between 8-5, not on the quality of service.

    I didn’t stay there long……..didn’t like the unspoken politics of the place. I can see why government workers are such drones. Only that type can survive the bureaucracy and still live with themselves.

    Me? Not so much. As I’ve said before on another post: “I’d rather live in a smaller house and have a good conscience.”

    Didn’t go all those years to school to climb up to the top standing on the shoulders of my clients/patients.

  • streiff

    but to say I’m wrong doesn’t make a good case for why I should take you seriously as the way I believe is the way the USA operates and the way you believe is the way it has never operated.

    If you want to go down this particular rabbit hole of revisionist history, knock yourself out. Just don’t expect anyone to take the ride with you.

  • mrmises

    I say we need to greatly reduce the role of the federal government. I also say that to competently carry out the responsibilities that are within Congress’s purview requires the amount of time it currently has.

    When I say diverse constituency, I refer to Madison. Each member of Congress represents the interests of his or her constituents. These constituencies have a diverse range of interests. The clash of these interests result in Congress making the choices it makes.

    I don’t know how the Federalist papers are Marxist.

  • cheetah2

    where the legislature only meets every other year. The size of the government makes a difference I presume, but Texas is not little, it has the 14th largest economy world wide.

  • avagreen

    She (sorry, can’t remember her name….blonde lady) and Varney agreed that Congressmen/women presently are not subject to the same laws as corporate people (or regular folk for that matter, by inference) , who would be breaking the law (and subject to prosecution) IF they take advantage of insider info to make trades, or profit.

    She was quite offended by it.

  • cheetah2

    :)

  • Adjoran

    One – Commerce has Constitutional duties, especially the Census. Keep the Department, cut out the unnecessary crap, close HUD instead.

    Two – Forget “reviewing” regulations “for the last five years.” Review them ALL – and put into statute (or if necessary and possible, Amendment) that all federal laws, rules, and regulations will expire at the end of ten years (unless specified to be sooner), at which time they will be reviewed and MAY be reauthorized only by being approved by Congress and the President again, like any other law.

    Other than that, it sounds like a darned fine start to straightening out the mess.

  • retire05

    Where, in the 18 enunerated powers of Article 1, Section 2 does it address education?

    So, are you telling me that the way the USA [goverment] operates is Constitutional just because that is the way it is done now? Are you telling me that what I said is the way the USA [government] has NEVER operated?

    My history is not revisionist. It is what it is, and no amount of lipstick on that pig makes it any less a pig. Presidents, starting with Jefferson and culminating with Obama have taken powers never intended for them to have.

    Now, you can accept that the Constitution has been bastardized to suit the agendas of presidents, or not. But that truth is unassailable. And the only power to halt the theft of authority by a president is Congress and the SCOTUS. Why do you think the SCOTUS has agreed to hear the case against Obamacare?

  • Langley

    Oops! Ha.

    My bad. I was following the absurdity of the thread and then got lost, then came upon your post which I saw as a misread of Perry’s position.

    Please accept my apology.

  • retire05

    protests Congress members from arrest only while they are actively in session (on the floor of the Congress) and during travel to and from sessions, except in the case of treason, FELONY or breach of peace.

    The Congress, via the Ethics Committee, has the authority to determine what is a breach of peace. Felony laws exempt Congress from the Speech and Debate Clause and Congressmen can be arrested for felonies at any time.

    Insider trading is a felony federal charge. Also, using information to enrich themselves that all citizens are not privy to would be a misuse of office.

  • serpounce

    with exempting military and law enforcement from pay freezes, but it’s exactly that type of exception that kills these things. If you’re going to do an across the board pay freeze, do a an across the board pay freeze. Start handing out exceptions and the exceptions will quickly overtake the rule.

    Also, while I think the congressional pay cuts are basically a good idea, I think people make too big a deal out of them. Most congress people are wealthy anyway. It sends a good message, but that’s all it is, a message.

  • serpounce

    “Cut X department” does beg the question of what, if any, of that department’s duties will be done by other parts of the government.

    And in terms of reviewing, I’d love to hear some cost-benefit analysis language in there. If you’re going to review regulations there should be some clear standard that they’re being reviewed under other than “does the Perry Administration like this regulation.”Otherwise it’s likely to just fall into the nonsense of politics as usual.

  • JSobieski

    More importantly, do you think the federal government is acting constitutionally if it were to gather statistics related to education, such as graduation rates, literacy rates, scores on various achievement tests, etc?

    The problem with the Department of Education is not much that it exists, but in what it does (and more specifically, what it spends).

    The enumerated powers of Section 8 limit what Congress can do in terms of law making, it does not prohibit Congress from . . . for example . . . spending money to support the Library of Congress.

    Using your logic, we need to tear down all memorials since they are not listed in Section 8 as well. Such logic misses the distinction between “spending power” and regulatory power (Section 8).

    By way of another example, there is nothing unconstitutional about the space program. We can argue about efficacy and prudence, but it isn’t unconstitutional.

    Was is unconstitutional when Thomas Jefferson commission the exploration of North America by Lewis and Clark?

  • serpounce

    FOX has always been a bit down on Perry, I’m really not sure why. It kind of made sense when I thought they had just decided to settle for Romney and didn’t want to hurt him at all, but now they’re all ga-ga over Cain so who knows?

  • JSobieski

    1. Nobody is saying that we “need” to have a Dept of Education. The issue is whether or not a Dept. of Education is permissible. A Dept. of Education that tabulates data, funds certain things, but is not regulatory in nature is perfectly Constitutional . . . although it may still be a bad idea. People forget that we had Pell grants way before there was a Cabinet-level position known as Secretary of Education.

    2. Enumerated powers apply to law making, not to spending. Thus, it was Constitutional for Lewis and Clark to be paid to explore North America. It wasn’t an enumerated power . . but neither was it a law making/regulatory power.

    In terms of constitutionality, focus on actions not agencies.

    A lot of bad things result from DC’s spending powers, but that doesn’t make spending unconstitutional—just unwise.

  • kdubs

    I completely agree, especially since I’m guessing that the “lifetime” appointments were originally far less than 18 years on average. (Given life expectancy, age at appointment, etc.)

  • center77

    after reading about Newts Freddie Mac connection, I really do not like being lied too, and it seems that is what Newt did at the debate when he stated all he did was give Freddie mac a historic perspective on policy. That turns out to be bull. Newt lobbied for them. I’ve been skeptical about Newt because of his past, but Ive always respected him for his vast knowledge. That is not going to cut it when I learn he made 300,000 dollars ro lobby other members of congress to go easy on one of the companies that helped tank our economy. That is what Obama did, and he should have to pay for it. Newt Gingrich is no different.

    Freddie Mac executives have come out and revealed what Newt really did for them, which I guess I already knew that, because why would they pay him that much for a history lesson.

    I was fully aware of Newts past connection to the Washington insiders, like Cain who was a Washington lobbyist, Newt is part of the problem, not part of the answer. I sat and watched so many people get tricked by Cain, now I am watching the same thing happen with Newt. Both of these guys have deep insider ties, both are from Georgia, and both have past problem with women.

    I am sorry guys and girls, but this is the problem, we have allowed the Washington establishment class to sell us their version of the Washington outsider. All the while they have decided to take Rick Perry head on, and its time for us to strike back. We have to get the word out. I write for a couple of blogs, and I hope others will hit the social networks, hit the campaign events, and let people know what is really going on here.

  • Scope

    He insisted that he is a Washington outsider. When talking about the exodus of his staff this summer, he said that he can’t have just any staffers as he is a very unconventional candidate, much like that of Reagan and Thatcher. Haven’t we just seen another egotistical candidate rise and is now dropping in the polls. Don’t we have an ego occupying the WH now.

    I heard that the staff exodus happened because he is very undisiplined and decided to go off on a cruise with the wife at an important time in the campaign? Newt is absolutely the kind of guy that will never listen to anyone, much like Cain, because he is just so much smarter than anyone. How do you work for a candidate who may come down on the conservative side of an issue today, but come down on a liberal side of an issue tomorrow.

    I can’t believe that the former speaker of the house, and a lobbyist, is actually trying to say that he is a Washington outsider. That is like asking everyone to believe that the sky is green with purple stripes, and pink polka dots.

  • federalfarmer1

    I would be fully behind him. But the guy didn’t pull off anything like this in Texas. He didn’t do much to radically reform Texas. He expanded green energy, expanded the budget, raised fees and some taxes, and used tax dollars to give to private companies, many of which were owned by campaign donors. He did enact good tort reform, but given the support of plaintiffs lawyers for democrats, any republican would do that if he could. This looks like desperation from a guy who didn’t take his campaign seriously until he became everybody favorite punchline.

    This is why I trust Newt, we saw him actually make an attempt to radically change Washington. Nobody has tried that since. The GOP is hopelessly tied to preserving its power base in Washington and its own special interests. Newt wants to make history, has a record of trying to do that, and as president, will have the stick to get the GOP in line. Stories about his bad personality and difficulty dealing with people are good things. I don’t want a backslapper to go chum around in dc for four years and worry about the gops image.

  • federalfarmer1

    How about a rule barring former reps from accepting money for lobbying activities for life.

  • georges

    NAFTA Newt, Federal Reserve Cain: they sound like Wrestling Stars. Both are good at the podium. Good speakers. But I have little confidence in their abilities to be Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces.

    Gradually, Republicans will conclude that this election is about one SINGLE issue: the economy. And they will realize only one candidate can possibly see us through the looming budget crises:

    Dr. Ron Paul. He has the only plan for controlling spending that has a reasonable chance of passing through Congress, and he is the soldiers’ choice for being their Commander in Chief.

  • federalfarmer1

    I know Newt took a lot of lobbying money and blew it at Tiffanys. The guy isn’t the most principled, but he is effective, determined, and convincing. If you want principled, vote santorum or ronpaul. If you wanted straightlaced and boring, too bad, pawlenty is gone. Perry is neither, try to figure out how he became a millionaire working in government his whole life.

  • retire05

    of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare created solely by FDR. It was assumed then that the president could add, or reorganize, departments, including Cabinet positions, unless vetoed by Congress. The SCOTUS later ruled that no president could arbitarily create a new Cabinet department. Basically, it took generations for the SCOTUS to rule what FDR did was unconstitutional.

    The very first enumerated power deals with the authority to spend, but it can only be done by Congress, i.e, Congress alone has the power of the purse.

    Article 1, Section 8: The Congress sha have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, TO PAY THE DEBTS and to provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;

    So yes, the enumerated powers deals with spending as paying debt is spending. And Congress has the authority to totally defund the Department of Education. Without funding, it would be useless. Well, actually, it has been useless as it has not done one thing to increase the test scores of students.

    Education should remain a state purview. The Founders never intended for education to be handled by the federal government.

  • retire05

    what taxes did Perry raise? Taxes are the purview of the legislation, not the governor. What fees did he raise that are also under the jurisdiction of the legislation? How did he expand the budget since once again, the jurisdiction of the legislature? What tax dollars did Perry give to private companies since the only tax dollars he has access to is the gubernatorial budget?

    Now, Perry can, and has, lobbied for legislation such as tort reform and “loser pays” laws. He also lobbied for a anti-TSA groping law and a restriction against sanctuary cities law, both of which failed due to David Dewhurst and Joe Strauss.

    Come back when you know what you are talking about.

  • lonestarmom2813

    business taxes did go up under Perry’s watch. see http://www.dallasfed.org/research/swe/2008/swe0802b.cfm

  • center77

    and all we heard from conservatives like myself was that Obama had been all talk, and was never the right person,. Now some in the movement are falling for the same thing. The media sold Obama to the nation, the center right media (Fox) is trying to do the same thing with Romney, and Cain, and maybe even Newt.

    It just boggles my mind, I do not understand why so many people fall for this garbage. These guys are not us, they are insiders. That’s why I am FED Up, and that’s why I’ve been a supporter of rick Perry. My blog covers a lot, being a student leaves me with limited time. I am very excited about my next class being about state and local government.

    I think its time we wake up.

  • federalfarmer1

    To propose and veto legislation?

  • runner12

    I can see many of these proposals being very popular with Indpendents and Conservatives.

    For the life of me I cannot figure out why more people are not consolidating around Perry. These proposals sound like a Tea Party Christmas wish list to me.
    They actually gave me hope that Washington can be changed for the better.

    Can you imagine the Congressccritters getting a pay cut until they balance the budget? I can hear the wailing and wringing of hands now.

    Perry 2012

  • supergirl2911

    With the communication I receive from Perry campaign (sign up at http://www.rickperry.org/)
    I first started paying attention in 2000 and supported Bush. Before 2004 I was receiving regular emails from Bush (staff, daughters, Laura, etc.) asking for support (money and volunteering).
    I supported Thompson and did not receive much communication. The same for McCain. It was frustrating to not receive contact. For each of these candidates I signed up for email communication on their website.
    Today I received email updates from Perry campaign providing links to him in the media. For two weeks I have received emails from Anita Perry talking about Iowa strike force.
    As a supporter it gives me more confidence to see repeated communication and organization from my candidate.

  • windwaker24

    I saw this documentary on TV (can’t remember the name of it) and back then, nobody in their right minds wanted to “live” in government. Most people wanted to stay close to their families and be among the people. The reason the Article 3 is so short is because the Founders didn’t think the Court would be that big of a deal. It was basically a boring and tedious job. They had no official building to call home, so they had to use any space that was available to them (libraries, basements, etc.). So a lot moving around was involved. One day, you could be in a library, the next you could be in the Capitol building basement. Judges also did their own work and research. I was shocked to learn that when John Paul Stevens retired he was the only judge in the current Court that wrote his own opinions. (WHAT ARE THE REST OF THEM DOING?!)

    The Supreme Court was finally given a permanent home at its current location in the 1930s. The Court has never been the same since and has grown more powerful by the day.

  • retire05

    can recommend legislation, but they do not write it

    A Texas governor can veto legislation, but only if it passes without a super majority at which point the veto can be over ruled with a revote and a super majority.

  • evilleramsfan

    is that he is proposing a cut of his own budget as President (if he were elected) in addition to Congress. That would put them in the ol’ proverbial between a rock and a hard place….

  • westcoastpatriette

    Guess we’re just ahead of the pack. Maybe it’s our job to get everyone on board with us!

  • acat

    Ron Paul is passionate, and is perfectly sane for 2 out of every 3 sentences… the rest of the time he seems completely out of touch with reality.

    Cain’s jacket is weak, but no more weak than Bachmann’s.
    – Neither ever won statewide office.
    – Bachmann ran a small business.
    – Bachmann won a seat in the House.
    – Cain ran a nationwide lobbying outfit.
    – Cain turned around a couple larger companies.

    Cain also has experience as a radio host, and that gives him an edge up in public speaking, just as acting gave Reagan an edge, or as radio hosting gives Mike Pence an edge. (I noted your signature, y’see… and I happen to like Pence)

    The point I’m after here is to realistically look at each candidate. Had Cain been who he said he was, or had he been better prepared for his past to come out, he would have been a strong candidate. (not sure how he would have been as President, but .. it would have been Interesting Times…)

    Mew

  • wbf

    It was a very good interview!!

    Glenn Beck really likes him and wants him to stay governor of Texas since Beck is making Texas his home!! Beck said he didn’t want some weasel in as governor!!

    Beck said he would have him back for an hour soon.
    He really liked the ideas Perry rolled out today.

  • acat

    And Perry doesn’t strike me as the type to mince words about why he’s not signing something…

    Mew

  • http://www.RightFace.us dkolonia

    Finally, it looks like the Rick Perry I was hoping for. These would be great changes to the government.

  • 1bunny

    email updates too. And I also like getting communication from my candidate. I signed up for emails as soon as he announced but I have never received any emails from Anita. How did you get on that list? I also signed up for email updates from Americans4Perry.

  • acat

    Most of the folks you’re talking about are what I call “bumper-sticker thinkers” on immigration.

    “Close the border!” sounds great, until you look at the cost of spinning up something on the scale of a division of Marines to actually *do* it.

    “Deport ‘em all!” sounds great, until you look at the cost of spinning up something on the scale of the FBI to actually go *find* them.

    “No tuition breaks for illegals!” sounds great until the lawyers get involved. Illegals who have paid taxes have the right (under current court rulings) to the services – including education – that those taxes pay for.

    Some days, the quote at the top of Ace of Spades really resonates …

    Mew

  • circlegranch

    Exposure on his program is exactly what Gov. Perry needs. As for Glenn, Fox News is not the same without him. They have been in perpetual decline since his departure.

  • Scope

    He recently moved his business there. The last radio Beck program I listened to was with one of his side kicks slamming Perry for his immigration policies. I promise that last show I listened to of Beck’s was very very anti-Perry. Beck has been a total all over the map idiot anyway.

  • Scope

    with his side kicks voicing their opinions have actually been very anti-Perry. The last day I listened to his show a few weeks ago, they were slamming Perry because of his immigration policy, especially the in-state tuition. Remember Beck’s shows about the border, and the brutality going on there? It was particularly brutal to Perry. I understand that Beck is now on board with Santorum. Pat Grey I think it is, has been a big time supporter of Santorum for many months.

  • aesthete

    It only became a federal priority in the wake of the Civil War: before then, the states generally did oversee education at both the university and K-12 level (to the extent that education then was analogous to the K-12 and modern university, anyways).

  • circlegranch

    thanks for clarification. I do, however, still miss Beck’s program on Fox.

    Some day someone will have to write a book on why all the negativity on Perry from the Right and yet, Cain gets a pass time and again. At some point, one would think Cain’s answer for every question: “999″ would become a joke, much like the guy that ran in ’08 under the “The Rent’s Too Damn High” banner.

  • Scope

    was when he first got on Fox when he was exposing so much liberal info, and the players, it was explosive. There were a few nights that Beck actually had the highest ratings of all the shows in that time slot. He jumped the sharks when he said he didn’t want to do those kind of shows anymore, and then he seemed to become Preacher Beck. I waited for his show before that at 5, but I started going elsewhere when precher Beck started preaching to me about how I was supposed to think, feel, and act. No no.

    I truly believe that much of the Cain support is because he is our black, and that he can beat their black. Rush has been so very into the racial issue, remember his “Barack the Magic Negro” song he played over and over in the 08 elections? Rush seems to have taken the banner, followed by Coulters comments where she literally said, our black is better than yours. The whole race issue has made me sick to my stomach. The conservatives don’t look at skin color before accomplishments, and qualifications. Cain has gotten a total pass because of his skin color. Isn’t that an insult to Cain? He’s black, he isn’t supposed to be smarter, qualified, experienced than the rest, and did I tell you he’s black? And, oh by the way, he’s not an accomplished politician. How many times have you seen comments here outright claiming that he can beat Obama, because he is black, and, our black is better than yours?

  • cheetah2

    but I couldn’t support him because he wants to add a 9% national sales tax. (I live in a state that already has an 8.3% state sales tax. Yowch, that would hurt to add another 9%!)

    I didn’t trust his conservative credentials knowing that. It is not conservative to give the federal government another way to tax us. Of course I learned more things I didn’t like after that…

    I agree that Bachman and Santorum also have thin resumes to qualify for POTUS. They do both have one qualification that Cain lacks, however. They have run successful campaigns in the past and have actually held public office.

    I don’t get why we are willing to consider novices for such an incredibly difficult and complex job as president of the United States.

  • izoneguy

    Is making me puke….
    They BS everybody with talk of sacrifice while they
    are getting fat on insider info.
    Rick Perry is right – some of these people should be put in prison – not running for re-election.
    The wrecking ball cannot come soon enough.
    Let’s help Perry tear down those walls!!!

  • Scope

    that Rush himself said that if Obama was elected, no one would ever be able to critize him on his policies, because the liberals would march out the race card. Now he is doing the very same thing. I have no respect for Rush any longer at all. He’s a hypocrite.

  • 1bunny

    more baggage. Newt is a poor fit for the role of “anti-Romney” but you can say one thing for him: He knows how to play the Washington Game. An outsider? I wondered what universe I woke up in today when I heard that. He is the ultimate insider.

  • http://www.AmericanThinker.com Hammer2008

    His refrain that he had to admit his failings and seek reconciliation will go far to appease many. If he gets a ticket out of Iowa, then we’ll all know.

  • Menlo

    He FINALLY addressed the TSA! :)

  • onemovoter

    That he has been negative on Perry because of the “illegal immigration” stances. I stopped listening to Beck after that week he was talking to the wife of the border agent that was put into jail. The wife put forth the case that her hubby was innocent of everything and Beck couldn’t understand why Perry wouldn’t do something like come out publicly or something.

    I looked into the case they were talking about and found out he wasn’t put into jail for rough handling of the alien, but for lying to investigators later on. That was the charge he was found guilty on. Beck fell for what the wife said instead of researching the case and then going from there.

    Beck also kept brushing off the powers of what a governor has compared to the federal level. He made the same mistake with the Texas tuition break for illegals. That whole situation finally ticked me off to where I’m not listening to him anymore.

    I know Beck is pushing his citizen action network and hope it will be ultimately successful. However, it still takes government to repeal laws that are harmful. That’s why we are here to argue for the best candidate, Perry!

  • tyman

    I got fed up with Boortz and the Cain lovefest a few weeks ago, so I wanted to see what Beck was up to. I figured that since he had Perry on his TV show that time before Perry announced, I thought I was going to friendly territory.

    Boy, was I wrong. Pat was filling in and saying completely erroneous or false things about Perry and immigration. Just like that day Mark Steyn filled in for Rush.

    I haven’t bothered to go back to Beck.

  • Scope

    Yes exactly. If you look at who the polls are putting at the top at this point is someone who has speaking abilities and gifts. It doesn’t matter at all what their histories are, or their lack of histories. The American Idol culture has taken over. There is absolutely no reason at all for Newt to be at the top at this time, other than those that think he can be the best debater against Obama. I was sick to agree with Donna Brazille tonight on CNN, the left is finding great humor at what is going on with the R’s at this point. The field going from one to the next and then the next top in the polls should dishearten all R’s. The left has created the chaos, and they are laughing at all of us. Fox has certainly contributed to that chaos. What does that tell everyone about Fox?

  • Scope

    Even with those on our side that are supposed to be so brilliant? They are once again winning the media war.

  • kamiller42

    This site has the entire debate schedule and offers the ability to watch debates past.

    http://www.2012presidentialelectionnews.com/2012-debate-schedule/2011-2012-primary-debate-schedule/

  • http://www.AmericanThinker.com Hammer2008

    All I know is tonight I’m sleeping on peeling off my Cain bumper sticker and not jumping directly into another camp. However, the two I turn to are Perry and Gingrich. I like Gingrich a lot. He was willing to let the government shut down in a battle he lost against Clinton, but still.

    I doubt we will see a Perry/Gingrich or Gingrich/Perry ticket. If Newt does not win the nomination, it will not be because he didn’t lay it all on the line in the end. He will make an excellent White House Chief-of-Staff.

  • Common_Cents

    He’s laying down the gauntlet on DC elite, including establishment R’s. Wondering if we have enough support out here in tea party country to take on DC like that. I hope for the day. Wonder if this will make it much tougher for Perry to get more support from the RNC machine.

    I hope other R governors rally around this type of platform. I think the real battle will be groups of states co-opping against fed govt, instead of one Presidential candidate.

  • onemovoter

    … Press Secretary for the President. He could tear the news press a new one each day and enjoy it.

    Still though Newt would be pretty good in the VP slot because of his knowledge in getting around congress. It will be needed.

    Otherwise for VP I’d go for Bob McDonnell.

  • Scope

    That was exactly the show that I turned Beck’s show off forever for. There was so much misinformation that Grey said that day that I wanted to puke. For all the honesty and truth that Beck promotes, that was my last straw. There were some other cases before that, but, being a Perry supporter, and hearing the trash said that day about Perry, that was it for me. I just thought about Beck’s preaching about, who are you and what do you believe took the truth to a new level. Grey literally misinterpreted Perry and his immigration policy.

  • Langley

    Lord, do we have a protectionist here? NAFTA Newt? Really?

    You do realize that libertarians (like your homeboy Ron Paul) are supposed to be in favor of free trade right?

  • seth90212

    so that some of his more laughable proposals could be more properly vetted. Unfortunately, he’s not taken seriously.

  • changeforrickperry

    I know I’d love to look over it.
    ______________________________________________________________
    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts.”–Winston Churchill

    www.changeforrickperry.org

  • greyeagle

    You are welcome to support Newt and sing his praises. However, please refrain from stretching the truth and trashing Governor Perry, whom a lot of us support. I am from TX, so I think I should know his record there. He cut taxes, cut the budget, expanded ALL types of energy, used enterprise funds (that majority of states use – tax dollars) to assist businesses to locate there. Quite a few businesses move to TX from California as well as other states. So I disagree with your comments, because they simply are not correct.

  • txindependent

    Don’t be so quick to kill pensions because you hate Congress, you are affecting a lot of workers with a variety of salaries.

  • changeforrickperry

    Please, seth90212, what exactly is laughable? I haven’t seen anybody laughing yet except for the LSM. Why do you think he’s not being taken seriously? Obama sure doesn’t share your opinion (commenting on Perry’s tax plan, having Perry’s face plastered all over Attack Watch, etc.) and nor does Romney (making websites devoted to bashing Perry, sending robo calls, etc.).

    Man, I wish Cain was a more serious candidate so that some of his more laughable proposals (9-9-9) could be more properly vetted. Unfortunately, he’s not taken seriously since these accusations (whether true or false, I know not) came out, or since he dropped the ball on the Libya question, or since he flip-flopped on abortion, or . . .

    You see, there are plenty of examples of Cain, at least, being a “not-serious” candidate. I’m not saying you are a Cain supporter–I don’t know if you are or not–but if you’re going to accuse Perry’s proposals of being laughable then at least back it up with some undeniable facts–as I just did with Cain.
    ____________________________________________________________
    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts.”–Winston Churchill

    www.changeforrickperry.org

  • greyeagle

    Perry is not dead and out yet. Why would Perry want someone else to steal his ideas. I wouldn’t.

  • carolina

    Elections are supposed to be a “battle of ideas”. I, too, wonder why Tea Party folk haven’t been more enthousiastic about Perry. He was instantly up in the polls when he threw his hat in the ring. Then he made some mistakes. Maybe that is a good thing ultimately? I imagine current supporters are pretty committed, while the ‘flavor of the month’ supporters are pretty fickle. I think one of Perry’s best strengths is his steadfastness. I hope, as voters get closer to actually voting, they will ‘get serious’ and realize he is the best candidate.

  • supergirl2911

    I signed up at RickPerry.org
    The emails from Anita were about the Iowa Strike Force, which I would love to participate in, but it is too far away and tough to miss work. I also sent an email in general expressing my interest to volunteer and received a personal reply.
    Here is the text from the email from Anita, re: Iowa

    Rick and I are honored by the outpouring of support we have received from across this country, and we are excited that so many share our vision to get America working again. As we enter the final sixty days leading into the first caucus, I wanted to take a moment to thank you for your support and to ask you to join our Strike Force effort in Iowa.

    The Iowa Caucuses will take place on January 3 at 7:00 pm. With over 1700 caucuses convening that evening, we need volunteers from across this great nation to assist Rick and I in reaching as many Iowans as possible.

    If you are interested in our Strike Force effort and would be willing to go to Iowa January 2 – 4, 2012, please contact our team by e-mailing strikeforce@rickperry.org. If you can come earlier, we are taking volunteers as early as December 27. Thank you again for all that you have done on our behalf. We hope to see you in Iowa soon!

  • conservativeparrothead

    I dont think as good as Newt has been, he is a top of the ticket or bust type of candidate. He is either the most qualified, you like his ideas and positions and his articulation and he is the nominee OR you dont, but he is not a good No.2 IMO (and I say this as a Newt supporter).

    I think there are good VP candidates that might balance out some tickets. John Huntsman, while I know he is not a favorite among conservatives, does have some good foreign policy experience and might be a good running mate for a Perry.

    I was thinking about VP picks:
    If its Perry – I think he goes with someone who has foreign policy experience, maybe a Bolton.

    Newt – I think has to go for more of a young fresh face to balance the ticket a bit: Thune, Rubio, Ryan type would be wonderful but dont go so far out like a Palin that it hurts your experience case.

    Romney….I really dont want to think about that, maybe he can be his own VP, he has taken both sides of every issue, this should balance the ticket.

  • txindependent

    and support Perry.

    One nit though: ?Federal salary freeze for all non-military and non-law enforcement officials until the budget is balanced;?

    I’m a federal worker and our salary has already been frozen for the next 5 years.

  • greyeagle

    Their pension plan is not, and they are also exempt from Obamacare.

  • greyeagle

    actually, Perry has been talking about some of this stuff for awhile. Some has been used in TX. Probably Obama likely changed his mind. Obama and his minions has been trying to destroy the energy business in TX as well as other things. Then Obama refused to give a disaster decoration, when the state was literally burning up until 3 people died. So Perry sure would like to see Obama ousted. (So would I)

  • Tbone

    He is basically a Democrat troll.

  • greyeagle

    There are several people from the Bush WH on Fox. They have been pushing Romney. The rest seem to have been pushing Cain. They are not pushing Perry because of some bad feelings between some of the Bush people and Perry. Not apparently between Bush himself and Perry. Chris Wallace seems to be the worst of the bunch. He really showed his true colors in the debate, then made another try during an interview. Fox are gave huge amount of play to Cain accusing Perry about that rock on the TX hunting lease used by the Perry family several years ago. (Washington Post story and a smear job) . Fox again gave huge play to Cain accusing Perry leaking about those sexual harassment charges. (he didn’t). Then FOX played on EVERY show about the Perry brain freeze. Cain had even longer and they barely mentioned it. Certainly, no longer fair and balanced.

  • carolina

    you would weep and understand why it will take so long. The DoD (like the Fed govt) tracks costs in ways that do not match up to operations. One of the biggest problems we have is a Fed govt accounting system that is the technological equivalent of the 1800′s.
    That is another reason why they “pave all of the parking lots” every September. Their “use it or lose it” approach has been rewarded with more money the next year for so long ….. that it is ingrained into the entire govt. DoD is as bad as any of them, and larger. You really have to see it to believe it.

  • rickperryreport

    Perry advocated a the law in place now that lowered and capped property taxes in Texas. To replace that revenue, he did inaugurate a franchise tax for businesses. The franchise tax has been tweaked over the years to allow startups a hefty exemption.

    He does have the Texas Enterprise Fund to explain, although the Tx Legislature did approve it, and other leaders in Texas gov’t have their oversight too, not just Perry, but Lt Gov Dewhurst and House Speaker Strauss have oversight of the board of the TIF.

    How else would you manage a public/private partnership fund? Would you place people like Van Jones on the board, and other people you don’t trust?

  • avagreen

    Is that like a small brown dog?

  • Scope

    Perry’s new plan that he released today didn’t get the first peep. Not one peep. I have given up on Fox, and have been watching CNN. Today CNN actually played segments of Perry’s speech today. Fox, nothing, crickets. I so switched back to CNN, because I want every rating to go against Fox. Somehow we have to find a way to destroy their ratings.

  • greyeagle

    Yeah, this individual is from another web site that trashes Perry constantly. Apparently, most are supports of Ron Paul, Cain, and Romney. Spreading lies and disinformation constantly. It used to be a good conservative web site, but not anymore. Red State has that honor of the best conservative web site.

  • 1bunny

    on Perry’s new plan. I have been surfing the different websites I have bookmarked and only 2 have mentioned his plan that was released today. WTH? CNN actually covered the speech until he started the uprooting part then they cut away. Can we say conspiracy now? Are we having a Journolist on the right?

  • center77

    its here

    http://theindependentpost1.blogspot.com/

    I also have some post done at Technorati.com under Timothy Bladel.

    I hope this did not get to you too late. I am really just getting started, and do a lot of the blogging between classes on my droid which often changes words, but its fun. I hated the media so bad, I decided to get my BA in Journalism and Mass com & Political science. So the blog was designed to give me practice and develop my views more. I call it independent post because I am conservative, but not so much republican. Though I have never really voted Democrat, but if one was more conservative and I trusted them to be, I have no issue with that, right now the Democrats never are that way.

  • snowshooze

    Because that IS the job of the Federal Government.
    It was the reason we decided to have one. That was their entire job description. Border enforcement, protecting the member States.. that is all we wanted… now look what we have… the Federal Government is so far off track, they thought they should start a new agency… to do the job that they were created for.

  • seth90212

    Outside of this echo chamber there are countless people who could write what I write here.

    Perry is becoming increasingly desperate, whether it’s his emotional outbursts in the last debate or this patently absurd proposal.

    What lies and disinformation have I spread? All I’ve ever done was comment on Perry’s policy proposals or his viability or lack of same.

    I’m not the only one laughing at this so-called government reform plan. Wander outside of Redstate and you’ll hear the laughter.

  • seth90212

    Perry fought for raises for himself and his colleagues.

    You see, if Perry was a more serious candidate something like this would be big news.

  • jakeofalltrades

    There’s no reasoning with someone who believes the federal government has enumerated powers, and then refuse to acknowledge that which was enumerated.

    The reason D.Ed. is Constitutional is because they aren’t regulating education. They are spending money with strings attached, and of course, the power to spend is an enumerated power.

  • Tbone

    nt

  • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

    You should work on not being that anymore.

  • avagreen

    http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-09-26/entertainment/30203196_1_roger-ailes-glenn-beck-fox-executives
    Roger Ailes Is Taking Fox News To The Center
    COURSE CORRECTION:
    Glynnis MacNicol|September 26, 2011|

    Roger Ailes is tired of Fox New’s ultra-conservative slant.

    Viewers of last week’s GOP-Google debate (and Rick Perry) may not be shocked to hear this.

    Fox made headlines Thursday after its moderators focused sustained attacks on Perry and it is paying off; Perry has seen his campaign practically fall apartover the weekend.

    This is not an accident.

    Howie Kurtz writes in Newsweek this week that following the Gabby Giffords shooting Ailes issued a directive to dial back on the rhetoric…Kurtz says he refers to this as a “course correction.”

    Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck are singled out as the troublemakers in this regard.

    Glenn Beck?s inflammatory rhetoric?his ranting about Obama being a racist??became a bit of a branding issue for us? before the hot-button host left in July, Ailes says. So too did Sarah Palin?s being widely promoted as the GOP?s potential savior?in large measure through her lucrative platform at Fox. Privately, Fox executives say the entire network took a hard right turn after Obama?s election, but, as the Tea Party?s popularity fades, is edging back toward the mainstream.

    Ailes also points to Beck as the reason O’Reilly has seemed more, er, objective of late. ?Beck scared him,” says Ailes.

    Which is not to say that Fox is becoming liberal. Apparently there are lines even everyone’s favorite anchor Shep Smith can’t cross.

    Ailes keeps a wary eye on anchor Shepard Smith, who occasionally backs aspects of the Obama record: ?Every once in a while Shep Smith gets out there where the buses don?t run and we have a friendly talk.?

    The best quote, however, is reserved for Mayor Bloomberg: ?I like Bloomberg, he?s a friend. But fuck him and the salt. I like salt. It?s not his business.?

  • retire05

    Since you are so well informed on Perry when he was a Democrat legislator in Texas, perhaps you can give us the year, and the number of the bill, that he fought for to raise his salary? Also, give us the amount of the increase that was being discussed in that bill.

    It must have been a lot since Texas legislators currently are paid less than $8,000 a year and only $128/per deim in 2011.

    So come on, seth, show us what you’ve got. After all, everyone knows you would not just repeat unproven claims you have gleened from an anti-Perry website, right?

  • gekster

    Your not the one on TalkLeft, who was promoting Obama over Hillary.

    Your saying you took someones elses monicker.
    I don’t think so.
    You are clearly an Obama supporter.
    How’s your president working out for you.

  • seth90212

    Could be another Seth in my zip code. That’s all the number stands for.

    I doubt I’d ever be promoting Obama over anyone.

  • 1bunny

    out your blog. Great work! And you got to meet Perry. I lived in TX for 6 years and never came close : ) Keep up the good work and good luck with your studies we need more conservative journalist.

  • seth90212

    From : http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/15/8824151-perry-backed-legislative-pay-raise-as-texas-democrat

    In 1989, Perry co-sponsored a constitutional amendment to adjust lawmakers’ salaries to equal one-quarter the amount made by the Texas governor. At the time, members of the state legislature, who are in session just 140 days every two years and are permitted to hold outside employment, made a salary of $7,200 per year. The measure Perry backed would have upped that to almost $18,000, nearly a three-fold increase.

    Voters rejected the amendment by a wide margin when it appeared on the ballot on Nov. 7, 1989.

  • nathanalbright

    …means that he accepted the verdict of the Texas voters, right? It must be hard to be a troll–so much hate in your heart.

  • gekster

    You are using basically the same words to slam Perry that you used to slam Hillary.
    What a coincidence.

  • seth90212

    There’s nothing original online, be it usernames or words.

    Are you the same gekster on Huffington Post and Celebrity Photos? Or Warrior forum? Or Gametracker?

  • nathanalbright

    …but I’m the same nathanalbright (it’s my name after all) on quite a few sites. Some of them even include my photo and some personal information so you can see I’m not very different wherever I am. And never a troll.

  • seth90212

    I have corporate profiles several places with my real name, real address, real photos, etc. But I’ll be damned if I’m going to do the same on a forum such as this. You can see that certain trolls who don’t agree with my views are snooping around trying to dig up info on me. If I had been posting under my real info they could make a lot of trouble for me, maybe spread negative information about me online or even call my office and harass us. That actually happened before when I was dumb enough to divulge my company name on a sports forum.. Well, some posters who were fans of an opposing team launched a campaign to tie up our phone lines and generally just bug us with obscene phone calls and malicious E-mail. Never again.

  • gekster

    There are no geksters on the other ones.
    You’ll get grokster, but not me.
    And if you read my posts on HuffPo, where I am a registered user, they are conservative.
    What you won’t see is the 90% of my posts on HuffPo because consevativism isn’t hardly allowed.
    Nice try to bait.

  • seth90212

    http://forums.animesuki.com/member.php?u=35548

    Not grokster, but gekster. Is this you? Are you and Anime fan?

  • seth90212

    Gekster’s deviant art gallery:

    http://gekster.deviantart.com/gallery/?catpath=/

  • nathanalbright

    …because they’re trolls, that’s their loss. You seem a little paranoid about people trolling you and snooping on their background. Is that because you troll others and try to drive-by smear them with reference to deviant art? The fingers we point at others usually point even more toward ourselves.

  • gekster

    Stick with the small g.
    I havn’t used anything else.
    I am not Japanese. I am not on devient art.
    Tell you what, try to find one in my zipcode.
    48457
    That is what you claim, someone else in your zipcode with the same username.
    I do think that narrows it down a bit.

  • seth90212

    My real zip code is 90210. But I didn’t want to be associated with all that junk, so I used my office zip. If you search for seth90210, you’ll get as many hits as gekster. So there’s nothing special about co-mingling name and zip.

    I think I’ve proven my point. Cute of you trying to parse between small and capital g’s. LOL.

    Believe whatever you want, dude. Are you into deviant art, by the way.

  • seth90212

    You are not into deviant art. So I would assume you are not that gekster. Noted.

  • gekster

    you havn’t made an anti-Perry rant in 2 hours.
    Hows it feel to be on the good side.
    Feel a little cleaner now.
    I hope so.
    Try this.
    Instead of waisting your time slamming Perry, why don’t you promote the one you think would be the best president.
    Get into it so much that some idjit will think you are a paid shill.
    Support with enthusiasm, and present facts to the falshoods and personal dislikes some have for your candidate.
    Insted of trying just to bring one down, raise one up.
    I think if you did that, people might not take you for a lefty.
    And I just showed you can reasonably post with out slamming Perry, so it ain’t that hard. ;)

  • gekster

    that ain’t that hard either.

  • avagreen

    Receiving this in an email from Human Events. I’ve tried before to access a headline story before from my HE email, but haven’t been successful then or now. So, no link that I could find.

    Mondays with Tony Lee 11.14.11

    Last night on CBS’s 60 Minutes, members of Congress on both sides of the aisle were exposed for their shady stock purchases. Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner, Spencer Bachus, John Kerry and many others made stock purchases and trades that would have been investigated if they were not members of Congress.

    A new book that comes out tomorrow, Throw Them All Out, by Peter Schweizer exposes how Washington insiders act on inside information to personally enrich themselves.

    As we’ve seen with the many venture socialism scandals within the Obama administration?ranging from Solyndra, to SunPower, to LightSquared and others?too often politicians, or those close to them, have vested financial interests in legislation they oversee and view Washington as a way for them to profit off of their influence.

    In his book, Schweizer offers some reforms to clean up Washington. Here are a few:

    Create a legal code that makes trading on nonpublic government information illegal both for those who pass the information and for those who trade on it.

    Corporate insiders trading their own company’s stock are required to disclose these transactions to the SEC within two days. Why not apply the same standard to Congress?

    Members of Congress should not be allowed to trade stock in companies that are overseen by their committees.

    Apply whistleblower laws to Congress. If it’s good enough for federal workers and corporate employees, it should be good enough for Congress.

    Disallow “sweetheart” IPOs. Unless the initial public offering goes through a public auction, in which people can openly compete for shares in a bidding contest, members of Congress should not be allowed to participate.

    Family members of legislators should not be allowed to become lobbyists.

    The federal government needs to get out of the business of offering grants and taxpayer-backed loans.

    Obama’s approval ratings have tanked, trust in Congress is at an all-time low, none of the Republican candidates have caught fire among conservatives, and the Tea Party, and to a lesser extent (when one takes out the violence, rape, murder, disease, boorish behavior, and general uncivilized aspects of the Occupy Wall Street movement) the “Occupy” movements, have caught on because Americans are fed up and have no more tolerance for the type of shenanigans that go on in Washington.

    We may well be better off as a country if we threw everyone out and started anew.

    ?Tony Lee

  • iidvbii

    Medical malpractice tort reform passed 2003 signed into law Rick Perry
    Largest tax cut in Texas history passed 2006 signed into law Rick Perry
    Sanctuary City’s outlawed 2011 signed into law Rick Perry
    Voter ID law passed 2011 signed into law Rick Perry
    2011 largest spending cut in 60yrs passed signed into law Rick Perry
    Ect..ect.. I can continue if you like.

    But I think the point “you don’t know jack” should be clear by now. If not let me know and I will augment the list untill you confess your ignorance or agenda.

    You are right Perry didn’t require judges to be elected or the legislature to be part time. THE ALREADY WHERE IN TEXAS.

    Nothing irritates me more than tards spreading disinformation and lies…..
    BTW WAY FEDERALFARMER…. I LIVE IN TEXAS… I THINK I WOULD KNOW….

  • nathanalbright

    …that Perry just threw to the Republican base. After all, how many times does one go after “crony politicians” on both sides of the aisle, including our own squishies, while also showing a strong moral stance. It’s a chance to win politically and win morally as well.

  • pttx333

    name was mentioned. Isn’t that news? Geez, they are all alike, aren’t they.

  • iidvbii

    http://youtu.be/OfC99LrrM2Q

    Would appear even supreme court justices disagree with you….

    How embarrassing………

  • iidvbii

    Did you really just type that? I think, you don’t think..

  • streiff

    because 1989 is like over 20 years ago.

  • streiff

    just not true. That isn’t the history.

    Again, your interpretation of the Constitution is not the way that clause has been interpreted over the 225 or so years the Constitution has been in effect.

    For instance, the raid, with a search warrant, on William “Cold Cash” Jefferson’s office was tossed as a violation of the Speech and Debate Clause.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech_or_Debate_Clause#William_Jefferson

    This is really getting annoying. Twice now, you’ve used your interpretation of the Constitution as an argument. Please stop. Other than this batsh** craziness you seem reasonable.

  • avagreen

    WOW!

    Perry has long supported the idea of citizen- legislature, using part-time citizens. I hardly think anyone is going to get filthy rich by making that amount, especially when they leave their full-time job to do so. Even that, they would be losing money.

    I remember this issue coming up, agreed with it, was disappointed his idea didn’t pass, and could completely understand his reasoning.
    If you want qualified people, you’ve got to make it worth their while to serve. Gosh! A whole $18,000!!!!!. Man, what a bolus to have to swallow.
    You have to attract educated, intelligent folk to come serve in the legislature if you hope to get any quality representation.

    sheesh! Your point is………….

    WTH?

    He added, “Rick Perry has long supported a part-time citizen legislature in Texas, and believes having a part-time citizens legislature in Congress is the right prescription for overhauling Washington, DC.”

  • iidvbii

    is to end “congressmen” as a career. How many of these people are wealthy before getting elected? I know some are of course but I would think that would be more of a reason for the reform. Additionally it requires that the work in the economy they are so determined to micro manage.

    I would go even a step further and require a live your laws clause. Essentially making it illegal for congress to exempt themselves or anyone else from any law , regulation or program they pass. You vote it you suffer it.

  • avagreen

    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/15/8824151-perry-backed-legislative-pay-raise-as-texas-democrat

    “Rank-and-file members of the United States House and Senate currently make $174,000 annually. Perry’s government overhaul would half that salary (or even quarter it if lawmakers fail to balance the federal budget in a prescribed amount of time.) “

  • jimmyg

    Who is a 27 year career politician who is currently living in a house where the rent and associated expenses, which are paid for by the taxpayers, is estimated to cost $10,000.00 per month.

  • nathanalbright

    …would that not be a constitutional remedy, though, perhaps to Article One?

  • nathanalbright

    The house was owned by the people of Texas too. And the last time I checked a lot of his time was spent as a Texas legislator. That’s hardly a “career” politician. It’s more like being semi-pro. Would you accept an $8000 annual salary for public service as making you a “career” politician? I would not. Are you going to stop trolling and actually start making some real sense?

  • diehardcon

    I don’t know that we can lay all the blame on the left for the foolish poll shifting (or even Fox), but the fact is that conservatives should never allow themselves to be bounced around by the shallow, fleeting and ultimately nearly useless demonstrations of political leadership found in televised debates. We must show that we rely on a candidate’s record for 80% of our judgment, and only on debate statements where they do not conflict with their records, or offer new ideas that they then become fully invested in for the duration, including the subsequent term of office. We must remind that debating is an activity that a president does not perform in office, that what is said in these venues is often casually forgotten and/or dismissed later, and that historically, debates have not been deterministic of general election outcomes. It is especially silly and insulting to believe that occasional verbal slips are serious failures, but that is the essence of the media’s implication. HOWEVER, having said that, I am still not going to give up hope until actual votes start counting. And even then, the work to defend our freedoms will continue!

  • pttx333

    because it seems that no matter how centrist (or seemingly centrist) they are, they will in the end always go along with the party. I don’t know if there are threats or just what is going on, but I’ve been observing for many a year and know it to be so. Like you, I am a conservative first.

  • supergirl2911

    There are journalistic standards for newsworthiness taught in Journalism 101. I don’t remember all, but one is timely. Fox really is losing me when they continue about Mrs. Cain and oh Romney finally showed up to be ‘intrrviewed’ by viewers and he is on forever. Then they analyze why Paul is written off by the media? Really they ARE the media. It is irresponsible with a plethora of suppose conservatives with opinion shows that they make NO mention of Perry.

  • wacowboy

    could get half of this done, it would be amazing work. People will fight him tooth and nail on just about every one of these. But it needs to be done.

  • wacowboy

    how many congressmen, especially senators get paid sizeable money as a result of their being elected, such as speaking fees and such. There is no congressman who is hurting for money.

    in fact, many of them are quite wealthy before being elected. Those who aren’t wealthy when elected become wealthy while in congress.

  • supergirl2911

    Except bOlton? How about Perry/pence

  • izoneguy


    The Texas Governor?s Mansion

    Nice Huff Po talking points

    On June 8, 2008,?the Governor’s Mansion?was?severely damaged by arson.? The Mansion was empty and all its prized contents in storage, but significant structural and architectural damage occurred to the house.

    More than three years have passed since an arsonist set fire to the Texas Governor’s Mansion. The 81st Texas Legislature appropriated $22 million and the Texas Governor’s Mansion Restoration Fund (Fund) has raised more than $3.5 million.

    The State Preservation Board (SPB) oversees the state’s appropriation for the Mansion and acts as the project manager for the restoration design and construction. In February 2010, state funding for Mansion restoration was reduced as a part of the 5 percent across the board budget cuts for all state agencies. With the current state budget challenges, donations to the Fund have been crucial to this project. Private contributions are used for some of the important and costly historic features such as the column restoration, new Americans with Disabilities Act and code requirements, the addition, landscaping, and changes necessitated by security, as well as historical documentation. The Texas Governor’s Mansion Restoration Fund Board oversees the allocation of these private funds.

  • changeforrickperry

    I’ve been on RedState for only a week and have been relieved to see how forgiving folks are if I don’t reply right away.

    I just visited your blog and really liked your post on why, as a Christian, you support Perry. His faith was a big draw for me, as well, while researching him this summer. Not that being a Christian is the only qualification when picking a candidate–of course not!–but we can be much more confident in the soundness of his convictions. I really believe, from everything I’ve seen and read, that Perry is seeking the Lord every day of his life. For all their faults, I believe Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush did the same.

    I hope you prosper in your journalism studies! Hopefully there are lot of other young people like you and I who are really fighting for our country. I’m excited to see what the Lord will do with our generation.
    ____________________________________________________________
    “Success is not final, failure is not fatal; it is the courage to continue that counts.”–Winston Churchill

    www.changeforrickperry.org

  • jimmyg

    http://www.dallasnews.com/news/state/headlines/20100518-Perry-defends-cost-of-rental-home-45.ece

    Pot meet Kettle

  • carolynr

    People…I am reading some of these comments. First off, we have the Paulbots. Your guy is not going to be elected. He is too extreme and his foreign affairs agenda is off the charts. I think you people are more interested in harming this country than the progressives. I am not a regulation nut…but we do have to have some in order to preserve our health, medicines, etc.

    Now…Newt. He is very smart. Yes…he would mop the floor with Obama. However…his voting record STINKS as bad as Romney’s. Go google what he has voted for.

    I went to serveral TP movements…I believed in their agenda. So, now we have a candidate that espouses EVERY SINGLE ITEM THEY WANT…and they want to watch a TV production with Newt and Obama! What about policies. Policies CHANGE the government…NOT DEBATES. Do you people want someone who talks out of two sides of his mouth or someone that will get things done. We’re at the end of the rope folks…we don’t have another chance. Do we vote in another Obama with a R behind their name or a person that will change Washington DC….the way we demanded it would be. What happened to your perseverance and courage…did you go for the style instead of the substance?

    “Newt’s my guy,…it will mop the floor with Obama”. Goody…so after he is sworn in…unless he changes COMPLETELY…he will mop the floor with our tax policies. Is the man interested in America or the title. Look at how he voted…look at who he backed. Do you want the SOS that we have had since Reagan!

  • iidvbii

    I live in Dallas area and believe me this paper is 50/50….

  • carolynr

    Who gave the EPA ALL THIS POWER….HINT..SCOTUS

  • 1bunny

    Has anyone considered Rand Paul for vp? I confess I don’t know much about him and the TPM backed him. Maybe that would bring the Ron Paul supporters on board to vote for Perry : )

    I have been thinking of vp choices and I considered Scott Walker or Allen West or Marco Rubio or Jim DeMint or Paul Ryan. I also think we need someone youngish so in 8 years they can run for president.

  • izoneguy

    A leftist arsonist can be blamed for the expenses occurred to Texas taxpayers for reconstruction of the fire-bombed mansion and all other expenses incurred forthwith.

    So far the expenses for Rick Perry and his family to live outside of the governors mansion has cost each Texas citizen 2 cents.

    I just gave Rick another $250 so 2 cents won’t bankrupt me…..

  • Menlo

    I’m not sure what the full story is, but I have heard that his work with the state entitles him to a far more generous salary (in excess of $100K per year in his case) once he leaves office.

  • romansdaughter

    Steny Hoyer the minority whip was already accusing Rick Perry of trying to get the Tea Party vote. So they are getting nervous. Just kind of funny how hardly any conservative news station is hardly talking about Perry’s Plan for Washington DC. Did you hear the good interview that Sean Hannity had with Rick Perry? It was real good.

  • http://www.AmericanThinker.com Hammer2008

    That should have come with warning… almost spat my cold beer over my laptop.

  • donald_24

    Where in Perry’s proposals are term limits for members of Congress?

    Also, I would LOVE to see the fincnal disclosure forms that memebrs of Congress have to file every year overhauled. Instead of allowing them to report their networth and outside income in broad ranges, they should be required to list specific amounts.

  • barron44

    Rick is not the King of Texas. Texas is not a kingdom. He cannot wave a magic wand to transform Texas into a Perfect Palace. Well, we still have liberal Democrats and liberal Republicans in both chambers of the Legislature. But give the man credit for helping the state become the robust economic engine that has out-performed the rest of the country.
    What the Governor Perry is proposing is a vision, a plan to dramatically transform the culture in Washington?to attempt to truly diminish the corrupt power of the ruling class?the career politicians who pass legislation to institute the welfare state, at the expense of the achievers and the citizens of this country who do not want to be slaves of the entitlement state. (There is one reform goal that was missing, however: Mandate that all laws and regulations enacted by Congress apply, immediately, to Congress, itself.) I love Governor Perry?s specific plans to dramatically change our federal government. I do not see this kind of plan from the other GOP candidates for President.
    Call it red meat, call it whatever you want. I want it. Call it pandering to the base. I am the base. Pander to me some more, PLEASE.

  • pttx333

    the one that I would call “what’s good for the goose and good for the gander.” You and I know that when he says he’ll be going to 1600 with a wrecking ball, that is exactly what he means to do.

    Ditto on the pandering … I handle that well. ;-)

  • pttx333

    with “… the goose IS good …” Sorry – fingers not awake yet.

  • pttx333

    with “… the goose IS good …” Sorry – fingers not awake yet.

  • wennejunk

    I feel better now. I seem to feel that way a lot, pretty much a

    ‘there are way too many idiots and insane people running loose”

    kind of feeling.