Skip to comments.Some of You Tea Party Folk Think Perry’s the Answer?
Posted on 08/27/2011 12:10:12 PM PDT by el_texicano
Looks Tough Firing Blanks
If you're a Tea Party member, or you have significant sympathies with them, I'd caution you against climbing aboard Rick Perry's TransTexasCatastrophe. The Media is doing everything possible to paint this guy as a bronc-busting, cattle-roping, Texan, but in truth, there are more than a few things you ought to know about him. He's no friend to individual rights, except in an election season, and he's not really the trend-setter he'd have you believe. His record on jobs isn't actually so swift as he'd have you believe, and he's got less in common with the average Texan than he does with the Wall Street types with whom he prefers to consort. He's no friend of Main Street, and he's certainly no friend to real entrepreneurs, and for all his posturing as one of us, he isn't, and it's been quite plain. Those of you from outside Texas can be forgiven for mistaking Perry for a conservative. It's assumed because he's a Republican, and he's from Texas, he must be. Let me now explain a bit of why this isn't the case.
Friday I heard the increasingly estimable Mark Davis claim that you shouldn't mind that Perry converted from the Democrat Party to the Republican Party because, as he points out, Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat too. Of course, this is a lie by omission, because what Davis doesn't mention is that it was a long stretch of years between Reagan's conversion and his arrival in California electoral politics. This isn't the case with Rick Perry. He was Al Gore's Texas Campaign Manager in 1988, and following the loss, immediately reversed course and ran as a Republican. I don't know about you, but despite Davis' rather disingenuous interpretation of Reagan's conversion, painting it as just alike, I'm inclined to believe he left some details out intentionally.
Rick Perry has been a regular guest on Davis' show on WBAP in the D/FW area for years, and to consider Davis anything like an objective or unbiased voice in this stretches all credulity. Frankly, I hope Limbaugh finds somebody else to be a regular fill in, because Davis is clearly in the tank for Perry, and it runs against Limbaugh's general premise that he will take no position in a Republican primary, except in general terms on behalf of conservatism.
You may have heard some of Perry's more recent statements about conditions along the Texas border with Mexico, and you might be inclined to believe Mr. Perry thinks more should be done. He even tried to repair his credibility on the issue by being broadcast on a live feed from a base of operations near the border for an interview on Greta Van Susteren's show. If you believe that stage-managed bit of theater, I'm inclined to let you know right now that he's relatively no more conservative in real terms than George Bush, which is to say on the matter of his statist, globalist reflexes, he's no conservative at all. I'd hate it if anybody else broke the news to you, because I believe bad news is best delivered by a friend. Check out the following video for where Rick Perry really stands on issues of the border:
I realize there's a tendency to overstate things in the name of supporting one's position, but it's really no exaggeration to suggest that Perry isn't really very close in his thinking to Tea Party Members, not when measured against what he's been saying since October 2010, but in what he has said all along throughout his career. He's taken money and support from La Raza, ACORN, and other groups that advocate spending tax-payer dollars for dubious programs and projects.
He's also a crony-capitalist. If you're like me, that's simply something you can't abide. I love the free market, but Governor Perry's revolving door between his staff and corporate boardrooms is a well-established phenomenon, and frankly, if you buy into his nonsense, he's going to wind up exploiting your good intentions too. Companies like Merck and Cintra are more his style, and his staff has reflected this over the years of his gubernatorial reign.
You've undoubtedly heard about the Gardasil flap, and likely been willing to dismiss it as a fluke. That would be a serious and potentially tragic mistake. The most ridiculously egregious thing he may have done in his tenure as Governor of Texas was the proposed TransTexas Corridor. You may have heard of it, but may not have any details, so let me expound on that for a moment or two. This was the project that first enlightened me to Perry's big government answers to all things. The upshot is this: It was to be a vast network of toll roads, but more, it would have included some form of light and heavy rail, pipelines, and all manner of things. On the surface, this might sound attractive, but as with any such project, the devil lies in the details.
The plan included 4400 linear miles of a toll road network, running parallel in many cases to existing Highways and Interstates already in existence. The corridor's right of way was to be a full 1/4 mile wide. Simple math tells you that even ignoring junctions and interchanges, this would have consumed 1100 square miles of Texas' territory. You might argue that while it's a lot of land, Texas is a big state. That's all well and good if the state already owns the land, but since it doesn't, it was going to acquire it by use of eminent domain. Again, you might argue that building roads is one function for which eminent domain out to apply, but once you look at the rules to be applied to this project, you might well conclude otherwise. Rather than basing their offers to property owners on free market value, they instead intended to limit it to "fair market value" as determined by a panel of cronies they would gin up for the chore.
This project actually proposed bisecting county and farm roads, and even property, dead-ending what are fairly important thoroughfares for the communities they serve. More, it would have bisected school districts and even towns along its path. Again, you might think that impossible until you understand that this was to be a closed system with few exits or on-ramps, only permitting access at major Highway and Interstate junctions. This threatened to destroy many rural communities, and they rose up against it. Once the details became clear to the public, it was quickly sent back for re-work, and eventually dumped.
Here were the things they didn't advertise, but you need to know. It was supposed to be operate by a concessionaire, Cintra, for a period of 50 years. It was going to employ tolls of roughly $0.26 per mile. A geographical understanding of the scale of Texas immediately prompts the question: "Who on Earth would voluntarily pay to enter a closed-system roadway at that cost over the huge distances in Texas, when a free parallel alternative is just a few miles away in the form of an Interstate, or Highway?" Good question, and the answer is: Almost nobody. So how did they intend to make this work? In 2004,TxDOT applied to the USDOT for a waiver so that they could charge a toll on the existing I-35. The first leg of the proposed TTC system was called TTC-35, the leg that would run from Laredo to an undetermined point on the Oklahoma border. In other words, it was a corridor to nowhere, but in order to get you to use it, they were going to toll the free Interstate and let it fall into disrepair.
Opponents at the time argued that the existing I-35 corridor could be widened, and this was met with a dismissive rejection by Perry's Transportation Commission. They said it couldn't be done in a cost-efficient way. Your confusion at this statement matches that of the average Texan who realizes that this couldn't possibly be true. How hard is it to add a few lanes here and there? Yes, you'll have some eminent domain issues, but nothing on the scale of what the TTC proposed.
They also promised it would promote economic development, but what they kept concealed for a while, until they no longer could do so under the law, was that because it was a closed system, Cintra, the corporation from Spain that would build and operate it, would also have exclusive rights to all concessions along its length. More, due to the limitations on exits and on-ramps, it could never be shown how this colossal highway system would provide any sort of economic boon to anybody, because you wouldn't be able to access most smaller towns from along its length. I'm sure you'll agree with me that the fact that one of Perry's top staffers was a former Cintra VP, and the fact that one of his own staffers had gone on to work for Cintra had absolutely nothing to do with Perry's TTC plans. Right?
Ladies and gentlemen, if you've fallen prey to the hype about Perry, you may be forgiven, particularly if you're not from Texas. You're not aware, as so many here, that Perry isn't the fellow he's now being portrayed to be. He's not a friend to the Tea Party, despite his seeming 2010 conversion, because much like his conversion in 1989, this conversion also seems to be one of convenience. I will assure you, this is most definitely the case.
Perry likes to put on an act about his conservative credentials, and his sympathies with the Tea Party, but if the truth is told, he's no more one of us than the man in the Moon. You might want to let your fellow conservatives and Tea Party patriots know it too: We're being hustled again.
And that's why half the posts on this thread (including several from 10+ year Freepers) sound like something straight from the DU playbook?
They're doing it because you are merely a troll, and it's gotten obvious
I'm a troll for backing the same guy that Senator James Inhofe has endorsed for President on a conservative website? That's a hoot!
I've already noted that some of the old accounts seem to have been hijacked for the express purpose of attacking Palin.
We'll have to wait for the next bug-zapper thread.
I'm a troll for backing the same guy that Senator James Inhofe has endorsed for President on a conservative website? That's a hoot!
No, you're a troll for baiting Palin supporters; for resorting to the Alinskyite tactics of LOUDLY denouncing your political foes (with no basis in fact) of the conduct you and your fellow whores and shills are engaging in; for engaging in argument by strawman; and for the insouciance with which you and the fellow Perrywinkles infest threads and shout down and insult anyone attempting to counter your propaganda.
As I said, we need another bug-zapper thread.
>> “So, if he should happen to get the nomination, will you stay home next November like so many here have proudly proclaimed that they did in 2008?” <<
I wish it would matter whether I do or don’t, but if Perry gets the annointing of the press in the primary, he’ll be McCain II. He just can’t win; he is loaded like a camel caravan with toxic baggage.
All you ever do is post your heart-throb emotions about Perry.
That is of no value to anyone, and opens no useful path to debate.
We know that you’re head over heels for Rick, but that is so subjective that it puts you in freefall on the pertinant issues.
I know what La Raza is, Sir. I also know why Rick Perry went to talk to them and I find no fault whatsoever with his letting them know what his position is.
If somebody wants to call themselves ‘the race’ what’s it to you? If they want to have some dumb racist slogan, what’s it to you?
You folks need to get real...there’s lots more race thingies going on than La Raza...they’re just another closed society, and there’s not really that many of them here.
Game set and match...no he’s not. Those are federal programs, not state. Game set and match again.
Suck on it yourself, NONE OF THOSE OTHER CANDIDATES are the Governor of Texas.
All I know is my daughter opted out, one time in 2003 and never has to opt out again of ANY immunizations. It was the law at the time. Now if you didn’t opt out in 2003, you can’t do that, it’s every year since the nice RINOs and democrats changed it in 2007..
I’m in Texas. I’ve never seen Perry do anything but the speak the truth and he would certainly make a good president. His record in this state is not debatable. So many Texans are racists? lol Man your brains be cookin...
You FAIL at trolling.
The good news is that they didn’t change the 2 year requirement in 2007, according to the DSHS website
That quote belongs to Gena Bukin. My response follows it.
What did he say about Palin?
Sorry, DRey, I’ve been at this too many years to ignore the red flags. Your side is trying hard to trivialize objections that in better times would have derailed Perry without question or hesitation. Now, out of a fear of Obama, too many on our side are willing to turn a blind eye to serious defects. It is Beck’s Overton Window in operation, the Hegelian dialectic, intentionally deployed in just these circumstances to keep us tacking ever more leftward. It’s root of power is fear, combined with a manufactured urgency (aka “never waste a crisis”), only this time the “crisis” is Obama himself. I urge you and your fellow Perry backers, if you truly love your country, to set aside your fear and let your judgment be ruled by reason and courage. Choose, just this one time, a proven reformer like Palin, not one more in a long line of business as usual politicians like Perry.
No, you fail. You don’t understand the many parents wanted it. Keep trolling and toting that bucket for the democrats.
Well, if you consider that as good news as compareed to the one time opt out consider yourself lucky...the Texas parents don’t feel so lucky.
By the time we get to the election in 2012, anybody, and by that I literally mean anybody at all, will be able to beat Obama. He may have trouble getting his own party's nomination if Hillary decides to take a shot at him. 2012 is going to be a throw-the-bums out election year. More incumbents are going to lose than lost in 1994.
In 1776, Thomas Paine convinced Americans to throw-the-bums out with these words, "We have every opportunity and every encouragement before us, to form the noblest, purest constitution on the face of the earth. We have it in our power to begin the world over again."
We the people do not want somebody just because they might be able to beat Obama. We want somebody that can hear Thomas Paine's words echoing down through the annals of time, even today:
The 2012 election sets the stage;
Yes, of course, I used my super powers of Alinskyism to bait all these Sarah Palin supporters into posting leftist drivel in their attempts to trash Rick Perry. Infest threads? Really? This is a Rick Perry thread! Or are we only allowed to trash Rick Perry on Rick Perry threads?
As I said, we need another bug-zapper thread.
Yeah, let's zot all the Perry supporters on this place. That would be a great move!
If you’d read the conversation, you would understand that the good news was that the Legislature did not change that law that year.
Well, the bad news for you, is that they did. You can no longer one time opt out.
Very cagey answer actually. She has said other times that their path to citizenship is to go to the back of the line. Bob
You’re not a troll, obviously, but I don’t put stock in senators and reps trying to get on the side of the person who they think will win. My problem with Perry supporters is that I think that they are ignoring his arrogant big government streak, and his coddling of La Raza and illegal aliens in general. Not to mention his snuggling up with some Islamic characters who should not be trusted. To me, Perry is just another typical pol. Bob
I’m still VERY interested in his reasons for his metamorphosis after supporting Carter, Mondale, Gore and Dukakis, all after age 30. It seems opportunistic. And some of his policies are anathema to small government. Bob
Well, you can rest easy. Before Reagan woke up after age 30 in 1964 and became a republican he was a HUGE supporter of FDR and the New Deal!
Al Gore was as conservative a democrat as there ever was until he realized he could make $billions of the ChiExg for carbon trading.
I have yet to see Perry present an anethema to small government even when he WAS a democrat and supported Tort Reform for which the democrats and the Texas Trial Lawyers crucified him. That will make anybody wake up. Can you name one policy Perry has carried out that supports big government?
Gardasil and the super highway. Plus, his acceptance w/o hesitation of multi-billions in stimulus money to balance Tx. irresponsible spending. If I rate Palin a 98 and Obama a 0, and I do, I’d give Perry a 50 or 60, maybe.
His newborn interest in sanctuary cities and national prayer meetings are laudable, but it’s hard to trust his sincerity at this point. I really have a problem with in-state benefits for illegals as well, not to mention his rejection of the WEAK Az. law for being too STRICT! America NEEDS better, IMO, and several candidates are much better in my evaluation. Cordially, Bob
Does anyone know if Perry supports odious big-government ethanol subsidies? This is another HUGE issue for me. I know that Sarah Palin opposes them, but where do the other candidates stand? Thanks, Bob
Answered and “refudiated.”
Gardasil was a kerfuffle over nothing. My daughter opted out in 2003...due to Rick Perry’s legislation. She doesn’t ever have to opt out again and SHE gets to decide whether her kids get the needle or not. End of that story.
The Trans Texas Corridor is being built today because the US Congress ordered it, not Rick Perry. We had some problems with the expansion and it’s been re-routed. Problem solved, by Rick Perry. And it continues to be built because the US Congress ordered it so.
Texas does not irresponsibly spend. However the federally unfunded mandates quadrupled over the last five years and we had a debt problem with FEDERAL SPENDING. When the democrats handed down the stimulus money, Rick Perry saw an opportunity to solve our problems by suing and getting these strings of the shovel-ready jobs removed from it and WON! Then he took the feds money and he paid off the feds debt from their unfunded mandates and we’ve balanced our budget and we’re not funding those mandates again. It was a brilliant move by Perry.
His interest in the Sanctuary Cities wasn’t newborn. He got the legislation put before the legislature, the legislasture couldn’t agree to pass it. He pulled it back up into the special session and the legislature still quibbled. Even though it had many of the same clauses AZ1070 has.
All the Texas Dream Act does is allow in-state tuition PAID by these children who have mostly lived here all their lives and for whom everything that was bought for them was taxed and supported the state. Texas college and university system is full of foreign students who’ve never put a dime into this state like these kids have, including out of state kids. Not only that, in order to qualify for in-state tuition, they have to get in line like everybody else and apply for citizenshhip if they intend to stay, or join our military.
Rick Perry and our AG filed an amicus brief in support of AZ’s 1070 and any other legislation they want to pass to protect their state. That’s not WEAK!
Obviously you have another candidate in mind, Sarah Palin. It’ll be interesting to see whether you present all the democrapic propaganda they produce against her like it is the truth, as you have with Perry. I suspect you’ll be screeching and squawling like a banshee monkey in the trees.
I can certainly support Sarah Palin’s PROVEN record of success without trashing my own governor’s PROVEN RECORD of success. Can you? I doubt it. Closed minds and loose lips sink ships.
You might check back occasionally:
See number 46
Hardly. Much like Irene, lots of wind, lots of noise, but not the expected damage.
” Perry is not the conservative that some on FR try to make him out to be. He’s a self-serving career politician who’s more beholden to big business and his globalist masters than he would be to the American people. And the more I read the more I am convinced both he and his supporters like it that way. “
Perry is merely the question....
N O is the answer : )
You may well have a good point on Perry’s acceptance of stimulus money. On the Az issue, I saw Perry with my own eyes REJECT their strategy. That is weak, IMO. Re the in-state tuition for illegals issue, I simply have a big philosophical difference about this. Americans owe illegals nothing, IMO. There are many good folks among the illegals, but there is no question that the coddling of Hispanics illicitly entering has placed an unbearable burden on our education, medical and penal systems. There is no argument on this one. Bob
You haven't been around enough to remember the bug-zapper thread, have you?
His supposed reason for making it mandatory was to make it eligible for massive Federal programs.
This is not the behaviour of a conservative.
Sorry 'bout that.
Spell it out, please -- I'm not making the connection on how that was agreeing with me.
Cheers! This does not service big government, it just serviced the parents who wanted it. Sorry to burst your little bubble.
He never ONCE rejected their strategy. He supported it!
It was not good law for Texas or even really needed except in the Sanctuary Cities which he tried to get it passed. The great majority of Texas Sheriffs are republicans who already enforce the laws on the books. Do you even have a clue what kind of burden this puts on our counties who have to hold these people for MONTHS waiting on the feds to act? Texas is NOT ARIZONA! A LOT of their Sheriffs are DEMOCRATS that don’t want to enforce federal laws. Texas is FOUR TIMES BIGGER than Arizona, with a border 1200 miles long as opposed to Arizona’s 300 miles. It is insane to try to build a fence across 1200 miles of open wilderness where illegals can crawl right over it in two minutes! Not to mention fighting off lawsuits by the many property owners that don’t want the fence built! Governor Perry has put more armed manpower and money on that border than the feds we pay to protect it. He’s also putting 100 returning vets down ther as game wardens who can go on any property without a warrant, including federal park lands, armed to the gils. He knows the only thing that is going to stop the influx of illegals is armed personnel.
Now if you want to buy the democratic propaganda that Perry is weak on illegal immigration, again I can’t stop you. And I can’t stop the democrats laughing at your arse while you do it.
I see that several people have let you know that they too thought that the Governor Perry said, “audios MoFo.” (Disclaimer: I don’t like public cussing, but have been known to use a not-so-choice word when the energy is needed.)
However, “Adios MoFo,” is a(n) euphemism and just cute. I even ordered some bumperstickers - couldn’t resist them.
No trivia. These “issues” have been thrown at him for years. And for years he keeps getting elected. Sounds like some people either don’t care, or have taken the time to look and see what actually happened. A small minority of deranged Palinistas on FR are not going to change the outcome of the primaries. Perry will win the primary, and he will be our next president. Palin...2020.
Small government federalists do not override parental authority and morality in sexual matters to invite Big Brother funding.
The only bubble is Perry.
When all is said and done, it's just astroturf.
No, he only just recently broke his promise not to run for president, and I have no intention of forgiving him for that. Nor should you rely on the willingness of Texans to overlook such defects as a measure of what the rest of the country will do, especially once Palin announces and the rest of us get a real choice. Peace.
Don’t know too many people outside of the fringe that are going to get in a twist over that. He was drafted as far as I’m concerned.
The truth will come out in the coming months about his record, as he will have every chance to explain. I fully understand that the Feds are a much bigger problem than Rick Perry or any other Republican, save maybe Juan McCain. Bob
Well, good luck with THAT!
Drafted? Very nice spin job. I'm impressed. And you might even get a few folks to believe that. Too bad for them. They'll waste their vote on a man who will tell them whatever they want to hear to get their vote and then do whatever he wants after he gets in.
But your rationalization is exemplary of the bigger problem you raise. It has been, for too long, a fringe idea to expect our political leaders to keep their promises. Character doesn't matter like it used to. You're right about that. The Bible says a good man keeps his word even when it hurts him to do so. I guess not too many people believe that anymore. My dad was that kind of man, and I was always very proud of him for that. To me, anything less than that just isnt a real man, no matter what state he comes from.
But I'm betting the farm that you are wrong about people caring about this. The driving force that energized the Tea-soaked 2010 victory for conservatives is that we thought we were getting a new batch of citizen politicians who would actually keep their promises to represent our interests faithfully in congress, despite severe temptation to cave to the system. We have been disappointed with some of them, and others have been faithful. Which of these do you think the Tea Party will reward in 2012? People who can break their promises when it suits them, or people who keep their word even when it costs them? I'm betting on the promise-keepers. You can do as you please. Come the primaries we will find out which of us has placed the better bet.
Who’s your candidate, Springfield?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.