Skip to comments.Some of You Tea Party Folk Think Rick Perry’s the Answer?
Posted on 08/28/2011 10:01:59 AM PDT by The Bronze Titan
If youre a Tea Party member, or you have significant sympathies with them, Id caution you against climbing aboard Rick Perrys 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. Hes no friend to individual rights, except in an election season, and hes not really the trend-setter hed have you believe. His record on jobs isnt actually so swift as hed have you believe, and hes got less in common with the average Texan than he does with the Wall Street types with whom he prefers to consort. Hes no friend of Main Street, and hes certainly no friend to real entrepreneurs, and for all his posturing as one of us, he isnt, and its been quite plain. Those of you from outside Texas can be forgiven for mistaking Perry for a conservative. Its assumed because hes a Republican, and hes from Texas, he must be. Let me now explain a bit of why this isnt the case.
Friday I heard the increasingly estimable Mark Davis claim that you shouldnt 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 doesnt mention is that it was a long stretch of years between Reagans conversion and his arrival in California electoral politics. This isnt the case with Rick Perry. He was Al Gores Texas Campaign Manager in 1988, and following the loss, immediately reversed course and ran as a Republican. I dont know about you, but despite Davis rather disingenuous interpretation of Reagans conversion, painting it as just alike, Im 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 Limbaughs 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 Perrys 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 Susterens show. If you believe that stage-managed bit of theater, Im inclined to let you know right now that hes relatively no more conservative in real terms than George Bush, which is to say on the matter of his statist, globalist reflexes, hes no conservative at all. Id 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 theres a tendency to overstate things in the name of supporting ones position, but its really no exaggeration to suggest that Perry isnt really very close in his thinking to Tea Party Members, not when measured against what hes been saying since October 2010, but in what he has said all along throughout his career. Hes taken money and support from La Raza, ACORN, and other groups that advocate spending tax-payer dollars for dubious programs and projects.
Hes also a crony-capitalist. If youre like me, thats simply something you cant abide. I love the free market, but Governor Perrys revolving door between his staff and corporate boardrooms is a well-established phenomenon, and frankly, if you buy into his nonsense, hes 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.
Youve 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 Perrys 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 corridors 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 its a lot of land, Texas is a big state. Thats all well and good if the state already owns the land, but since it doesnt, 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 ought 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 didnt 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 Perrys Transportation Commission. They said it couldnt be done in a cost-efficient way. Your confusion at this statement matches that of the average Texan who realizes that this couldnt possibly be true. How hard is it to add a few lanes here and there? Yes, youll 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 wouldnt be able to access most smaller towns from along its length. Im sure youll agree with me that the fact that one of Perrys 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 Perrys TTC plans. Right?
Ladies and gentlemen, if youve fallen prey to the hype about Perry, you may be forgiven, particularly if youre not from Texas. Youre not aware, as so many here, that Perry isnt the fellow hes now being portrayed to be. Hes 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, hes 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: Were being hustled again.
Um, Perry does not stand for everything this site stands for. Sorry to have to correct you. I can’t just let that go because it’s simply not true. FR has NEVER in all my years here been a place that welcomes pro-amnesty conservatives NOR open borders NOR candidates who sell legislation/votes/executive orders to the highest bidder. FR has never been a place where we excused candidates who are pro-U.N. either. FR is a property rights advocate also. So, NO, FR can support who they want, as it’s a free country (so far), but I have to correct factual errors when I see them. If FR has changed & any of those things are no longer true, please point to the FR mission statement that notes the change.
No, Palin isn’t “in” right now, which makes me want to support her more, but instead of jumping on a specific bandwagon while we wait, would our time not be better spent vetting ALL the candidates??? Hashing it out and let the cream rise to the top. If Perry is not what he claims, isn’t it better we find out NOW and put the pressure even more on Palin to jump in??
That statement alone shows that you are clueless about the Tea Party. Need I remind you that the Tea Party is made up of individuals. There are no elected leaders. There are self appointed leaders.
Correction, they are all self appointed opportunists.
The author states that there's a catastrophe in Texas. Texas happens to be on the the few bright spots in the nation right now. No matter how hard the Anti-Perry people and Obama trash talk Texas' economy, the people will not believe it.
The author says Perry was Algore's campaign manager. That's an outright lie. That's like saying a paper pusher at the CIA is the same as an undercover agent. Now, did Perry support Gore a quarter of a century ago? Yes. Did he work for his campaign? Yes. Was he Gore's 1988 campaign manager? No.
But, let's dig deeper into Texas history, since the anti-Perry folks on here keep lumping in Algore as if this happened last year. The author wants to talk about lies by omission. Said author is just as guilty of his accusation by not stating that Texas hardcore democrat up until the late 80s. It was not out of the ordinary for there not to be an election after the primaries, b/c the republicans wouldn't run anybody. Obama likes to say that Texas has been historically Republican, but a quick bit of research for those non-Texans will notice that there have only been SIX republican governors of Texas out of the 47 governors. Bush and Perry make up 2 of them. Prior to Bush was Gov. Clements, and he was the 1st Republican governor since the 1870s. It wasn't until 2002 that the republicans controlled the Texas House. It has been since reconstruction the last time they held that power. If you wanted to get elected, you ran as a democrat.
Now, the article claims that if Texas wants to build roads, they will just eminent domain the landowner and, voila, the landowner loses land. Now, the author of this article is either ignorant of the road building process, or the author is lying. The governor doesn't just wave a wand, thus owning the land. That is not how the road building process works. The city/state/federal government will go to the landowners and try to work out a right of way agreement. This can include the landowner keeping his mineral rights, but allowing the city/state/federal gov't to access the surface. The landowner, if he agrees to the contract, will get paid for this land. If the landowner refuses, the state or federal government (in this case) would then proceed to bring suit against the landowner. The judge would then decide whether or not the government should have access for the land in exchange for paying the landowner the fair market value of the property.
An example of this is the interstate process. I have recently worked the title for property backing up to the then proposed I-30 in Fort Worth. Some landowners granted the ROW and reserved minerals. Some granted it outright. Some refused and were taken to court by the Federal Government. In one particular case the federal government was granted full right and title to the strip of land. They paid the property owner the fair market value, then deeded the property to the State of Texas. Not one time did the governor of Texas at that point wave a wand and confiscate the land. He doesn't have that power.
Now, if one has issues with building roads, then I can't do much for you, but that's how the property is obtained, and it's usually by the landowner negotiating for more money, thus negating the need for a civil suit.
Now, regarding the transportation system in Texas. For those who are against building new roads, what is the solution to the growing population of Texas? Those who drive in Houston/DFW/Austin know that there's a traffic jam problem. Those who are against Perry complain b/c a private company was going to take the brunt of the costs to build these toll roads. The alternative is to raise your taxes. But, Perry wanted wanted this plan to allow the private companies to fund it, then get reimbursed on the tolls.
Those also against the idea of building new roads in Texas claim that this will allow trucks from Mexico to drive in Texas. Here's a news flash. Mexican trucks already drive in Texas and the United States, just as trucks from Canada drive here.
As a side note, the author of this article takes shots at Mark Davis for putting some perspective into things. Was that necessary? Mark works out of Arlington, Texas on the great WBAP. Those who listen to him before Rush know that he was very fair in the 2010 primary process. He had Debra Medina and KBH on very often and challenged them, along with Perry. But, if one says one single thing positive about Perry, that makes one a "Perry Apologist" in the highest degree.
Mark just happens to be of the opinion that if the republicans of Texas didn't care about these issues, the national republicans won't, either. Per the 3 re-elections as governor, the people don't care that Perry supported Gore a quarter of a century ago. They don't care that he put together a plan to build roads in Texas. They don't care that he issued an executive order that said you didn't have to take the HPV vaccine if you didn't want to. Yes, your eyes didn't do you wrongly. Nobody forced anybody to do anything. If you didn't want to take the shot, you didn't have to take the shot.
Now, I will close for now since this post is getting quite long. I will be accused of cherry picking issues. No, I just don't feel like typing anymore. I choose not to go after all of the spaghetti that's thrown up against the wall.
I agree with you. (There was no confusion...I read both.)
You’re wasting your time responding to the anti-Perry trolls. They have their talking points and they’re sticking with them.
What is his exact relationship to Merck and all those other corps? If he got them special tax breaks to encourage them to move their HQ into the state, etc, that doesn’t sound much worse than what other governors would do. I’m not against toll roads per se, although using the power of the state to finance and impose a mega-highway is impossible to justify. I just hope this is supposed to all be an argument for Romney instead of someone like Paul/Bachman/etc.
Perry endorsed Giuliani in the same election.
“Um, Perry does not stand for everything this site stands for.”
Could we have a list, please with proof?
(Realizing that much of what has been claimed by the anti-Perry posters has already been refuted.)
I feel lik give Perry a chance and see what he has to say in debates
I feel lik give Perry a chance and see what he has to say in debates
I feel lik give Perry a chance and see what he has to say in debates
“Youre wasting your time responding to the anti-Perry trolls. They have their talking points and theyre sticking with them.”
Rick Santelli’s spontaneous rant was in February of that year, so who co-opted who?
Neither you nor “The Tea Party” can or will speak for me.
I will not be directed by you, by the GOP, or “The Tea Party”, or by any other party or organization who thinks they can tell me (a free man) what the “right way to think” is.
[My position on what gets taught in school: Governments should not operate schools.]
You never told me what “priorities” you accused me of “imposing” on you...
...or how it is that you think I will be responsible
for idiots like yourself forming a 3rd party.
Try to get a grip on yourself.
I greatly admire her too, and probably would vote for her. But she isn’t running for anything, so far. I know, now I’m going to hear how “all the signs are there”, “she’ll announce September 3, 4, 5 or later in the month - whenever”.
If she does, then I’ll reconsider, but Romney/Paul are out for me - positively.
LOL Mark Davis. I tune out of Limbaugh’s show when the master of bloviation in on.
AND...I agree with several of you. It’s not worth going after so much pure negative gook being thrown up on the wall.
I gave the list when I posted that comment. Keep reading.
No, you did not.
Heck - he would probably be happy to give McPain another shot...
Hey, Carville...is that you?
There seems to be two different attitudes displayed here. One group is fixated on defeating Obama as if that’s the only thing that matters.
The other group(mine) is determined to clean up Washington DC and is looking for a candidate that will take on the corruption in all political parties. Defeating Obama is merely one step in the process.
The problem with the first group is that they fear Obama so much that they will settle for anyone they believe will defeat him. You won’t win anything coming from a position of fear.
It’s time to look for bold leadership, not a band-aid administration. Obama has given us the best opportunity in our lifetimes to roll back the size and scope of government but it will take a true believer occupying the White House to accomplish it.
And it will take another influx of tea party candidates to congress. As I see it, the only one qualified true believer is Sarah Palin for president.
We can elect someone else but the corruption will go on and on and on. And we all get to work and pay for it. Isn’t life grand?
Reply to the title: Actually, Perry is more of the same problem(RINO), in a sneakier package than usual.
Not buying what he’s selling.
[ “A new poll from Gallup shows that the Texas governor has 35 percent support among Republicans who identify themselves members of the Tea Party movement. ]
ALL Polls are propaganda.. all of them.. even the ones that go your way..
They are for manipulating the weak minded.. who are drawn to them..
But the weak minded always follow the herd.. the majority..
The majority of TP Caucus members KNOW Perry is a RINO..
AND...Are not easily fooled.. not all republicans are conservatives..
Some are not for a Republic but for a democracy.. and barely know the difference..
Is Perry better than Obama? If so and he is the nominee, that’s good enough for me.
I suppose deciding to 'become President of the United States' equates just to getting another job.
I’m not against vetting Perry, but for a pro Palin site to post a hit piece on an announced candidate when Palin hasn’t joined the fray is unseemly and I don’t think Palin would support such an effort. There are enough anti-Perry threads started with articles from the MSM. We don’t need them coming from Pro-Palin sites. You want to promote Palin, that’s great. You want to destroy Perry? Don’t use Sarah Palin as a cover for your hatred.
“...it wasnt on his radar screen 45 days ago...”
And even that is longer ago than your sign up date on FreeRepublic, newb.
The more “conservative Republicans” I see enter the race, the more sure I am that we are going to wind up with the same crap we got in 2009 (the word crap is, of course, referring to McCain, but also includes the cluster-whatever that was the 2008 primary campaign). I grow more certain by the day that the only candidate that will do us and the country any good is the one who has been consistant throughout his career and is probably the only tried and true conservative in the bunch (including the ones we are waiting on to jump into the fray.
You and whomever else can laugh at me all you want. But I remember well the results of two Bush Presidencies (Clinton and Obama, to be precise). And I sure know the result of running a guranteed rino. You’ll not get rid of Obama by nominating someone similar (but not as ignorant or stupid or openly socialist) to him that just talks different. Conservatives will not stand for it, just like they would not stand for it 2008.
"Cross-over appeal", now you're reminding me of Tokyo-Rove.
You do know simple math right? It will take more than the TP to win the general.
Keep on being deluded thinking that purifying the party will actually entail a winning margin on election day.
If you’re pushing Perry, then you are pushing social issues, because he’s all wrong on financial issues and limited government issues.
Oddly you keep on stating positions that I fully agree with (gov’t out of education entirely). In that context I can’t see why you would view Perry favorably at all, unless you are relying exclusively on his re-invented public persona of the past few months.
Really? What has she said or done that makes you think that. There has to be some 'sign' that you've read or seen to make you think that way. What may that be?
Yes, definitely. A lot of times, you have a focus, and then something happens and a new focus emerges. I see nothing wrong with that.
It's not necessary.
Once Sarah declares, all the Sarah wannabes fade off into the sunset.
And the longer she puts it off, the longer she keeps Ubama in total disarray.
“...If youre pushing Perry...”
And I have done that ... where???
Excellent excellent post. Thank you.
Another with more facts (some repeating) was just posted by hocndoc.
“...I regard any reference to my sign-up date here as an admission that I am correct...”
I don’t give a flying fig what you regard.
Obviously you do care as you keep responding, Ophelia.
Yes. Different situation. We need to keep our sense of humor and perspective on all of this, all the while engaging in a serious debate concerning the issues and the candidates.
Yeah a lot of people endorsed Rudy until his true colors began to show.
We need all 50 or at least a majority.
This is the one issue that needs to be puched. The failure of the FEDs Bush and Zero have driven up State cost enormously.
This has to have some sort of Constitutional element that would force the issue.
Thank you so much, Sir! I’ll admit to a little worry.
We are all at least nominally on the same side!
This conversation began with your post at #9
where you took it upon yourself to define
what “the right way to think” was for tea partiers.
You can’t handle the truth.
And I have done that ... where???
Lemme see, you've done nothing on this thread but start a sh*t-fight with someone who pointed out that no genuine Tea Party person would endorse or support Perry. 2+2 = ??
“...no genuine Tea Party person...”
As defined by who?
In fact, if the supremes rule that the forced payment of ins premiums is unconstitutional. can an argument be made that the Feds are FORCING costs on States by refusing to enforce the Constitution and the immigration laws?
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.