Some of You Tea Party Folk Think Rick Perry’s the Answer?

C4P ^ | August 28, 2011 | Marc America

[xzins]

Oh, but wait, I see you’re not opposed to “vetting”, just so long as the “vetting” is all “positive”. I get it now.

Absolutely, yes, the vetting of conservatives by other conservatives is to be positive.

Answer me this ... would you rather have Perry as a senator in Congress or would you rather have Romney?

Conservatives are insane to destroy another conservative who is not their first choice. Lord knows that Perry is FAR more conservative than Scott Brown, but you were ok with Brown in order to "throw egg" on Kennedy in Massachusetts.

And interestingly you said this a few months ago:

I am supporting Palin if she runs. That being said, my advice to everyone: Don’t get worked up on ‘who’ supports ‘whom’ in the Republican Pres primaries. Support whomever you feel is the most honest and sincere in carrying out the conservative agenda once elected to office. In the end, we will need to support whomever gets the nomination if you are really worked up about the POS we have in office now.

[Tempest]

Guess what. If Perry makes it through to the nomination. he is going to get labeled like that in a non-stop manner. You better start coming up with better argument, because I seriously doubt that America is ready for another Texas governor.

And no, nobody is going to buy into that GWB isn't really a Texan act.

[xzins]

Gov-bean-counter wrote this about Scott Brown, liberal Rino from Massachusetts:

Has Steele been queried about the National Party’s failure to support this candidate?

It's OK to worry about a liberal Rino, but who cares if we destroy a pro-life, pro-God, pro-gun, pro-fiscal conservative when we're arguing in favor of our favorite conservative over another conservative.

I'm appalled at the ignorance of conservatives when it comes to doing research for their enemies. If Palin becomes president, do we think that she'll hate the idea of a Rick Perry as governor of Texas or as a future senator from Texas. Heck no, she won't hate it. She'll pray for it to happen, and then she'll cuss under her breath at all those near-sighted conservatives who intentionally injured conservative candidates.

And using humor in supporting Scott Brown after his naked picture in Cosmo, you said:

Lord I hope the Brown campaign doesn't have a similar picture of Croakley. I don't think I could stand it...

Honestly, gbc, I don't think I can take more conservatives destroying conservatives thinking they're supporting their favorite conservative, but they don't attack obvious rino's, but instead they support them.

You do not shoot people on your own side, but give covering fire to those against you.

It's how one wins wars.

[The Bronze Titan]

-"Conservatives are insane to destroy another conservative who is not their first choice."

Ok, let's keep quiet on Perry. Let's not say anything that might upset ANYONE, lest they think that we might be for the Socialist.

You guys really take the cake. Always trying to deflect from defending Perry's record by resorting to your bogus and phony argument .... 'ok, you want Perry or the Devil' - GIVE ME FREAKING BREAK! The guy's announced only 15 days ago, said he had no clue he even wanted to be President 60 days ago, and we're all supposed BOW DOWN STFU and SING 'HOSANNAH IN THE HIGHEST' the minute he announced?

Here, here's a couple of more "positive" vettings you can try on for size. It's from a couple of radical liberal marxist outlets: 'The Washington Examiner' and "Townhall.com" (tell me how that fits the template of the conservative message from the 2010 elections:

- The cowboy corporatist rides to the rescue

- Rick Perry's NAFTA Superhighway Problem

[gov_bean_ counter]

I have said my piece regarding Perry and will say no more. I am sorry if you are offended by a frank discussion of Mr. Perry's associations relative to grants and campaign contributions (which have been my primary focus). But if anonymous posts on this website can destroy a candidate, then he wasn't much of a candidate to begin with.

[xzins]

Here’s the clue, Titan. You find it ok to speak positively of OBVIOUS Rino Scot Brown winning in Massachusetts, but you attack a conservative who is pro-life, pro-gun, pro-God, and pro-fiscal sanity.

Vetting a record for George Bush, you would have come up with the same stuff.

I’m betting you voted for GW. Did you?

[xzins]

You miss the point, gbc. It isn’t about NOT VETTING Perry. It’s about recognizing the GOOD that is in any candidate who claims to be conservative.

He is pro-life, pro-gun, pro-God, pro-fiscal sanity, etc.

There is a LOT of good there.

Say that you don’t like the Guardasil decision, that you don’t like the trans-texas highway, that you didn’t like some of his fiscal decisions.

But, you follow it up with what was correctly done, and the man did an awful lot that was right.

Same with Palin, BAchmann, Santorum, Cain, Gingrich.

[Jean S]

Just curious, who do you support? You obviously hate Perry. Who is your candidate?

[The Bronze Titan]

x, First of all, quit bustin on ‘gov’. You can’t diss on him based on him supporting the NON-RAT in any election. I don’t care if it was Scott Brown in drag against those commies in MA.

Here’s the deal - In the general I’ve voted for Reagan, Bush, Dole, Bush, and McCain - and as long as there is a Democrat Party on the other side of the ballot, it’s highly unlikely that this trend will change.

What does that prove in terms of vetting in the primaries?

In 2008 primaries I campaigned against McCain (and for no one in particular), and called him every name in the book. Probably like a few others around here.

It’s 12 light years before AUGUST 2012, we’re going to be fighting for who is going to be the BIG ENCHILADA for our side, and you’d better get used to it because it’s going to be a WAR in the primaries. Just like the RATs had their war in 2008 (and that didn’t seem to keep them from winning in NOV).

There was a vicious war in 1980 primaries. The guy that called Reagan’s economic plan “Voodoo Economics” wound up being chosen by Reagan to be his VP (and ‘Eastern Establishment’ dude), and that didn’t seem to keep Republicans from winning in NOV.

So, what’s the deal? Lighten up. Take the hits, or respond with something back that will make one understand better on how the issue of Perry’s action served to advance the conservative cause.

[gov_bean_ counter]

thank you. You said it much better than I could have.

Have a great evening.

[The Bronze Titan]

"Just curious, who do you support? You obviously hate Perry. Who is your candidate?"

What gave you the idea that I 'hate' Perry? Because I am posting quotes and actions that might run counter to the conservative philosophy that should be reflected in the person that is to be elected to lead us in the fight?

I have not chosen a "candidate" yet, because at this point in time, there is no one in the current announced "candidate" field that I SUFFICIENTLY trust based on their records as I have learned of them (relative to what I laid out).

The candidate I chose will have a demonstrated record of actually having accomplished what they campaigned on - irregardless of 'party loyalties'. Doing what is BEST for the people, and working WITH either party to accomplish what is deemed the best course of action for the citizens.

If you know of anyone that fits that bill, let me know.

[xzins]

I’m bustin on both of you. The big deal is what’s good for conservatism. What’s good for conservatism is that we don’t do opposition research on behalf of liberals, and we don’t do voting sector polarization on behalf of liberals. We let them do that on their own.

You gonna sit there and tell me that Sharon Angle wasn’t injured by her own side during the primary and during the election in Nevada?

There is a way to oppose one of our people that doesn’t increase their burden in the current election or one for a different office in the future.

Personally, I’d love to see a Senator Bachmann from Wisc. some day.

[xzins]

Also, you gonna tell me that Palin wasn’t injured by McCain’s staff?

[The Bronze Titan]

Take a rest. We’ve got a huge fight, and a long way to go, before this even begins, let alone ‘ends’.

[Nervous Tick]

>> Guess what. If Perry makes it through to the nomination. he is going to get labeled like that in a non-stop manner.

Oh, of course. And I’m guessing we’ll find you right here, helping Obama’s minions push that falsehood.

So tell me... how does it feel being on the Obama team? Because, by doing your damndest to peddle the “Perry=Bush=CowboyChimp” meme, that’s exactly the team you’re playing for.

[Fledermaus]

Perry is as phony as Romney.

[gov_bean_ counter]

Over the years I have developed a general dislike for the Southern male politician who wears their religion on their sleeve then proceeds to engage in the same ole, same ole back room deals with cronies. Very simply it goes to character. I resent the politician who has no regard for the appearance of impropriety then hides behind a Bible, their military service or an outstanding organization like the Boy Scouts of America. I have little time for their supporters who express righteous indignation that I would begin to question the motives of such a fine individual.

I will not rehash the specifics of this race. This is just to let you know where I am coming from on this issue.

[gov_bean_ counter]

Sir, I am a far cry from Nichole Wallace or Steve Schmidt. I have no power to influence anything. I am just one person with an opinion. Thankfully we live in a country where I am still free to express that opinion. As long as I am able I will continue to express that opinion.

BTW, thank you for your service. While deployed to Iraq as a civilian there was one particular chaplain who helped me keep things together during a difficult time.

[The Bronze Titan]

xin, Ok I’ll ‘lighten up’. I see your point in the ‘friendly fire’ perspective, and if you were truly a “chaplin’, well, I can understand where you’re coming from.

Look, it’s gonna get nasty, but here’s something that I would like for you to consider. Any “negatively” construed presentations (at least from me) that is directed against Perry (or any other Republican), will come from the “RIGHT” side of the equation (meaning what he ‘said’ or ‘did’ was not in-line with what I believe to be conservative principles). If I have called him a “phony” conservative, it’s because his demonstrated actions or words, to me and others, demonstrate that.

In the “general”, the Socialists (”Liberals” just don’t exist in the RAT party anymore, only on our side) will targe Perry (or whomever) from the LEFT side, meaning he won’t be SOCIALIST enough. Our bullets now will have NO EFFECT in the general. Trust me. History has proven that.

Unless, though, we get into PERSONAL (non-political) conduct, then all bets are off, and that would be ‘radioactive’ material, lethal in any battle field.

[grey_whiskers]

Thanks, you've put your finger on it.

Thanks for being so concise!

g_w