Posted on 12/16/2011 10:23:11 AM PST by CaroleL
Early in last night's Republican presidential debate, Texas Governor Rick Perry said he hoped to be the "Tim Tebow of the Iowa caucuses." That pop culture shorthand for an underestimated person of strong faith who comes from behind with no time to spare and snatches victory from the jaws of almost certain defeat was definitely corny, brilliantly memorable and possibly a glimpse into the very near future.
While the mainstream media and the party establishment bicker over whether the go-along-to-get-along elitist or the self-serving serial adulterer will be the GOP nominee, the people of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina are actually deciding who will get their votes. And while former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich spent their time in last night's debate defending their less than conservative records and big government ideas, Governor Perry was effectively highlighting his conservative record and smaller government policies.
(Excerpt) Read more at talkingsides.com ...
That's unfortunate.
I suppose you expect folks to give you a blog hit to read the rest of whatever it is you have written?
Isn't that a bit scummy?
It's time for Perry to call it quits. We don't need another Texas RINO...one was enough.
Better than a Massachusetts liberal.
Neither one will become the nominee....
There are those of us who don’t want Perry to call it quits. I thought he looked Presidential last night and his answers were simple and straightforward.
And his record is conservative all the way.
Notice how I can say I’m for Perry without insulting or tearing down other candidates. Novel idea, huh!
Or a former Speaker of the House who says that he is a conservative but does a lot of liberal things...
Rick Perry is not George W. Bush.
President Bush was comfortable with "big-[federal]-government solutions" to problems (even problems that are none of the federal government's business, if it sticks to its constitutional charter as it is required to do in order to be constitutionally-legitimate).
Perry advocates the devolution of governmental power from Washington back to the States and the People. This, to me, signifies that he is truly a constitutional conservative — as well as a social and fiscal one (as demonstrated by his public record).
To me, just about the entire Republican Party establishment is "RINO" these days. And they definitely do not want Perry to succeed: He is a threat to the status quo that they are eminently "comfortable" with.
More and more the GOP has abandoned its conservative roots, if by that we mean limited, constitutional government, responsive and accountable to the People....
Are any of these GOP establishment folks unhappy with the inexorable decline of individual liberty in this country? I see no evidence of it.
Which is why I left the GOP last summer, and re-registered officially as an "Independent."
If Perry makes the final cut, I would be one Independent voter who chooses to cast my ballot for him.
FWIW.
Perry isn't going anywhere....it's time to eliminate the wheat from the chaff or allow the one individual we all agree would be a disaster...MITTENS the RINO...
So, I guess I'm in the anybody but mittens crowd....and from my view that anybody ain't Perry.....
President Perry. It has a nice sound to it.
You're right. George W. Bush was more articulate and popular with voters when he was Governor of Texas.
>> President Bush was comfortable with "big-[federal]-government solutions" to problems (even problems that are none of the federal government's business, if it sticks to its constitutional charter as it is required to do in order to be constitutionally-legitimate). <<
Governor Perry is comfortable with "big-STATE-government solutions" to problems (even problems that are none of the state government's business, if it sticks to its constitutional charter as it is required to do in order to be constitutionally-legitimate). There's no reason to believe he'll change his ways when he does to Washington.
>> Perry advocates the devolution of governmental power from Washington back to the States and the People. <<
Back to the states, perhaps. I've met a lot of Perry supporters and they don't seem to be fans of taking power away from state government and giving it directly to the people. Some of these "conservatives" are even offended when individual citizens, instead of state government, decide what's best for them. Seems to go against Conservatism 101 but they've actually made the argument that state legislatures can make better decisions on how to run our lives than we can.
>> This, to me, signifies that he is truly a constitutional conservative — as well as a social and fiscal one (as demonstrated by his public record). <<
Not to me. My state government continually grows bigger and more powerful over the years. I don't see that as a return to "true constitutional conservatism". Where were you guys in the Bush years when these liberal state and local governments were sticking their noses into all kinds of things they had no business in -- like spending zillions of tax dollars on embryonic stem cell research -- simply because they didn't like the GOP-run federal government and wanted to thumb their nose at federal authorities? Do you think that's "conservative"?
> To me, just about the entire Republican Party establishment is "RINO" these days. <<
Yes, that would include Governor-for-over-a-decade Perry, who's about as establishment as you can get. He's another career politician who has stayed in office far too long.
>> And they definitely do not want Perry to succeed: He is a threat to the status quo that they are eminently "comfortable" with. <<
Really? And how exactly did he upset the "status quo" in Texas. Feel free to give me a list of all the major changes he enacted in the 12+ years he's been there.
>> More and more the GOP has abandoned its conservative roots, if by that we mean limited, constitutional government, responsive and accountable to the People.... <<
More and more these freepers screaming "STATES RIGHTS!" have abandoned their conservative roots, if by that we mean limited, constitutional government AT ALL LEVELS, responsive and accountable to the People. It seems they're only offended by big federal government and are perfectly happy with bigger and more powerful state/local government.
>> Which is why I left the GOP last summer, and re-registered officially as an "Independent." If Perry makes the final cut, I would be one Independent voter who chooses to cast my ballot for him. FWIW. <<
Okay, that's one "Independent" for the former Democrat Perry. And I'm one lifelong Republican AGAINST the former Democrat Perry. (and don't bother with the Reagan comparisons, Reagan wasn't out stumping for liberal Democrats a year before switching parties)
Aren’t you just sick and fed up with the candidate sycophants daring to compare their idols to Reagan ? News flash, fellas... NONE of them are Reagan.
Well said!
FWIW, the term rino gets thrown around way too much. Perry is Pro-Life, Pro-defense, believes in American Exceptionalism, supports the 2nd Amendment, has pushed tort reform in TX, and is a big backer of the 10th Amendment. I don't see where the term rino applys.
I do think the term serial adulterer is over the top. Gingrich has admitted to his mistakes and says he has learned from them.
Okay now that you got your "shots" in against Perry who is it that you believe is the best candidate?
More and more these freepers screaming "STATES RIGHTS!" have abandoned their conservative roots, if by that we mean limited, constitutional government AT ALL LEVELS, responsive and accountable to the People.
What offers the most liberty to citizens, an all powerful fed govt that dictates to it's citizens or a Republic in which States are treated as sovereign? In the Republic I have the option to move to a different state that better reflects my values. Under federalism all I can do is submit to the govt or leave the country.
Michelle Bachmann better brush up on her facts. She quotes Politifact as saying she was factually correct in the last debate. However, today Politifact says she misrepresented their rating. Today they even give her mixed ratings on truthfulness including a PANTS ON FIRE rating. Looks like she’s going for Mitt’s VP. Keep fighting Newt.
What constitutionalist could be in favor of mass democracy — which seems to be what you approve here? That ultimately boils down to "every man for himself," a doctrine that quickly leads to mob rule, where only the "strong" prevail....
State governments are closer to the people than Washington is. IOW, it is easier to change state-government "solutions" than any "solution" emanating out of Washington.
To me, state government is the constitutional bulwark that intercedes between the feds and the People. As a "mere 'people," I have no standing to sue the government for redress of my grievances. But if I work through my state government — which is easier to "pressure" and change than anything in Washington — I just might be able to get something done.
State legislatures are creatures of the people of the state in a much more direct way, and can affect state government policies far more directly, than ever they can affect the government in Washington.
BillyBoy, you wrote:
My state government continually grows bigger and more powerful over the years. I don't see that as a return to "true constitutional conservatism".Of course not! But then you are the citizen of a state — Illinois — whose government (like mine) is the very model of political corruption, whose methods have been directly exported to this White House. The blame is to be put squarely on the citizens of Illinois for tolerating widespread institutionalized political thuggery, corruption, and what is effectively "mob rule" — over several decades by now, with a decades-long history of incarcerating its political leaders for criminal offenses.
Don't complain to a citizen of Massachusetts if the citizens of Illinois are so evidently willing to tolerate public corruption on a breathtaking scale, who seem blissfully disengaged from the necessary public task of establishing honest, "clean," just, limited, that is constitutional government.
I'm already busy enough with very similar problems in my home state, thank you very much.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, BillyBoy!
FWIW...so was Bush...
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.