And Reagan appointed Sandra Day O'Connor. So what?
And how does that exonerate Perry for bad decision making and supporting a moderate over a conservative?
It doesn't exonerate him and I never claimed it did. Perry supported who he thought was the best pick and that appears to have been a mistake. Sandra Day O'Connor was also a moderate and turned out, imho, to be a mistake. If what I read is true, this guy Smith (good guy) won by a substantial margin against Rodriguez (bad guy) during the primary in 2001. In 2004, Smith (good guy) lost in the primary to Paul Green (?). Clearly, the voters rejected Perry's candidate in 2001. For some reason though, these same voters chose not to support Smith just three years later. Maybe there's more to the story than the originator of this thread is offering.
Some folks are working pretty damn hard to demonize Rick Perry. I'm as skeptical of them as I am of any of the Republican candidates. Our country is on the express train into the sewer, and taking our liberty with it, so I'm not fixated on -- or frothing at the mouth over -- Gardasil, a superhighway and one judicial appointment. I'm still learning about Rick Perry and haven't made any decisions as to whom to support in the presidential primary, however, relying on input from people who can't keep these issues in perspective is probably not the best way to learn about Perry's position on important issues like illegal immigration, economic policy, national defense, the defense of life and the war on our culture.
posted on 08/12/2011 11:20:14 AM PDT
(Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson