Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: normy

If they looked that carefully they’d see that he had less power in his state than practically any other guv in the country and that most of the growth-friendly environment in Texas predated his tenure.

It’s unfortunate and unfair, but his manner of speaking and gestures were associated with mental slowness in other parts of the country from before W’s time in office. And in another loop of bias, it feeds into his vulnerability for having governed as part of a God Squad when such is also not a positive association for many other parts of the country.

My beef with him is not the above so much as his globalist/amnesty/TTC tendencies, but I don’t think that’ll get through to most of the voting public.


14 posted on 07/14/2011 3:54:26 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: 9YearLurker
Your statement either credits Bob Bullock, the Democrat Lt. Governor under W. B ush or Rick Perry, the other Lt. Governor under W. Bush and the first Republican Lt. Governor EVER in Texas.

Since the Texas Governor has no power (which is what the outsiders keep telling us, and no doubt Obama's team will too) and since the Lt. Governor has all the power, the next logical leap would be the always Democrat Lt. Governors until Perry won, actually started the Texas economic boom.

Perry has been Governor for 10 years and was Lt. Governor before that yet deserves no credit for anything. See how weakly that argument will fly when Obama tries it too?

22 posted on 07/15/2011 5:19:11 AM PDT by normy (Don't take it personally, just take it seriously.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson