Posted on 08/29/2011 6:46:20 AM PDT by DRey
Texas Gov. Rick Perry, like most of the other the GOP presidential hopefuls, says his campaign is about undoing the decisions of President Obama. But Perry also presents a stark alternative to the last Republican to occupy the White House, his fellow Texan George W. Bush.
In his writings and speeches before he entered the race, Perry shared the view, widely held among conservatives, that Bush’s government spending habits in office were a betrayal of the GOP’s core fiscal principles. But Perry went further, dismissing “compassionate conservatism,” the central tenet of Bush’s domestic policy, as just more overreach by the federal government.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The facts about Perry’s support for TARP and raising the debt ceiling by $2.4 TRILLION are back up the thread. Go read them.
I know the facts about Palin, too.
Sometimes the LEGAL farm field workers would have fun by scattering like chickens when the planes flew over. And when the INS vans (notified by the plane) would roll in to round them up, the workers would then come out of hiding laughing like crazy.
Along about that time a law (State?) was enacted that said any vehicle found transporting illegals would be immediately confiscated and not returned. It was very effective in the farming/ranching community because nobody wanted to lose their pickup.
In a very short time the flood slowed to a complete stop and it's been years since we've seen planes, border patrol vans or illegals walking the back roads. The vegetable and cotton farmers have become mechanized and I don't know any farmer/rancher who employs them anymore.
The illegal population has changed over the years too. Now they head directly to the big cities to work in construction, restaurants, etc. The work is easier and the pay is probably better. Also, I think there's a darker element now. More dangerous with the drug and people smugglers.
Rick Perry has Distanced Himself from Rick Perry George W. Bush's Brand of Conservatism
It doesn’t mean the Washington Post has suddenly become honest. It means the Washington Post has picked the guy they want for the Republican nominee, and that guy is Rick Perry."
BINGO
Anyone who chooses to forget that Perry is the stealth candidate for the elites should just look at who is supporting him. Krauthammer and now the Washington comPost gives him a favorable article. They are tipping their hand big time.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2770335/posts?page=82#82
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2770335/posts?page=116#116
I agree a much more sinister change has taken place. I know the problem is complex but come on US Government goodies must be stopped completely. We are the welfare country for dirt poor mexicans...and the leaders of Mexico are proud of that. Enough already!!!!!!!
Palin is not infallible. She did a lot of things that we’d call RINOish in anyone else.
Nope he hired Jay Carney and Newt's campaign team who had quit when Newt and his wife went on vacation.
Jay Carney had previously worked for Perry but went to Newt back when Perry showed no interest in running.
Shhh...don’t speak ill of the Oracle.
Either you love to deliberately misrepresent the truth, or you just don't understand economics. Let me educate you.
First, a better metric to use for looking at state spending is how much is spent per resident. To make a relevant comparison, you need to adjust for inflation. Let's do that:
Texas per capita spending in 2000: $2109.00
Texas per capita spending in 2010: $3197.00
Percentage of increase in per capita spending: (3197-2109)/2109=51.6%
Aggregate inflation 2001-2010: 26.4%
Actual increase in per capita spending 2001-2010: 25.2% or 2.5% per year.
Now you might want to argue that a real spending increase of 2.5% per year is too much, but it is hardly the liberal spending spree you want to portray.
Just for comparison purposes, I decided to look at Alaska's spending growth during Sarah's term.
Alaska per capita spending in 2006: $11020.00
Alaska per capita spending in 2009: $12778.00
Percentage of increase in per capita spending: (12778-11020)/11020=15.6%
Aggregate inflation 2007-2009: 6.2%
Actual increase in real per capita spending 2007-2009: 9.4% or 3.13% per year.
OK, fine, on TARP...but MANY others supported it, too.
As far as Cut, Cap, and Balance, I supported it, it was the only realistic plan out there.
A sudden forced reduction of 40% on federal spending would have crashed the markets and economy far worse that they already did. And while possibly the best way to solve the problem, it would have been an electoral disaster for the GOP.
But through the primaries, I must support somone who not only gets the economy and other critical issues right, but also get it right on immigration.I think that Gov. Perry's stance on immigration is symptomatic of the political realities in Texas, a border state on the front line of the immigration issue, and therefore a microcosm of what we all face. That doesn't excuse it, however, it explains it to a degree. I'm looking for a candidate that will at a minimum, as president, lead the charge to secure the border. That one action would be a giant step in beginning to control illegal immigration. The House and Senate are bigger hurdles to overcome, IMO.
Correction—she never did the ultimate RINO thing—she never compromised her principles.
Palin’s record shows her to be the opposite of a RINO.
If you believe that, then Sarah has a bridge to nowhere to sell you, that she supported before she was against.
I don’t mean to knock Palin, just that EVERY CANDIDATE (and potential one) has had some controversial positions, some flip flops, and some boneheaded moves.
“Enforcing the laws as written is always a good idea. The issue is funding, as it would take an incredible tax hike to pay for it. I mean, these illegals are EVERYWHERE. They’re working in singles up to groups of hundreds. The groups are easier to locate, but that will never eliminate the problem. Greed will always make it a problem, just like drug sales. Cutting the head off is the first step, and it’s a doosey.”
You move a mountain ONE shovel at a time! This is a big Time issue and will NOT go away,Close The border and remove this pestilence ,You win the election! Or you lose for turning a blind eye!
Both bills, of course, were totally wrong. TARP because there is no legitimate constitutional grant of power to take money from one group of people, the taxpayers, and hand it over to another more favored group, the bankers. "Cut, cap and balance" because it is immoral to rob our posterity of their God-given, unalienable right to government by consent.
-- Thomas Jefferson"The principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."
“”I do think George (W. Bush) is basically a conservative man who believes in God, in the greatness of America, in the protection of life, and in protecting our nation from our enemies ... (but) he turned a blind eye to undisciplined domestic spending while he focused on ensuring funding for a very important war against the perpetrators of terror.”
To think Palin was renaming conservatism is to misunderstand the entire discussion.
Let’s go back.
“Compassionate conservatism,” when coined a decade ago, meant replacing the genuine compassion inherent to conservatism with the artificial, self-centered compassion of liberalism.
For Palin to use the term common sense conservatism is merely to remind conservatives that they have left one of the most authentic components of conservatism—common sense—out of the picture. She merely used common sense in a descriptive way, not in an attempt to rename conservatism.
The distinction is critical, yet it appears subtle and maybe obscure only if viewed hastily or superficially.
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.