Skip to comments.Rick Perry has Distanced Himself from George W. Bush's Brand of Conservatism
Posted on 08/29/2011 6:46:20 AM PDT by DRey
click here to read article
We don’t have a candidate as yet. Been waiting to see if the Republicans regained their senses. No sign of that to date, sadly, though.
I didn’t support TARP and neither did Perry.
“None of the candidates, not even Palin, are advocating that. The problem is more complex than that.”
WRONG as usual,Ever run a business in a “Infested” Area?
I didn’t think so.
I’m hitting and running this at the Library right now, so don’t have time to read further, whether you’ve been corrected or not. Rick Perry would not have signed the debt ceiling bill. Said so. Multiple sources all over the net. Google it. Somehow, you got false information.
What a load.
He teams up with a fellow Governor, a Dem, to push a bailout, right in the middle of the debate over a bailout. They pass it, and then suddenly Perry never had a thing to do with it. LOL...
You are unbelievable.
And I mean that quite literally.
No. I never ran a business in an infested area. But I’ll bet you have! Sounds dreadful and something must be done. First things first: lock up the border, like Perry says.
He very publicly supported “cut, cap and balance,” which would have raised the debt ceiling by $2.4 TRILLION dollars.
It is you who is misinformed, not me.
He can’t handle the truth. Refuses to believe facts. Pointless.
But it is clear he did want the government to take action at that time. I think you would be hard pressed to find any real candidate, declared or not, who did not support the government taking action in the 3rd quarter 2008.
I am not saying I agree with it. The government did a lot to create the mess with their meddling in the first place. But I find few republicans that spoke out in mid-late 2008 that was against some form of bailout.
“No. I never ran a business in an infested area. But Ill bet you have! Sounds dreadful and something must be done. First things first: lock up the border, like Perry says.”
Lock up the people that employ these invaders.
Perry is obviously running a progressive style campaign.
You’ll notice all the claims of lying by those opposing him but so far I’m not seeing them offering up any proof of these so called lies.
Who is running his campaign, Media Matters?
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.
I gave my word to my constituents in Georgia and to the rest of the American people that I would not vote for any bill that increases the debt limit. Although the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill is a step in the right direction, it still raises the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion, and we simply cannot afford it.
Also missing from the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill is the urgency to pay down the debt by immediately reducing the outrageous spending levels to which Washington has become so accustomed. Unfortunately, the cuts outlined in Cut, Cap, and Balance take effect over a period of ten years. We no longer have ten years to spare its too little, too late.
Undoubtedly, we have to cap spending and we must enact a balanced budget amendment, but Congress can get these tasks done without raising the debt ceiling. I have introduced bills to both lower the debt ceiling and to balance the budget.
Weve been down this road before. Administrations of the past have agreed to raise the debt ceiling on a contingency that cuts would be made in future budgets but those cuts never materialized. Its long past time to stop obligating our constitutional duties along with our budgetary problems to both future Congresses and future generations.
Now, please, explain to me how it is that Rick Perry did not support raising the debt ceiling by $2.4 TRILLION dollars.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: WSJ - Governors Against State Bailouts
December 02, 2008
Hard to believe, but not everyone in politics wants a free lunch by Rick Perry and Mark Sanford
The Wall Street Journal
As governors and citizens, we've grown increasingly concerned over the past weeks as Washington has thrown bailout after bailout at the national economy with little to show for it.
In the process, the federal government is not only burying future generations under mountains of debt. It is also taking our country in a very dangerous direction — toward a “bailout mentality” where we look to government rather than ourselves for solutions. We're asking other governors from both sides of the political aisle to join with us in opposing further federal bailout intervention for three reasons.
Our Founding Fathers were clear and deliberate in setting up a system whereby the federal government would only step in for that which states cannot do themselves. An expansionist federal government of the last century has moved us light-years away from that model, but it doesn't mean that Congress can't learn from states that are coming up with solutions that work.
In Texas and South Carolina, we've focused on improving “soil conditions” for businesses by cutting taxes, reforming our legal system and our workers’ compensation system. We'd humbly suggest that Congress take a page from those playbooks by focusing on targeted tax relief paid for by cutting spending, not by borrowing.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Not recent political spin but rather what he was saying years ago.
Yeah. He figured out real quick he was on the wrong side of that.
...Act? Thought they were representatives, not leaders. They're supposed to VOTE, not use legislative orders, which are "ACTS"!!!
...Time for US citizens to "ACT"!!!
Excellent...thank you. I’m sure you pinged me but I must have overlooked it.
Thx again shield
He supported TARP. That’s all I need to know.
You find out what they’re really made of when the pressure is on, not from their campaign rhetoric.
At least when you’re dealing with cynical, manipulative, unprincipled politicians like Rick Perry.
I disagree that the Governor of a State should not give a talk to citizens of the State when invited. He’s everyone’s Governor, not just those who agree with him.
We’re told to be salt and light in this world. Sometimes that means meeting with the people the Pharisees don’t like.
- - - - -
With that as a requirement. If only it was done.
Yes. He was not a fiscal conservative by any reasonable definition, but he was definitely a social conservative and a national security conservative - two of the legs of the "three-legged stool" of conservatism that Reagan spoke of.
This is why I get so upset at people crying "RINO" all of the time. Even Ronald Reagan acknowledged that someone could be a conservative without being conservative in all aspects. He always said that someone who is with us 70% is not our 30% enemy. He knew that to get anything accomplished, such as putting together winning coalitions in Congress, we needed social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives. Nowadays, it seems like we spend way too much of our time trying to drive anyone who doesn't meet our definition of a "true conservative" out of the party.
There were a lot of things that Bush did that I didn't like, especially on the spending side. But I can't think of anyone who ran for president in 2000 that I would have rather been at the helm on 9/11, or who would have pursued the war on terror with as much determination as Bush. We need to stop talking about him like the Dems do. We can disagree with his spending without trashing the man's character.
So who is your republican candidate that did not support it in 3rd quarter, 2008?
They were both cheerleaders in college, both were pilots in military service, both from Texas, both moderate Repubs big on govt spending, both are in favor of amnesty for illegals, and Perry just hired Bush’s campaign team...but, nah, they never heard of each other.
Yes, he certainly shielded the facts from light of day, in his post.
Cut, Cap and Balance was supported for its provisions to cut, cap and balance. The debt ceiling part was anthema but was the trade off to pass the right policies going forward.
Whereas, the Debt Ceiling Bill, which Perry opposed, raised the debt ceiling but failed to put in place the right policies going forward.
But his post pretended that Perry was for the debt ceiling going up and shielded the truth that Perry was for cutting, capping and balancing, and was against the awful Debt Ceiling so-called compromise bill.
Then, he blasted me for not knowing what he really meant, although he was the one who covered up the crucial facts in his original, accusatory post, which only blared that Perry supported raising the debt ceiling.
Given his history, he must feel pretty good about that sorry act, down there in Mom’s basement...
And naturally they come running with nothing that addresses what I said.
You don’t support any of the Republican candiidates, so why should we care what your opinion of them is?
If it actually, cut, or capped, or balanced, there would have been no need to borrow and spend another $2.4 TRILLION dollars.
It was all nothing but smoke and mirrors. Political cover for all.
But the fact is, the Republican leadership, including Governor Perry, were intent every step of the way on raising the debt ceiling by more than two TRILLION.
Perry supporters, and Republicans in general, are doing everything in their power to mask that now, but some of us are no longer fooled by this sort of political nonsense.
False. I have no problem supporting Republicans if they’ll simply do their sworn duty. Getting pretty hard to find those who will, though.
But I am still waiting to hear who you want at the GOP nomination that did NOT support government bailout in 3rd quarter 2008.
Oh, and Saint Sarah supported TARP, too.
“Cut, cap and balance” was a debt ceiling raise. $2.4 TRILLION dollars worth.
You can pretend it wasn’t all you want, but it won’t change the facts.
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 doesnt 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."
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.
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.