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

Skip to comments.

Super PAC backing Rick Perry to spend $55 million to beat rivals, documents reveal
MSNBC.com ^ | September 6, 2011 | Michael Isikoff

Posted on 09/06/2011 10:25:55 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner

The new super PAC backing Rick Perry has drawn up plans to spend $55 million as part of an ambitious campaign strategy aimed at blowing away the Texas governor's rivals in early primary states and securing him the Republican nomination by next spring, according to internal committee documents obtained by NBC News.

The documents underscore the central role that such super PACs — or super political action committees unconstrained by any limits on how much they can collect from wealthy donors and corporations — will play in the 2012 presidential election.

They also show that the strategists behind the new Perry super PAC, led by a longtime Perry confidant and backed with infusions of cash from major Perry donors, are preparing to mount a full service political operation — complete with TV advertising, direct mail and social media outreach.

If it realizes its goals, the super PAC — which calls itself "Make Us Great Again" — will likely eclipse the financial operations of Perry's official presidential campaign committee, according to some Republican consultants.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Politics/Elections; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: corruptbastardsclub; crony; palin; perry; rickperry; rinoricky; sarahpalin; superpac
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-129 next last
Crony capitalism in action---Rick Perry---already bought and paid for.

BTW, he's sprung a leak in his campaign.

1 posted on 09/06/2011 10:26:00 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

I’ll bet Perry and his moderate-to-liberal moneyed backers are thinking that by putting this out there, that it is some sort of effective “shot across the bow” statement that will work to keep Governor Palin out of the race.

If they do, they don’t know our Governor Palin now do they?!


2 posted on 09/06/2011 10:29:02 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
I love the way the 0 bots never worry about the massive crony capitalism Union run political machine that is funding his billion dollar reelection campaign.

Clean up your own corrupt political whorehouse Leftist clown posse before having the arrogance to lecture us.

But that the real truth isn't it? You all are not worried about "crony capitalism" you just want the Right to be politically disarmed so your idol Present-ident 0 can keep his job.

3 posted on 09/06/2011 10:29:53 AM PDT by MNJohnnie (Giving more money to DC to fix the Debt is like giving free drugs to addicts think it will cure them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

Wasn’t it the Democrats who wrote those campaign finance laws?

Anyway, we all knew that Perry was carrying a “for sale” sign.


4 posted on 09/06/2011 10:29:53 AM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
This is EXACTLY how we got George W. Bush.

The GOP ruling-class anointed him long before the first primary vote was cast.

It ain't gonna happen again.

5 posted on 09/06/2011 10:32:02 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Palin is coming, and the Tea Party is coming with her.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

55 million. Oblama expects to raise 1 billion.

Just who is the crony capitalist here.


6 posted on 09/06/2011 10:32:15 AM PDT by Henry Hnyellar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner
That is quite a nice campaign stash given it was less than a year ago he stated publicly he was not going to run for the office of president... Sooooo seems like he got offers he could NOT refuse, in spite of what he said publicly...
7 posted on 09/06/2011 10:33:17 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

I’m so tired of the phrase “Super Pac”. As if the term PAC wasn’t enough. Next thing you know, there will be “Super Duper Pacs”.

It’s a good thing Sarah Palin doesn’t have a PAC, since apparently now it’s really a bad, anti-conservative thing to give money to support a candidate you like.


8 posted on 09/06/2011 10:34:30 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

????????

“It is a point that the Make Us Great Again strategists are emphasizing in courting wealthy donors.”

WHO SHOULD they ask money from????? People on welfare?

Scott Toomey apparently is in an organization which advocates Tort Reform. Since Frivilous Lawsuits are contributory towards needless business loses and since tort reform was an accomplishment of the Perry Administration, this is a plus, no?


9 posted on 09/06/2011 10:40:19 AM PDT by ZULU ( Non nobis, non nobis, Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

You don’t know what you are talking about! SuperPAC and a regular PAC are not the same thing. SuperPACs can get almost unlimitless funds from corporations and high-dollar donors - PAC just receive personal contributions. Btw show us what interest groups or corporation donated to SarahPAC?


10 posted on 09/06/2011 10:41:44 AM PDT by Bigtigermike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie; Virginia Ridgerunner; Brices Crossroads; Al B.
*Make Us Great Again*?

LOL. That "us," looks like some cronies with bundles and oodles of money, just like Sarah Palin was talking about: Ray Sullivan (Mrs. Sullivan is working for Romney)Jason Miller, this Toomey guy, and a very interesting fellow....

George "Brint" Ryan,the co-founder with Toomey of Make Us Great Again, and a huge Perry contributor who has benefitted from his $563,334. to Perry! Perry appointed him to the University of North Texas board of regents and the Dallas tax services firm Ryan runs was awarded $927,500 in tax rebates from a Texas Enterprise Zone program that Perry created.

WOW.

Tip of the proverbial iceberg.

Trying to buy our primaries.

Governor Perry needs a thorough vetting. If he's clean, he'll survive and we will all be the better for having him thoroughly vetted.


11 posted on 09/06/2011 10:44:43 AM PDT by onyx (You're here on FR, so support it! If you support SARAH PALIN & want on her ping list, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts; Windflier
That is quite a nice campaign stash given it was less than a year ago he stated publicly he was not going to run for the office of president... Sooooo seems like he got offers he could NOT refuse, in spite of what he said publicly...

Good point.

12 posted on 09/06/2011 10:46:47 AM PDT by onyx (You're here on FR, so support it! If you support SARAH PALIN & want on her ping list, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

I’m not sure that corporations exercising their constitutional rights is quite the same thing as “crony capitalism”. Most likely, these corporations, if they win, will try to push an agenda of deregulation, tort reform, lower corporate taxes....that sort of thing, ie, the sort of thing that creates real jobs, and real economic growth.

I wouldn’t think that any conservative capitalist would be too worried about that agenda.


13 posted on 09/06/2011 10:48:45 AM PDT by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; AuntB; Tennessee Nana; Fred; rabscuttle385; ...
Perry's got a $55 MILLION campaign stash? Less than a year ago Perry stated publicly he was not going to run for president... seems like he got offers he could NOT refuse, despite his public disavowals........

Perry's owned lock, stock and cowboy hat. Who is going to get payback?

Perry should campaign in a NASCAR jumpsuit with the names of all his donors plastered on it.


14 posted on 09/06/2011 10:52:41 AM PDT by Liz (The rule of law must prevail. We can’t govern ourselves by our personal point of view.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
This is EXACTLY how we got George W. Bush.
The GOP ruling-class anointed him long before the first primary vote was cast.

You're right *on the money* and dead bang accurate with your comments!


It ain't gonna happen again.

RUN SARAH RUN! She's the only one thoroughly vetted and she's squeaky clean honest, as proved by the searching of over 26,000 of her emails.

Just how would the others stand up to that same scrutiny?

15 posted on 09/06/2011 10:53:50 AM PDT by onyx (You're here on FR, so support it! If you support SARAH PALIN & want on her ping list, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude

Note that they expect the nomination to be complete by March 24.

That is less than 7 full months from today.

I know that most of the posters on this thread think that it is a done deal that Palin is going to stomp everyone (and if you are skeptical of that, then you are a naive fool, or worse...a liberal).

Palin might well run. She might even do ok.

But in any event, it is going to be a short campaign because this is going to be over pretty fast. Once those primaries start hitting in the New Year, it’s going to be over soon. So the idea that any other candidate has months and months to consider, plan, and roll out a campaign is simply not living in the real world (at least not the real world of the GOP primary....).

It’s all going to be over in about 200 days.


16 posted on 09/06/2011 10:55:55 AM PDT by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

“I’ll bet Perry and his moderate-to-liberal moneyed backers are thinking that by putting this out there, that it is some sort of effective “shot across the bow” statement that will work to keep Governor Palin out of the race.

If they do, they don’t know our Governor Palin now do they?”

I like Sarah Palin. I’d be happy to have her in the race and would vote for her for the Presidency if she were to win the primary vote. That said, just how can you say “they don’t know our Governor Palin now do they?” She has a very thin record when you consider her to be our President. She ran with McLame, a discredited candidate, and she’s hustled some of the RINOs that I would personally like to see removed from office, and she resigned her governorship in mid-term ( something she surely could not do as our President). So please enlighten the rest of us as to just “what you know “ about “our Sarah Palin!”


17 posted on 09/06/2011 10:58:45 AM PDT by vette6387 (Enough Already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude
I’m not sure that corporations exercising their constitutional rights is quite the same thing as “crony capitalism”. Most likely, these corporations, if they win, will try to push an agenda of deregulation, tort reform, lower corporate taxes....that sort of thing, ie, the sort of thing that creates real jobs, and real economic growth. I wouldn’t think that any conservative capitalist would be too worried about that agenda.

Sarah did not require of them one thin dime to state she wanted to abolish 'corporate taxes'... We really cannot itch about the political system if we continue to play the games that give some animals more equality than the rest. AND what good is Perry's word now if less than a year ago he declared publicly he was not going to run for the office of president.

18 posted on 09/06/2011 11:02:29 AM PDT by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Let me guess who’s on the list: Norman Adams of Adams Insurance Service (insuring contractors -illegals),Dr. Steven Hotze menopause doctor, Bob Perry of Perry homes another alien-hugger.....etc.
Run Sara run!


19 posted on 09/06/2011 11:07:25 AM PDT by magna carta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

Perry is not requiring anything here from these folks...and I say “it’s about time” that corporations started spending some money to protect their (ie, our) freedom. Unions do it all the time. Corporations now have the freedom to advocate; good for them to do so.

As for Palin, good for her. If she runs, she can advocate that position. We’ll if that happens. A lot of people advocate that same position free of charge, as well.

As for Perry changing his mind, so what? This time last year, it looked like Christie, Paul Ryan, Huckabee, Mitch Daniels, Barbour and many others would duke it out for the nomination. They all passed. No one else was standing up to be the alternative to Romney.

It would have been far worse for the country if Romney had run unopposed. So far, Perry is the only one who has had the guts to actually get in the race against Romney and all of HIS money.

Will that change? Maybe.

But maybe not. When Palin announces, if she does, then we will have a second alternative to Romney.

Till then, Perry is the only alternative. And at least there is one.


20 posted on 09/06/2011 11:09:23 AM PDT by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: vette6387
She has a very thin record when you consider her to be our President. She ran with McLame, a discredited candidate, and she’s hustled some of the RINOs that I would personally like to see removed from office, and she resigned her governorship in mid-term ( something she surely could not do as our President). So please enlighten the rest of us as to just “what you know “ about “our Sarah Palin!”

It's obvious from your slanted, biased, and completely cherry-picked selection of the "Facts" that either you are completely ignorant of her history, as explained in her books, in the documentary "The Undefeated" and the historical record of her governorship or you don't really care about the facts or debating from a factual, logical, historical perspective.

You keep pushing the Left-wing MSM and GOP Elite talking points, it really shows who you are.
21 posted on 09/06/2011 11:09:55 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

Everybody, we need to DESPERATELY hope that the whole state of Texas burns to the ground, so that Perry is discredited and SARAH! can take her rightful place at the top of the heap once again.


22 posted on 09/06/2011 11:21:41 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus ("A gentleman considers what is just; a small man considers what is expedient.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

I’m not sure if this is one of those threads where nobody cares about the facts or not, but in case it is.

First, this is based on a planning document. The PAC has not RAISED $55 million. It had a PLAN to SPEND that much, presumably if they could raise that much, over the next year. So there is no “campaign stash”.

Second, a SuperPac is not associated with a candidate. They can raise money FOR a candidate, because the courts have ruled that people are allowed to give money to express their opinions, without restriction. The Pac is not part of a particular campaign, and it is not run by the campaign staff.

Third, the plan reviewed by the news organization is an old, outdated plan. Not sure why that would matter, I presume they still have a plan to raise money and spend it to help elect Rick Perry. Just as there is a PAC which is working to get Michelle Bachmann elected, and there will be a PAC working to get Sarah Palin elected if she enters the race.

I’ve never seen so many conservatives so upset about people raising money to express their opinions on elections. It’s like they think SarahPac doesn’t even exist.


23 posted on 09/06/2011 11:43:40 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

The distinction is stupid, part of the rediculous attempts by career politicians to control how people spend their money to express their opinions. SuperPac and Pac are what we end up with when government regulates people. I’m opposed to that regulation, I think it’s an infringement on our rights.

I have no idea who donates to SarahPac. I’m sure they get money from people who like was Sarah does, and would like to see her continue. Probably also from people who want her to run for office, and hope the money helps get her elected.

I forgot though that some conservatives have now decided that corporations are evil. It’s a bit scary.


24 posted on 09/06/2011 11:47:29 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

OK, to answer your question a bit better. I looked up SarahPac to see the donors. I have NOTHING against people OR corporations giving money to support causes they like. You asked the question.

The first donor on the list was the President of Melina Imports. Now, these are individual donors; the donation is from the president of the corporation, not from the corporation itself, although when you see news reports indicating which companies are supporting which candidates, they always refer to money given by officers of a company as being related to that company, just because that’s what they do, whether it makes sense or not.

The president of Acorn Advisors also gave money. I doubt this is the same “ACORN” that we all hate.

Also, the chairman of TH MCELVAIN OIL & GAS

And the President of RA MILLER INDUSTRIES

And the Owner of APW ENTERPRISES

And the President of FUN EQUIPMENT SALES

And the CEO of ALPS SOUTH LLC

The President of FLAVA PUFF

The President of TRAINYARD TECH, LLC

The Vice President of AW WILLIAMS DRILLING

The President of PUMP REPAIR SPECIALIST INC

Now, you could argue that all of those people who own companies gave their own personal money without regard to their companies. But it is clear that people who OWN businesses are giving money to SarahPac. Probably because they believe what Sarah Palin is doing will be good for their companies. Because that is what business owners do — give money to support candidates who will help their businesses.

And there is nothing wrong with that, or at least there wasn’t from a conservative point of view until someone decided “crony capitalism” really meant “businesses are evil”.


25 posted on 09/06/2011 11:56:45 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Corporations are not evil.....I never said that. But the ‘soft pay for play’ schemes is one of the root problems for why simple things like cutting government don’t get done in Washington D.C. by the Republican Establishment and Liberals....they have to grease their friends first whether it’s unions to corporate kick backs


26 posted on 09/06/2011 11:59:37 AM PDT by Bigtigermike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

You have NO way of knowing IF $55 million has or has not been raised. Because as you stated this document is a ‘planning document’.

IT IS A FACT that Governor Perry less than a year ago stated publicly he was NOT going to run for president.

Excuse me while I attempt to discover the ‘FACT(s)’ that made him change his mind. IT goes to the character of a person who is seeking my vote to stop this insanity that is over US. AND claiming Reagan was a democrat and changed his party affiliation will NOT hold water. WE have the literal ‘FACTS’ of what Reagan stood for and Perry is an unknown, most especially since he was out to lunch even after 8 years of President Reagan.


27 posted on 09/06/2011 12:01:50 PM PDT by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude
I wouldn’t think that any conservative capitalist would be too worried about that agenda.

I'm beginning to think the conservatives are being taken over by populists, who rail against business and think "corporate capitalism" is a bad thing.

I've never seen conservatives so up in arms about people spending money to support their candidates.

I remember not long ago when we were all CHEERING the Citizen's United court decision, and attacking Obama for denigrating the court at his state of the union address. Now it looks like some conservatives support Obama's attack on that decision, and believe that unlimited expenditures should be made illegal somehow.

28 posted on 09/06/2011 12:03:03 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

Hitting early and hard was the name of this election cycle. I am thrilled Rick is in hard. These are the same reasons I remained convinced Sarah wouldn’t. Too little and way too damn late. SP needs to keep him honest once he boots BHO.


29 posted on 09/06/2011 12:03:46 PM PDT by RitaOK (TEXAS. It's EXHIBIT A for Rick. Perry/Rubio '12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: onyx

Remember how we are always told how many times Palin was attacked unfairly? It appears more and more like you want to make sure all the other candidates get attacked just as unfairly.

Do you remember the MSM going after Sarah Palin for her legal defense fund? All the guilt-by-association arguments, the “it looks bad so it is bad” arguments”, the ludicrous charges based only on innuendo and appearance? Eventually I think they had to shut it down and return money just to get beyond those rediculous charges.

Now you are doing the same thing.


30 posted on 09/06/2011 12:05:25 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
WE have the literal ‘FACTS’ of what Reagan stood for and Perry is an unknown, most especially since he was out to lunch even after 8 years of President Reagan.

Really? Exactly what do you think that Reagan stood for when he was a Democrat? Would you be surprised to know that Perry was much more conservative as a Democrat than Reagan was as a Democrat? Would you be surprised to know that Perry started voting for Republican candidates for President at a much younger age than Reagan did? You might want to double check your "facts".

31 posted on 09/06/2011 12:07:12 PM PDT by CA Conservative (Texan by birth, Californian by circumstance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude

Right now, Perry is apparently blocking the path they see to Palin. Now, Palin doesn’t seem to think that, and her supporters here insist that when Palin enters the race, Perry will be an afterthought.

But it appears they don’t really believe that, because they are certainly trying to burn the conservative village down to try to stop Perry.

Today they have already attacked a tort reform organization, and now a group of businesses willing to spend their own money to save our country from Obama. They’be attacked a good conservative lawmaker for having the temerity to sign up to be a Perry economic advisor.


32 posted on 09/06/2011 12:10:48 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT; DJ MacWoW; trisham
You're sounding more and more like a concern troll, Charles. Perhaps, Jim had you pegged right a couple of months back?

Governor Perry needs a thorough vetting. If he's clean, he'll survive and we will all be the better for having him thoroughly vetted.

He's the new comer. Others already in the race are pretty well known to the majority of us.

33 posted on 09/06/2011 12:20:12 PM PDT by onyx (You're here on FR, so support it! If you support SARAH PALIN & want on her ping list, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts

We have the article. The ONLY place where $55 million is mentioned. And it doesn’t SAY they raised $55 million. It says they plan to SPEND that much.

If they had RAISED $55 million, the article would have said they raised $55 million. The statement that they have raised $55 million is a fabrication.

If they had said they hoped to spend $100 million, would you insist they had already RAISED that much? Probably, I guess. As I said, maybe this isn’t one of those threads where facts matter.

It is a fact that Perry said he wasn’t going to run. People convinced him to change his mind. If you watched his talk in Tim Scott’s town hall meeting saturday, you would know why he changed his mind. If you cared about the facts, you would watch to find out the facts, and not assert unsupported claims that some PAC raised $55 million dollars already, as a way of falsely smearing a candidate you claim to want the facts for.

I am glad he changed his mind. I don’t know if I’ll support him, but we need good conservatives to step up to the plate.

So, why do you think he changed his mind? What reason for changing his mind would make a difference to you?


34 posted on 09/06/2011 12:20:15 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

Good news for Perry. This race is going to be hugely expensive and it going to take a lot of money to counter the upcoming Democrat offensive in the general election.


35 posted on 09/06/2011 12:23:36 PM PDT by magritte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

SP isn’t runing. And, yes, Rick is most of the reason why. She does like his style and would prefer his to ticket to McCAIN’s on any day. But bet he picks Rubio.


36 posted on 09/06/2011 12:25:13 PM PDT by RitaOK (TEXAS. It's EXHIBIT A for Rick. Perry/Rubio '12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT; onyx
Now you are doing the same thing.

Hardly. The press is going to give all the candidates a colonoscopy. We'd better find their warts first.

37 posted on 09/06/2011 12:25:55 PM PDT by DJ MacWoW (America! The wolves are here! What will you do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

Cue the Talking Heads! Great snarky post !


38 posted on 09/06/2011 12:25:55 PM PDT by magritte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

You are correct. And you are right in noting that populism and conservatism are not the same thing.


39 posted on 09/06/2011 12:26:28 PM PDT by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
Really? Exactly what do you think that Reagan stood for when he was a Democrat? Would you be surprised to know that Perry was much more conservative as a Democrat than Reagan was as a Democrat? Would you be surprised to know that Perry started voting for Republican candidates for President at a much younger age than Reagan did? You might want to double check your "facts".

Gee advance man for algore presidential aspirations is all the FACT I need to know who what and where Perry was in the days of Reagan... I live through those years of the democrat treatment of Ronald Reagan... Now Reagan made it acceptable to be 'conservative' on the national stage and the voters in each and every state FORCED the politicians to present themselves in the image of what is required to get elected. I do not play stupid that these politicians are in this game for 'service' but more than likely self service. I do not know enough about Perry yet to make that discernment... BUT know this his supporters are NOT helping his cause.

40 posted on 09/06/2011 12:29:43 PM PDT by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Ditto - When I read these detractors, I immediately think of our victory in Citizens and what it will mean to honest conservatives in the next election.


41 posted on 09/06/2011 12:30:55 PM PDT by hocndoc (http://WingRight.orgI've got a mustard seed and I'm not afraid to use it.Patrol the border 2 control)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: RitaOK
SP isn’t runing.

And she has told you this personally?

42 posted on 09/06/2011 12:33:14 PM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin has crossed the Rubicon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Virginia Ridgerunner

Who are Perry’s $55M worth of backers? Yeah, the establishment pols and special interests are REALLY terrified of Rick Perry! *gag*


43 posted on 09/06/2011 12:34:00 PM PDT by alstewartfan ("The movie's rolled down to the last reel. It's got an ending you never planned. Harry Chapin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onyx

I’m just wondering why you are so intent on smearing people with no evidence merely because their names are associated with a SuperPac, or because they are part of a campaign.

For example, what is it but “guilt-by-association” to continue to bring up the fact that a Perry campaign guy happens to be the husband of a person who works for Romney? Should they get divorced or something? Should he be fired because his wife works for the wrong GOP candidate? Do you have any evidence that she is influencing him?

I have not seen a single word posted explaining what bad thing is happening because these two are married. It is just thrown out there to smear the couple by association. It is exactly the type of gutter politics that I am glad Sarah Palin has denounced.


44 posted on 09/06/2011 12:38:47 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
We have the article. The ONLY place where $55 million is mentioned. And it doesn’t SAY they raised $55 million. It says they plan to SPEND that much. If they had RAISED $55 million, the article would have said they raised $55 million. The statement that they have raised $55 million is a fabrication. If they had said they hoped to spend $100 million, would you insist they had already RAISED that much? Probably, I guess. As I said, maybe this isn’t one of those threads where facts matter. It is a fact that Perry said he wasn’t going to run. People convinced him to change his mind. If you watched his talk in Tim Scott’s town hall meeting saturday, you would know why he changed his mind. If you cared about the facts, you would watch to find out the facts, and not assert unsupported claims that some PAC raised $55 million dollars already, as a way of falsely smearing a candidate you claim to want the facts for. I am glad he changed his mind. I don’t know if I’ll support him, but we need good conservatives to step up to the plate. So, why do you think he changed his mind? What reason for changing his mind would make a difference to you?

AS simply as I can put into words, any advance man of algore for president, after 8 years of President Reagan, plus the literal history of the democrat party, government is 'god', rings alert, alert, alert, bells.

I have NO clue 'yet' why he changed his mind, but right now with all the 'whitewashing' taking place under the guise of 'facts' I am leaning to being deceived by another political opportunist.

45 posted on 09/06/2011 12:39:07 PM PDT by Just mythoughts (Luke 17:32 Remember Lot's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: RitaOK

Rita from OK! What a surprise! You’re on a Palin thread! I can’t believe it!


46 posted on 09/06/2011 12:41:04 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Palin , "I Am Not For Sale"


47 posted on 09/06/2011 12:42:13 PM PDT by RightTechDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: hocndoc

For extra credit, maybe they can name the current presidential candidate who does NOT have a superPac that supports his or her candidacy.

And here’s a funny thing. There’s a SuperPac that is said to be a Perry SuperPac, which is run by Newt Gingrich’s people. Isn’t Newt Gingrich an actual candidate? Is he really directing a SuperPac for an opposition candidate?

Remember the key: Money given to candidates you don’t like — evil, payoff, “for sale”. Money given to candidates you DO like — support, “grass roots activism”.


48 posted on 09/06/2011 12:42:54 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

I think it’s great that we post these stories and talk about them. What I find disturbing is when we adopt the tactics that we used to abhor. I know the Huffington Post is going to raise guilt-by-association arguments. I know that liberals are going to attack corporations spending money to save our country from Obama.

I just don’t expect conservatives to join them simply because they want to clear the field for a preferred candidate.


49 posted on 09/06/2011 12:45:37 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: vette6387

You don’t know Palin either.


50 posted on 09/06/2011 12:48:48 PM PDT by GlockLady (Sarah Palin - The Antidote - Going Oval January 20, 2013!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-129 next last

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.

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