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

Skip to comments.

Rick Perry vs. Rick Perry
SteveDeace.com News ^ | 09/17/2011 | Steve Deace

Posted on 09/22/2011 9:05:15 AM PDT by iowamark

On Friday morning, our very own Rebekah Maxwell got an opportunity to do something few in the media have had the chance to do at one of Rick Perry’s presidential campaign stops — ask him a serious question about his own record.

Given Perry’s answer, it calls into question either Perry’s truthfulness or whether or not he even knows his own record.

In the exchange, Maxwell asks Perry about his support for the controversial 2008 bank bailout known as the TARP, a hugely unpopular move that eventually launched what is now known as the Tea Party movement. Perry responds by saying he never supported the TARP and that Maxwell is mistaken.

Maxwell asked this question of Perry because contrary to his own assertion he never supported the big-government boondoggle, there is ample evidence to the contrary which says in fact he actually did.

That is just some of the clear evidence indicating Perry did indeed support the TARP, despite his denials to Maxwell. Perry, you’ll recall, hosted an event called The Response in his native state of Texas back in August, which urged public repentance to Jesus Christ as our savior for our sins as a nation.

Would lying be considered an act worthy of public repentance? At the very least, for “Fed Up” voters it certainly requires a “response” from Governor Perry.

(Excerpt) Read more at stevedeace.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Politics/Elections; US: Iowa; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: perry; rickperry; stevedeace; talkradio
Des Moines Register: Perry denies he supported bank bailout; Deace calls him out

Video: Rick Perry: Supported TARP Bailout

Video: Rick Perry supported the TARP BAILOUTS


1 posted on 09/22/2011 9:05:17 AM PDT by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: iowamark; South40; Liz; BobL; Clemenza; Impy

Captain Gardasil lies ? But he’s so honest...


2 posted on 09/22/2011 9:14:08 AM PDT by fieldmarshaldj (Rick Perry has more red flags than a May Day Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj; iowamark; South40; Liz; BobL; Clemenza; Impy
"No Ma'am," Perry replied when asked whether he signed on to support Obama's $800 Bill TARP giveaway.......even as the letter w/ Perry's signature goes viral.


3 posted on 09/22/2011 9:27:55 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 2 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

I watched the videos in good faith, believing I was going to see evidence to support the claims of the article. Instead, I saw inuendo, out of context remarks and ample use of newspaper headlines, rather than Perry’s position spelled out.

Shameful.

I’m not all that strong on Perry. It is definitely one of those “lesser evil” things with me. If there is something real there I really want to see it. But this was a hit piece, nothing more.


4 posted on 09/22/2011 9:28:32 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
Senor Ricardo released his "holdings" the other day, he sure left OUT a LOT----like for instance, that one of his multi-million dollar "political committees" paid for family trips all over the world. And what about his wife's "holdings?" She also worked for Texas government----for a non-profit that received "grants" from her husband, the Governor's, office. Just a coincidence, I'm sure (/snix).

=====================================

So how many political/personal slush funds does Senor Ricky have---that he forgot to mention? This is what we know to date----could be many many more.

<><> “Texans for Rick Perry” committee is a $102 million slush fund he uses at will. Some PAC mega-donors paid in $100,000 each in order to influence Perry's official actions. Gov Perry paid for posh family trips to the Bahamas, Amsterdam, Madrid out of campaign contributions from his “Texans for Rick Perry” committee.

<><> Perry's "Make Us Great Again PAC" raised millions to flood Iowa, and other early voting states, with ads promoting their boy.

<><> At the time he was saying he WAS NOT running for president last year, Ricky's Super-Pac raised $55 million for a presidential race---in $2500 max per person/ $5000 max per corporate PAC contributions. Perry organizers would not say what the Perry presidential groups has raised to date.

<><> Perry bragged at the Tea Party debate that he raised $33 million for reelection that year and that he was "offended" at the inference that he could be "bought" with Gardisil mfg Merck's $5000 campaign donation.

<><> The $295 million Texas Enterprise Fund doles out millions of tax dollars to Perry supporters who then kick-backed to his campaign coffers. TESF also gave $20 million to Countrywide Mtge---the crooks at the heart of the US financial meltdown---- Ricky said the $20 million was to (cough) "create jobs."

<><> Perry raised funds for the Republican Governors' Association, and, in turn, Perry's 2006 campaign received two $500,000 checks from the RGA that he did not disclose as election law requires.

<><> His wife Anita Perry's $60,000-a-year salary at the Austin "nonprofit" "Texas Association Against Sexual Assault" comes indirectly from Gov. Perry's political donors, state contractors and companies that do business with the state or have issues before the Legislature. Of 37 major donors during Anita Perry's tenure as fundraiser, ONLY three have NO ties to the governor or state business. Anita Perry is paid from the "nonprofit" money pool that includes political contributions. TAAS also receives grants from state agencies AND the governor's office. Donating to the TAASA seems to be another way Perry dreamed up for those with an interest in state government to influence Perry. State grants to the "non-profit" could be easily laundered especially w/ Mrs P at the helm.

<><> Perry also has a pot of "inaugural committee" monies (bet that comes in handy).

<><> And do on and so forth, ad infinitum, ad nauseaum.

=============================================

My, my, Ricky's come a long, long way. It was only yesterday, farm boy Rick sold Bibles door-to-door to get money to buy a car. Perry's hopes to become a veterinarian were dashed when he flunked animal science in college. Then Ricky got into $$$Texa$ politic$-----and hi$ money worrie$ vani$hed. Now he travels to campaign stops in a sleek corporate jet, and has hundreds of millions of dollars at his disposal........over and above the paltry amount in his blind trust that he "allowed" voters to see.

5 posted on 09/22/2011 9:29:45 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 3 | View Replies]

To: Liz

I just read that letter. I like it. What is damning in it?


6 posted on 09/22/2011 9:30:52 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: iowamark; org.whodat; cripplecreek; TADSLOS; BobL; raybbr; truthfreedom; CowboyJay; ...
Perry is a fraud.

The Tea Party was launched as a result of Washington politicians foisting TARP on an unwilling taxpaying public. 'Conservative' Rick Perry supported it.

The TP does not agree with Perry on the big-government, nanny-state Gardasil debacle.

The TP does not agree with Perry on his opposition to the border fence.

The TP does not agree with Perry on his opposition to Arizona trying to defend itself from the ILLEGAL hordes that he wants to make citizens.

The TP opposed Perry on the TTC.

The TP does not support Perry’s warped view that anyone opposing instate tuition for ILLEGAL aliens does so because of the ILLEGAL aliens’ last names.

The TP did not agree with Obama and Pelosi’s stimulus bailout plan yet Perry took stimulus cash anyway.

Rick Perry is a big government, progressive neocon candidate much the same as Mitt Romney ;he is a fraud and anything but in line with the TP's core principles.

7 posted on 09/22/2011 9:33:43 AM PDT by South40 (Rick Perry = The Other McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

Funny thing about that whole TARP thing and the way conservatives went ballistic over Obama getting money from AIG.

Now that the chief exec of AIG (Hank Greenberg) is hosting fundraisers for Perry we hear nothing but crickets.


8 posted on 09/22/2011 9:37:37 AM PDT by cripplecreek (A vote for Amnesty is a vote for a permanent Democrat majority. ..Choose well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf
I just read that letter. I like it. What is damning in it?

The point is Perry d-e-n-i-e-d he sent the letter....that's the point.

Get it?

9 posted on 09/22/2011 9:39:48 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 6 | View Replies]

To: Liz

—The point is Perry d-e-n-i-e-d he sent the letter....that’s the point.

Get it?—

No. I did not see or hear any information in those articles/videos where Perry denied sending that letter. Notice the letter supports no particular bill. Rather, it is a generic call from a bi-partisan governors group to ask the congress to do something responsible. It doesn’t say what, other than to leave their political bickering at the door.

Now, I know that sort of letter is pretty worthless, but this one is not a smoking gun. It doesn’t say anything.


10 posted on 09/22/2011 9:42:38 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Crickets are a surprise. I would expect Perry's supporters to fervently defend shyster Rick's connection to Greenberg with something along the line of "he needs money to defeat Obama and I don't care where he gets it".

Former AIG Chief Hank Greenberg To Host Rick Perry's First Wall St. Fundraiser

11 posted on 09/22/2011 9:44:12 AM PDT by South40 (Rick Perry = The Other McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Liz
The point is Perry d-e-n-i-e-d he sent the letter....that's the point. Get it?

The letter says nothing about TARP. It talks about an "economic recovery package", which could mean anything from tax reform, tax cuts, regulatory reform, etc. If he would have been intended to specifically support TARP in that letter, he likely would have said "TARP". He didn't.

If you want to argue that he must have "meant" TARP, feel free, but that's an inference you're making, not some kind of contradictory "gotcha".

12 posted on 09/22/2011 9:49:25 AM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Bruce Campbells Chin
The letter says nothing about TARP. It talks about an "economic recovery package", which could mean anything from tax reform, tax cuts, regulatory reform, etc. If he would have been intended to specifically support TARP in that letter, he likely would have said "TARP". He didn't.

So we're supposed to believe that Rick Perry was the only man in the country who didn't know what congress was talking about? I sure don't recall a lot of talk about anything other than bailing out the banks with taxpayer dollars. If you really believe he was talking about something else, you're lying to yourself.
13 posted on 09/22/2011 10:00:29 AM PDT by cripplecreek (A vote for Amnesty is a vote for a permanent Democrat majority. ..Choose well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

Trashy hit piece of the lowest order.


14 posted on 09/22/2011 10:08:42 AM PDT by comebacknewt (Newt (sigh) what could have been . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
So we're supposed to believe that Rick Perry was the only man in the country who didn't know what congress was talking about?

No. We are supposed to believe that the letter urged action, but did not even come close to endorsing any specific plan.

Does it not concern any of you running with this garbage that neither Perry NOR Manchin supported TARP? BOTH of those who signed the letter did not support the bailout.

I know it screws up the narrative of Perry as an evil, lying RINO, but facts are stubborn things.

15 posted on 09/22/2011 10:13:19 AM PDT by comebacknewt (Newt (sigh) what could have been . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

Come on now.

You guys at Texans for Public Justice can do better than this.

LOL


16 posted on 09/22/2011 10:17:03 AM PDT by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
Of course Perry was supporting TARP in that letter. Proof-positive is that Perry was asked about it, and stupidly denied he even sent the letter......as the letter went viral.

Another instance when Perry's brain was AWOL. If he didn't support TARP, that was a good time to say what he thought he meant.

Not very quick on his feet, is he?

17 posted on 09/22/2011 10:35:12 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 13 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
The date of Perry’s letter is October 1 2008. That's the exact time when congress was debating H.R. 1424, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.

On October 1, 2008, the same day Perry sent his letter, the senate debated and voted on an amendment to H.R. 1424, which substituted a newly revised version of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act for the language of H.R. 1424. The Senate accepted the amendment and passed the entire amended bill. The amended version of H.R. 1424 was then sent to the House for consideration. On October 3, just 2-days after Perry’s letter, the House passed the bill known as TARP and Bush signed it.

Did Perry use the term, “TARP” in his letter to Pelosi? No, but at the time he sent his letter it wasn’t known as TARP. To say Perry never supported ‘TARP’ is one thing -- but to say he never supported a big-government bailout of the U.S. financial system is a losing argument -- that was the point of his letter.

18 posted on 09/22/2011 10:42:04 AM PDT by South40 (Rick Perry = The Other McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: South40
To say Perry never supported ‘TARP’ is one thing -- but to say he never supported a big-government bailout of the U.S. financial system is a losing argument -- that was the point of his letter.

I don't think I've ever heard TARP -- in any form under any name -- described as an "economic stimulus package". You might call it "ensuring the integrity of the financial system" or something along those lines, but "economic stimulus package" just doesn't seem to fit what TARP was. Heck, why didn't they just say they supported H.R. 1424 (or some version of it) if that's what they meant?

19 posted on 09/22/2011 12:02:04 PM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: South40
To say Perry never supported ‘TARP’ is one thing -- but to say he never supported a big-government bailout of the U.S. financial system is a losing argument -- that was the point of his letter.

I don't think I've ever heard TARP -- in any form under any name -- described as an "economic stimulus package". You might call it "ensuring the integrity of the financial system" or something along those lines, but "economic stimulus package" just doesn't seem to fit what TARP was. Heck, why didn't they just say they supported H.R. 1424 (or some version of it) if that's what they meant?

20 posted on 09/22/2011 12:02:21 PM PDT by Bruce Campbells Chin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

He never supported TARP. The record is quite clear on that. The only “evidence” presented against him is a single letter written for the RGA and DGA, signed by the two chairs of those organizations, which asked congress to do something about the financial meltdown.

That letter, written AFTER TARP was first voted down by the house, never mentioned TARP (even though it was a bill by that time, so if they wanted to support it they could have), and instead called on bipartisan agreement, something TARP didn’t have at the time.

The next mention we have is two months later, when Perry co-authored an opinion column which explicitly attacked the idea of bailouts and called for it to end.

So the notion that he supported TARP until he was running for president is stupid.

Now, who did support TARP? Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, and Mitt Romney, at least. Maybe other presidential candidates, I don’t know.

But there is no evidence that Perry supported TARP, and it’s hilarious that his attempt to straighten out a reporter on that is used to pretend he is flip-flopping on it.


21 posted on 09/22/2011 12:54:35 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: South40

When did you get designated the official Tea Party spokesperson? I missed the memo.

Sarah Palin really liked Rick Perry. She’s Tea Party. So I figure I’ll believe her rather than you.


22 posted on 09/22/2011 12:56:03 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Liz

BUMP


23 posted on 09/22/2011 1:15:22 PM PDT by Jane Austen (Boycott the Philadelphia Eagles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: South40

” Rick Perry is a big government, progressive neocon candidate much the same as Mitt Romney ;he is a fraud and anything but in line with the TP’s core principles. “

Bottom line....Rick Perry is a F R A U D


24 posted on 09/22/2011 1:24:08 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: South40
All true, Perry is a rino fraud, actually an algore democrat. How does an educated illegal, get a job that is against the law for them to hold.
25 posted on 09/22/2011 2:20:31 PM PDT by org.whodat (so Perry's purchase price starts at $5001.00: and $29,000 , was a sell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
When did you get designated the official Tea Party spokesperson? I missed the memo.

Typical PerryBot response -- mindless and clueless.

No, I am not an oficial TP spokeperson. I needn't be to post links that prove liberal Rick Perry's views don't mesh with those of the TP. Are you really so dense that you can't understand that? Why not address whay I said?

Do you think the TP supported TARP? Perry supported it.

Do you think the TP agrees with Perry on the big-government, nanny-state Gardasil debacle?

Do you think the TP agrees with Perry on his opposition to the border fence?

Do you think the TP agreed with Perry on his opposition to Arizona trying to defend itself from the ILLEGAL hordes that he wants to make citizens?

Do you think the TP agreed with Perry on the TTC?

Do you think the TP agrees with Perry’s warped view that anyone opposing instate tuition for ILLEGAL aliens does so because of the ILLEGAL aliens’ last names?

Do you think the TP agreed with Obama and Pelosi’s stimulus bailouts? Perry took stimulus cash so he must.

Care to respond to those issues? Or are diversions through rhetoric all you have?

26 posted on 09/22/2011 7:25:47 PM PDT by South40 (Rick Perry = The Other McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: South40

You got your first point so wrong, why should we even bother with the rest of it?

Perry opposed TARP. The queen of the Tea Party, Sarah Palin, SUPPORTED TARP. If you can’t get those simple facts right, what’s the point?

The “Gardasil” debate has nothing to do with big-government nanny-stateism. Government has limited function. One of those limited functions is to guard the commons — to provide the security and safety for people to live their lives freely and, so far as is possible, from external harm not of their own choosing.

Vaccines are one of those items which guard society. This is a legitimate government concern, which is why conservatives have NOT been opponents of the mandatory vaccination laws of all 50 states. I challenge you to find a SINGLE statement by Michelle Bachman before this year where she spoke out against “nanny-state” government mandating vaccines.

Gardasil is a MEDICAL argument, and a philosophical argument. Medical — is it actually effective? Philosophical — does Government’s legitimate function of guarding the commons extend to “sexual” commons? People don’t argue over polio vaccines, since polio is spread by casual contact, contact you’d expect in public.

But Gardasil guards against a sexually transmitted disease. Is Sex a “common” public area, or is it purely a private individual area where government has no play?

It is clear that Rick Perry struggled with THAT question — thus his strong wording of final parental choice, and making the opt-out simple and advertising it (these things never happened because his EO never took effect). We don’t draw our moral black and white lines on degrees of separation.

The Tea Party wants our borders secured. Perry wants our borders secured. A “fence” is a debate not over goals, but over implementation. If Perry is elected, and seals the border without a fence, I don’t think any Tea Party people are going to be upset. We want results. Again, this isn’t a matter of principle — on Principle, we DON’T want a fence — fences are a sign that things are broken.

We don’t have a fence with Canada.

You are dead wrong on item 4, the “Arizona Law”, when yo u claim he had “opposition to Arizona”. He SUPPORTED Arizona. He had Texas file a brief SUPPORTING Arizona. Again, you don’t know what you are talking about. He didn’t support implementing an arizona-type law in Texas. Again, not because he opposed the law, he had other ideas for how Texas would solve the problem.

I don’t know if the Tea Party was involved with a road widening/creation project. The Tea Party is not generally opposed to us building new roads. When we debate road widening in our state, I don’t see the TP fighting against growth.

The TTC was wrapped up in the alleged PURPOSE of the road. That turned into a fight over emminent domain, but I haven’t seen conservatives argue that the state and the federal government do NOT have the right to use emminent domain to purchase property to build roads.

Road building is a core function of government, defined in the constitution. Opposition to the road was about policy, not principle.

I don’t think he has a “view” about names, I just think he has a stupid way of explaining it. He was playing for a sound bite. Maybe he is playing for a general election and that phraseology tests well with latino citizens who can vote. I don’t like it.

That said, I doubt the Tea Party is primarily concerned with how one defends something the Tea Party opposes — in-state tuition for illegals is certainly a point on which Perry is in opposition with the tea party. But no more so than Sarah Palin and Herman Cain in their vocal support of TARP when it was being passed.

Perry opposed the bailouts. He wrote an op-ed against them. But Perry, as Governor, took his people’s tax money back when it didn’t bind his state. Just as Sarah Palin, Tea Party Leader, did in Alaska. She even praised parts of the stimulus as something that would create jobs in Alaska. I don’t see anybody saying Sarah Palin isn’t Tea Party.

So, of your “list”, two of them you got dead wrong, most of the rest were implementation of policy, not philosophical differences, in one case Perry was on the TP side while Palin was not (TARP), and in one case Perry and Palin were identical.

Since I know you don’t reject Palin as a Tea Party candidate, your list is rather unpersuasive.

And I will point out what I pointed out before with my cryptic comment — you essentially asserted without evidence what the “Tea Party” position was on things. You provided NO evidence that what you said matched concerns of the tea party, or were things they would choose to make a decision about. Some were, some weren’t. But rather than simply raise your OWN objections, YOU chose to hide behind the “tea party” label, acting like their spokesperson.


27 posted on 09/22/2011 9:55:31 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

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