I have been under the impression that the offensive N-word was on a rock on a piece of property that the Perry’s leased for hunting. No one has said that Perry, his father, or any relative painted it on the rock. In fact, his father purposely painted OVER the word to try to remove it.
How in the world does this reflect poorly on Rick Perry? I’m not even a Perry supporter, and I am getting ticked off at the MSM for purposely misleading people about the facts.
Let me know if I have anything wrong, here.
In fact, let me add just one more thing:
How many of us has had the occasion to be in the presence of profance or offensive graffiti on a wall or restroom stall? Are we guilty of something, when we weren’t the ones that put it there?
Or... What if someone vandalizes our property by painting offensive language on something we own. If we don’t condone that type of language or thought, are we still guilty just because the language appears on our property?
Can you tell I’m frustrated by the absurdity of this?
It's hard to know exactly what the 'facts' are in this case. The only "hard truths" seem to clear Perry & his father of culpability (if that's the right word). But the report embellishes with "un-named sources" who are "troubled" by the situation. And let's be clear... the most that you can say is "Guilt by Association".
I am not a Perry-partisan, but this stuff has got to STOP!