Obama's Kids
Posted on 07/16/2014 1:58:59 AM PDT by South40
There are many things I like about Texas Gov. Rick Perry, including his stance on the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution. But apparently his new glasses haven’t altered his perception of the world, or allowed him to see it any more clearly.
There are obviously many important events going on in the world right now, but with 60,000 foreign children streaming across the Texas border, I am surprised Governor Perry has apparently still found time to mischaracterize and attack my foreign policy.
Governor Perry writes a fictionalized account of my foreign policy so mischaracterizing my views that I wonder if he’s even really read any of my policy papers.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/07/rick-perry-is-dead-wrong-108860.html#ixzz37cVzvgfI
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
“The fruit didn’t fall far from the tree.”
Yeah, agree. The old man had a screw loose for sure. But, I’m hoping that neither of these guys wins the GOP nomination. Don’t care Paul’s libertarian views on immigration, the military, foreign policy. And, while I have voted for Perry every time and believe he has been a good governor for Texas I dint believe he can carry the day in a national election.
Neither are suitable cantidates and especially Rick do nothing Perry. This clown is all bark and not bite. I’ve now heard him for at least 2 months drone on and on about this border crisis yet what has he done within his own state? He continues to yammer on some more taking political shots at Obambi while the flow of illegals continue daily. He controls his state’s resources. He could have sent a message months ago through action. He hasn’t....he’s a bag of hot air
More like the stock and trade type of article from the liberal press; in this case Politico. They love to prod Republicans into giving them a sound bite against another Republican, then they can publish this bit of "news". It serves the MSM in two ways, it denigrates a Republican by proxy and it sows dissension among Republican voters. (You'll notice you virtually never see like articles of one Democrat criticizing another.) It's all part of the Emmanuel Goldstein-ing of the Republican party by the MSM/Regime.
That's right he's keeping his powder dry, he will pick just the right time to enter the fight, meanwhile he lets them beat themselves silly.
I figured those characteristics would eventually assert themselves in Rand. Blood will Tell.
I watched Rand Paul on Hannity last night. And he sounded no different than a liberal BS artist. He was nuancing and dancing his way around his pacifism. It was a pathetic display for a Republican.
Ergo, if it's him or Hillary, then Hillary is the logical choice - right?
Lots of hot air among all the politicians and among many of us (including me) on FR - most haven't been in the situation where they claim they would be taking action, and by the same token, none know what may or may not be going on behind the scenes to stay their hands so they don't ignite a Federal response at an inopportune time.
We be full of armchair quarterbacks who haven't been on a football field.
That said, I'm waiting for a number of Governors to band together and present a unified front to begin the process of taking back out Nation - problem is they will never unite because those who would support them cannot unite. The only true unity is the lockstep, blind follower-ship of the Leftists.
Rand Paul already breaking reagan’s cardinal rule
Republicans shouldn’t eat each other
Rand Paul has entirely too much time on his hands if he is swinging at Rick Perry
Shouldn’t the focus be on the absolute horror of the obama/holder depredations against our republic?
Interesting how many on here don’t appear to have actually read the article...
Rand is essentially saying that in Iraq, doing the same thing over and over again is stupid and wasteful.
He’s right.
Nor is he advocating an “isolationist” or even non-interventionist policy.
I’m a “smash your enemies flat and leave” kind of guy, so I don’t agree with his policy. But it still isn’t what folks in this thread are saying it is. And yes, I’m only basing this opinion off of this one thread and the responses to it.
Perry took a shot at Rand first, apparently. This article reads like a rebuttal..
then they are both wasting oxygen
Obama's Kids
Rand should have ignored it. He doesn’t need to be having this fight right now, Perry does. As far as Perry is concerned, I like him, but the neoconservative foreign policy argument is going to be a loser this time around if foreign policy becomes a central issue.
--except in this case it's A's response to B's rebuttal of A's attack on fellow Republicans. It all started w/ Rino Paul WSJ stance--
America Shouldn't Choose Sides in Iraq's Civil War Obama has made mistakes but so did Bush by invading. There's no good case for U.S. military intervention now...) which Perry slammed--
which Perry slammed masterfully--
Isolationist policies make the threat of terrorism even greater
--and now we got Paul whining.
No...foreign policy matters.
Its also becoming obvious that the ‘crisis’ at the border is a manufactured distraction.
He has done everything a governor is allowed to do. Sent the DPS and put boats on the Rio Grande. Has been calling for troops on the border for years! I’m not really a Rick Perry fan but he has been on top of this!!!
Sadly, you are right.
Is he evolving toward Libertarian or was he fooling us before?
Correct. But, you need to realize that this is a battle between the NeoCons and Rand Paul. Perry's shot at Paul was a NeoCon shot.
This battle broke out spring 2013 when Paul(on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee) joined the two antiwar dems and voted against arming the Syrian Rebels. Then those three were joined by isolationist Mike Lee to introduce legislation opposing the arming of the rebels.
After that, it was the NeoCons who fired the first shot at Paul. They published that story about Paul's campaign aide being a NeoConfederate racist, which would imply that Paul is a racist.
Rand Paul responded by attacking Liz Cheney running for the Wyoming senate seat. And the battle has continued since. Perry's shot is just the latest.
Paul's campaign strategy is to run against the NeoCons, and because of Iraq and Afghanistan he is getting traction, he has the highest poll numbers. And most recently, many of the NeoCons(especially Cheney) have gone on TV calling for the re-invasion of Iraq and Paul has used that as ammo.
Hillary is watching this. She has hired the prominent NeoCon Fred Kagan has an advisor. No doubt if Paul gets the GOP nomination she will run heavy as an interventionist hawk. Like Joe Lieberman.
Rand’s point is the continuation of the “Paul/Perry” feud.
If Rand wants to sound like Dad, then he will be relegated to similar stature.
I had hoped Rand could keep his head and make a viable contender.
Sorry Rand........ I pick Rick!
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.
