HOW RICK PERRY WILL RUN (Texas Governor will focus on presidency, not the nomination)

Word is that Texas Governor Rick Perry will enter the race for the GOP nomination for President of the United States on Saturday in South Carolina. Perry will be in Charleston attending a RedState.com meeting for conservative bloggers. Insiders have made it clear that Perry will make his intentions regarding the Republican nomination known at that meeting.

After leaving South Carolina, Perry will travel to New Hampshire and then on to Iowa. Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina represent the first three states where actual voting to determine the GOP nominee will take place next year.

Since news broke on Tuesday that Perry intends to run, the talking heads on the 24 hours news channels have been assessing and prognosticating how Perry’s entry into the field of GOP candidates will play out.

According to the most recent Gallup poll of potential Republican voters, Mitt Romney holds a tenuous lead, built over the past five years, at 24%, with Perry coming in second at 17% and Michele Bachmann at 14%. The rest of the field of contenders register in single digits.

Conservative author and talk show host Laura Ingraham, appearing on the O’Reilly Factor on Tuesday night, discussed Perry’s chances with host Bill O’Reilly. Ingraham basically said all the same stuff everyone outside of Texas says about Perry.

Can he win outside the South? Can Perry excite the voters? The Texas model is great. Evangelicals like him.

Ingraham offered the obligatory nod to the success of the “Texas model” which is a begrudging acknowledgment that, “Yes, Texas is doing better than most other states, and that Texas is creating the overwhelming majority of all jobs in America, but it’s really not something that you can credit Perry for, after all he’s only been running the state for 12 years.”

Once Rick Perry enters the race, he won’t run for the GOP nomination. He’ll run for President.

The talking heads on Tuesday wondered aloud how Perry’s entry into the race on Saturday would affect the Iowa debate on Thursday. Most agreed that those candidates already in the race would adjust their strategy to “defend against” Perry, which is political speech for “attack” Perry.

After watching Rick Perry win three elections for Governor of Texas, those of us here in the Lone Star State know that Perry won’t even bother to acknowledge the existence of the other GOP hopefuls. Perry will go all out for the real prize, not just the nomination, but the presidency.

I have watched time and again as Perry has debated in Texas for the GOP nomination for governor against multiple challengers ranging from Kinky Friedman to Debra Medina. Perry simply ignored them. His focus was on the Democratic challenger, not those buzzing around him on the GOP side.

In Texas’ most recent gubernatorial election, Perry really ran his campaign against Barack Obama and Washington politics, successfully tying his opponent, former Houston Mayor Bill White, to Obama.

Expect Perry to do the same when he enters the race for the GOP nomination. It will be “Mitt Who?” insofar as Perry is concerned. While the current contenders gear up to attack or defend against a man who won’t even be with them on stage in Iowa on Thursday, and who has not actually as of yet entered the race, Perry will focus on Barack Obama’s policies.

Perry will contrast Obama’s promises from 2008 through today, and the results of those promises and policies against Perry’s own success in Texas. A few examples.

Barack Obama rammed Obamacare, a form of socialized medicine, down the throats of the American people.

Barack Obama promised to create new jobs, yet the unemployment rate is over 9% and at least 15 million Americans are out of work today.

Texas has created more jobs during the recession than all 49 other states combined, and in the past two years Texas has created nearly half of all jobs in the United States.

The federal government is in so much debt and spending is so out-of-control that the U.S. just lost its triple A credit rating.

Texas has a balanced budget, and always has. This year balancing the budget required difficult and painful decisions, but Perry got it done.

Hope and Change and the empty promises of Barack Obama vs. the jobs and results of Rick Perry. That’s how Perry will frame his campaign.

Perry has more executive experience than any two of the other GOP candidates combined and is the longest serving governor in Texas history, as well as the longest serving Chief Executive currently in the United States.

As to whether or not Perry can excite the crowds? Perry is a dynamic speaker. He talks straight, actually answers questions, and has a great sense of humor.

PS to all those talking heads who routinely and predictably ponder whether any candidate from the South can ever make it on the coasts: Five of our last eight presidents (elected) were from what those pundits call the South.

Yes, your points are good ones. Perry has done a reasonably good job with regard to the things that an political executive can do. And, let’s be honest, there have been some classic “sleazy” political deals in there as well (Guardasil vaccine—it’s not a deal killer for me, but it was a little sleazy). Making sleazy deals is part of the nature of the political beast. It’s good that we are being reminded that even our guys have to be watched like hawks. We can’t any longer just pull the lever in the voting booth and assume that “our guy” will automatically do the right thing. Politicians are inherently untrustworthy; this is a perennial truth, and one that we should have learned well after Dubya.

Perry is also very sincerely pro-life. I think he will nominate very good judges to the federal bench. And let’s not forget that when we elect an executive nowadays, we are de facto electing a judiciary. The country simply cannot survive another 4 years of judges appointed by Obama. We may well have to impeach a couple of them. Impeaching judges may be the next major task of the Tea Party. Electing legislatures no longer seems to suffice.

So, there will come a day when we Tea Party hobbits have to raise Hell about some damn fool proposal that a President Perry comes up with (think back to Dubya and Harriet Miers and the amnesty), but I can live with that. I’m confident that with the rise of the Tea Party we now have a “Fifth Branch of Government” (namely, We the People). It won’t let things get by without raising hell.

Most importantly, Perry loves this country. He is on it’s side in principle.

ONe more thing: we have to conduct a review of the way we conduct commerce with foreign powers (mostly China). Hollowing out our industrial base is not just a trade issue, it’s got national security implications. But that’s a whole other thread.

My post on another thread regarding the cervical cancer vaccine:

Gardasil Cervical Cancer Vaccine/Merck

Reasons for HPV vaccine

CW: Most people do not think like you and the few others who hit every Perry thread trying to elevate this to a "sticking" point.

I'm not a mind reader but it strikes me that Gov. Rick Perry truly believed the HPV vaccine would have helped a lot of Texans who otherwise would not have gotten this protection against cervical cancer (it was to help with 3 strains of the human papilloma virus HPV).

Rick Perry's wife Anita Perry was a nurse for 17 years and still is involved in health care as First Lady of Texas, so I imagine health care is something this governor is more aware of than maybe your "average" governor and understood this to be a vaccine that would combat cervical cancer and cut heath care costs.

Then too Rick Perry grew up hard scrabble with little luxury as many have, yet vaccines traditionally have been made available to all.

Instead of applying the worst motives to Rick Perry, perhaps his critics could consider that his motives were good ones.

Another FReeper had some thoughts on this issue.

However, there are some here on FR who prefer to apply the worst motives to Rick Perry.

The most "vocal" either won't name a candidate they would support; say they would vote for Huntsman or Romney over Perry; say they would rather Obama stay in the White House than vote for Rick Perry.

The HPV vaccine was always Opt-Out. And according to below report had been changed to Opt-In, before being dropped entirely.

90 days after his EO, Gov. Rick Perry let stand legislation undoing the EO.

UPDATE from Aug 8, 2011: -- CW: Perry’s been laying tracks and he’s moving down the line.

Perry can’t seem to make a wrong step.

I swear, the cervical cancer vaccine EO will turn out to show Perry was on the right track.

The TTC has already been shown to be lied about by environmentalists and opportunists to push light rail and block Texas infrastructure. They still have people believing half of Texas was going to be paved over to allow Mexico to invade. They don’t need a road because the federal government won’t secure 1250 miles of Texas’ INTERNATIONAL border with Mexico — and what lies south.

I laugh when they say Perry is lucky. He’s sets goals and works to meet them.

Gov. Rick Perry has prepared himself for this, and now that opportunity knocks, he’s stepping forward.

FReeper comment: You really said that? On a site for conservatives? There are a lot of reasons to like Gov. Perry - but this isn't one of them.

CW: Yes. I said it. There is an increase in oral cancer and a lot of it comes from oral sex the kids are having from the wonderful illustration Hillary Clinton's husband Bill Clinton so casually advertised for the world and children to see, where his sycophants in the media and education lapped it up. So I am not going to say Rick Perry was awful to want to protect women and young girls if it was possible to prevent this cancer (any strains of it - and oral or cervical). There is going to be an explosion of health care costs and this cancer will be among them. His idea to do good was at odds with what was politically correct but the legislature blocked his EO. They're responsible for not having the vaccine available. Was it the right thing to do? Time will tell.

FReeper 2 comment: IIf he stood on principles, we wouldn't have to wait for 'time'. He would know today that it wasn't the right thing to do. I can agree with you about the Clinton's and the impact of the original man-child President, but I don't want the state's (or the nation's) executive making decisions like this. Sorry, not what a conservative would have done.

CW: Perhaps that Gov. Perry let the legislature override his EO — let them make the final call for their constituents (he’d made his decision) was where he took his stand. Perry isn’t king or emperor or dictator. He used the tools he had available and then the people’s representatives used the tools they had.

The vaccine had been “opt-out,” was changed to “opt-in,” the legislature still stopped it, and before it started and now it is not at all. It was never “mandated.”

He’s solidly pro-life, pro-growth, pro-business, pro-freedom and pro-10th-amendment... which makes him pro-constitution. ...... samtheman

That’s not enough anymore. Look. I heard him exclaim that he was “fine” with New York approving gay marriages. He said it was a 10th amendment issue and blah.. blah.. blah. ...... Responsibility2nd

You do not believe in the Tenth Amendment, Responsibility2nd, or do you believe that the Constitution should mean whatever Tom, Dick and Harry want to to means on Tuesday and whatever Nancy, Barney and Barack want it to mean on Wednesday?

Do you prefer that the Federal Government have the Constitutional power to dictate about gay marriage to the State of Texas and to YOUR State regardless of what the Tenth Amendment says?

Like Perry said, if you want gay marriage, move to New york because you are not going to get it in Texas. It is the Tenth Amendment that guarantees the right of the State of Texas to say that.

That’s code speak for “I’m a RINO Libertarian.”

"Code speak"?

What part of the plain English of the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America do you fail to understand, Responsibility2nd?

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." .... Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Once you give the Federal Government the power to ignore the Tenth Amendment in regards to gay marriage, Responsibility2nd, do you really believe that the Federal Government will not impose gay marriage on YOUR state as a "civil right"?

It is amazing how many so-called "conservatives" are so willing to ignore the Constitution and surrender even more power of the Federal Government because they naively believe that a more powerful Federal Government will respect them in the morning.

Well, NO, I didn’t say that, now did I? I think I asked do you think the FEDERAL government should be able to tell you that you can’t marry a woman. So I’m guessing you haven’t a clue what I mean.

What I’m saying, now read my typing really clearly here is...

...that our Constitution clearly states in the The Bill of Rights 9 Specific Amendments, Enumberated Rights of Americans and then in the 10th Amendment:

“Powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

And that Article 1, Section 9, limits the powers of the federal govern specifically and nowhere in it give the federal government the power to restrict or not restrict marriages.

And THAT Sir, was the message Rick Perry was delivering. HE does not have the right to tell another state what laws they can or cannot make.

NOW, there are the many that WANT to put into his words that he promotes or approves of same sex marriage. It is nothing more or less than a LIE!

ZOT...Sir!

Yeah, she’s waiting for something. Waiting for all the other wanna-be’s to shoot their wad, so she can then announce after they do. And when she does, her polling numbers will be at or better than 50% approval.

These were Palin's polling numbers back in February.

FReep Mail me ANY poll from ANY source showing ANY evidence that Palin's approval among ALL voters is NOT STILL lower than whale scat at the bottom of the ocean.

I have put that challenge out there to the Palin Worshipers multiple times and not single Palin Worshiper has been able to meet the challenge .... EVER.

Except for Tweeting to her own choir, Palin has done absolutely NOTHING since February to improve her standing among ALL voters.

FOX News Poll (February 7-9, 2011)

Question 3: I am going to read you a list of names. Tell me if you think that person would make a good President or not.

Sarah Palin:

.................YES.........NO.......DK.....Never heard of

ALL...........23%.......72%.........4%.......1%

Dem ...........7%........87%........5%.......1%

Rep ...........40%.......56%.......3%.......1%

Ind ...........25%........69%.......3%.......1%

You and the other Palin Worshipers really need to get back down to the Planet Earth, Responsibility2nd.

If not, your delusions will lead you to a hard crash that will be as painful as the box office gross of the failed Sarah Palin movie.

Here's the reality: The Undefeated debuted to $65,132 at ten locations over the July 15-17 weekend. This past weekend, its release grew to 14 locations, but business plummeted 62 percent to $24,664, averaging $1,762 per site. That put its total at just $101,382 in ten days, which means it's sold an estimated 13,000 tickets. ... (Undefeated is not to be confused with Sarah's Key, a foreign language movie that opened to $115,708 at five locations this past weekend.) ..... To put these numbers into further perspective: The Undefeated's ten theaters on opening weekend yielded 159 showings. Using the current average ticket price of $7.86, that means the movie played to an estimated 52 people per average showing or at about one-fifth to one-quarter capacity. In the movie's second weekend, which had 211 showings, the per-showing average attendance dropped to 15.

How the Sarah Palin movie "The Undefeated" fared at the Box Office for two weeks before being rushed to the DVD/ Pay-per-View graveyard of failed films

Sarah Palin cannot manage to get more than 15 warm bodies into a theater to see her movie on Week 2 after the release. Yet, the Palin Worshipers are still under the illusion that tens of millions of voters will elect her President in November of 2012.

There are none so blind as those who absolutely refuse to see.

Good points all, but I still have one question for you, CW: do you really think the the Gardasil affair would have morphed from an executive order into a legislative debate—i.e., from an “opt-out,” to an “opt-in— if the “Hobbit faction” of the Texas GOP had not screamed bloody murder about it?

My issue is not whether Perry had the purest of motives or the blackest; frankly, I don’t give a damn about his motives. They are beside the point. My issue is this: why was the issue framed initially as sth you had to “opt-out “ of, rather than sth you could “opt-in” to?

I don’t care if Perry’s motives were purely angelic and he just wanted the government to “help,” or whether he was a purely passive instrument of big, evil Pharma. How come a circle of obligation was circumscribed around us poor, innocent hobbits that we had to escape from? That’s my issue. I don’t care WHAT motivated the sausage makers; I care that we were originally offered a thing that we had get out of, as opposed to sth we could take or leave on our own volition. As things turned out, the choice was left to us; but would it if our folk hadn’t raised hell?

Perry’s actions on Gardisil fall within the perennial tug-a-war that we call politics. I can live with that. What I cannot live with is 4 more years of the Revolution.

One more point: I live on Kirby Dr. in Houston within walking distance of Reliant Stadium. I’m not an evangelical Christian (raised Episcopalian, now a Catholic), but was impressed with Gov Perry’s appearance last weekend at the Response. I believe Gov Perry is a deeply religious man. His motivations during the event seemed utterly sincere and unimpeachable. I think he would make a very good president. I do also think that our problems in this country are way beyond politics. They are spiritual, and will require the grace of God to solve.

So, that’s my two cents, CW. I’ll be following your threads, even if I don’t post. God bless!!!

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.