Posted on 08/27/2011 6:00:47 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
There is zero political or personal risk for any Republican, RINO or non-RINO, to support the Boy Scouts.
That’s zero risk.
I agree with Wheeler’s comments completely. This is why I had to reconsider my support for Palin when she campaigned for McCain before I realized she had done the right thing.
But what Wheeler says tells me nothing about whether Perry is a closet RINO or not.
If you are open to reason then you should be really open to look at her history. I did that and the more I thought it through came to the conclusion that she is not fit for POTUS.
Other political office, fine, POTUS, no.
I’m not going in circles with the excuses made for her quitting. If it was just the governor deal that would be one thing but she also quit mid term on the Oil and Gas commission before anyone outside of Alaska knew who she was.
But nothing you mention meets the criteria for the ultimate test.
What you describe is Perry acting in ways that bring him more political support from his particular group of supporters.
The ultimate test is to uphold principle even though it puts your political viability and your personal gain at risk.
Perry is Reagan? That's what The Party(tm) is trying to sell? R O F L M A O.
Where are the photo's of Reagan stupidly pandering to and legitimizing the Marxist/Leftist Entitlement crowd?
Oh what, there are none? Maybe that's because Reagan wasn't stupid enough to do so - unlike Perry, who fertilized ACORNs with the RINO piddle that leaked out of his (D)epends.
Compare:
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q="Community+Reinvestment+Act"+Reagan
VS
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=ACORN+"Rick+Perry"
NO SALE.
Unlike 0 bummer, san fran nan "We have to pass it to find out what's in it" and dingy hairy who jammed the obummercare bill through even though the electorate said no.
It looks like a lot of people on FR want to see 0 bummer reelected by shooting themselves in the foot, rather than supporting a candidate who could and would tell 0 bummer "Adios, MO FO".
Thanks for posting that. I like Perry.
Instead of resigning (and making millions from selling books and making speeches), she could have fought for regulation of the powerful Litigation Industry with a “loser pay” law like Texas did. That would be doing the right thing when no one is looking, IMO.
So it comes down to who do I trust more, Wheeler or Palin?
Bump!
Yes, I replied to #45 a few minutes ago. See #66.
An answer would be nice. At least it would be a starting point, rather than the mere casting of aspersions.
Because if the political climate changes while Palin is President, we know she will continue to do what is right even though it isn’t popular.
This is a non-sequiter from Friedman's point. The only thing that matters is the political climate where bad people are forced to do good. Without it, good people that do good fail and are voted out.
Perhaps you should invert your screen name to 'faithisreason'? It seems that once you believe something, you're going to keep bending the facts around it until it fits. I get that you really, really like Palin, but sitting around hoping for white knights to ride in and save the day is not what our system of government was designed for.
Perry has his flaws, but he's not a 'wrong' thinker. He's just not always right, and needs to be corrected now and then. That attention is vital to the functioning of our democratic republic. Palin may be more 'right', but the idea that she's better because she wouldn't need to be watched is exactly the wrong attitude for us to take. Our engagement is the only thing that makes the system work.
You know who Wheeler is, right? I don’t always agree with Wheeler...but I take his advise extremely serious. He will NOT promote anyone who is close to a RINO....he also knows Perry’s shortcomings....he also knows Palin’s shortcomings...he is fighting to save America as hard as he can. He also realizes the Tea Party will save America. He just came back from a trip and visited all the Tea Party HQ’s and had indepth conversations with those leaders. When he came back, he endorsed Perry.
Maybe Friedman’s ideas can be expanded. (Unless we want to put 100% faith in Friedman, without engaging and applying our own thinking.)
Logic tells us that if the political climate favors conservatism, a conservative with the highest integrity is not going to be worse than a RINO.
And what I’m trying to tell you is that reason alone shows us that a RINO will stop advancing conservatism as soon as it is unpopular, while a Sarah Palin will continue to advance it against the political winds.
So in the Friedman-inspired discussion, we can see that electing a conservative to office, in a climate which favors conservatism, will help to advance conservatism for a longer period of time than electing a RINO in the same political climate.
They won’t answer because they hate Perry. Anybody who totes a gun and blows away a coyote in Austin is better than the “cumeunity oginizer” we have now.
If what you say is true, maybe you have a good point.
But the effect of the ethics charges was to tie her hands politically. If this was accomplished, then strictly according to logic your point is invalid.
Of course I know who he is. But I don’t pick my candidates based on faith in Wheeler’s ability to pick candidates.
(Assuming what you say about Wheeler is true) Wheeler could be wrong about Perry.
No arguments there - I'm a big fan, especially if/when she declares.
I would also vote for Perry without qualms - what are the hard decisions he passed on?
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.