Skip to comments.The legend of Al Gore and Rick Perry
Posted on 09/07/2011 12:43:45 PM PDT by wolfcreek
Its a legend of Texas politics and a hatchet for foes of Gov. Rick Perry, front-running candidate for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. The story goes that as a Democratic legislator, Perry chaired Democrat Al Gores presidential campaign in Texas.
The legend has been aired routinely for more than 13 years, originally by a Democratic opponent of Perrys, and in news reportsall but unchallenged by Perry. Even we at PolitiFact Texas repeated the story as fact.
Of late, theres a July 16, 2011, reference to Perry chairing the Gore effort in Time magazine, and an Aug. 29, 2011, item in The New Yorker magazine saying Perry "became a Republican after shouldering the thankless task of running Al Gore's 1988 Presidential campaign in Texas."
This week, U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, likewise bidding for president, premiered an advertisement calling Perry "Al Gores Texas cheerleader."
But interviews with political players in Texas and Tennessee and news articles from 1988 have convinced us that, although Perry endorsed Gore, he was not his Texas chairman.
(Excerpt) Read more at politifact.com ...
It is a good starting point to find out what really is accurate. Most of the information is cited, as well.
The fact that anyone can edit the Wikipedia article should add to the confidence of it being accurate, because upon reading something that one knows to be false, who would leave the falsity without correcting it. I would be more likely to believe as false an article that is composed by one author and has no option for edition by the public at large. The idea behind Wikipedia is that the true accurate information will be the only information that remains. This holds especially true for Wikipedia articles that are read by many people; such as articles on presidential candidates. This is also the reason why just about every statement in Perry’s Wikipedia article has a citation.
I agree that there is a possibility that inaccuracies exist, but I also think it acceptable to use Wikipedia as a starting point for an investigation into finding the truth.
This whole thread was meant to make you feel better and quit believing lies.
If it doesn’t help, there are drugs available that will.
Guess the ronpaulnut siren call went out as we seem to be picking up the usual herd of PDS coyotes.
Let see what your background was in the late 80s.
Ever make a mistake or change your mind?
Dude, the article states that this *rumor/legend* has been pushed by political opponents and Liberals for years.
Politifact.com is a fairly left leaning organization who themselves, having printed this lie, have admitted this is BS.
Wikipedia is whatever people want to print.
Not a blog written by some guy in his mom's basement, but an investigative journalism site run by a major media organization. They're presenting what they claim to be facts. If they're wrong, I welcome your refutation.
Or was that just your excuse for refusing to read the article?
Show their desperation.
That's fair enough, but then you should probably specify which part of the entry you are referencing, so others can determine if you are referring to an entry that is false. For example, the entry you posted refers to Perry being the chairman of Al Gore's Texas campaign - as we can now see that part is in error.
If you look a little more closely, you'll see that the page you linked to is an autogenerated aggregator page which includes the Wikipedia entry on the topic as well as wall posts about the topic by people on your Friends list.
In what way would such a page be "scrubbed"?
What's the frequency, Kenneth?
"Rick was not here. "
You should know how unreliable eye witness testimony is. :-)
Actually, it is! I am presently reading a book about the Dallas cowboys and the early days when Jones and Johnson replaced Landry and Schram. One part is about the different reports about how Jimmy handled a player who had asthma. Of the many player and reporters who were on the scene and saw what happened there are five different versions as to the player, his position and his size, and the same number of versions about what was said. I saw a tape of it on the evening news and my recollection is different from the other five.
...who was considered by Perry and most other conservative Democrats to be the most conservative major candidate in the Dem primaries. Don't forget that part.
And also don't forget that by the end of the primary season, Perry was so disgusted with the reality of the Dem Party (i.e. that any attempt to pull it back to the right was futile) that he left.
Exactly how do you figure that, since Perry voted for Bush41 in the general election? Yes, Perry voted for Carter in 1976, and he admits he was fooled by Carter - he thought Carter, as a Christian Southern Democrat and a farmer, was more conservative than he turned out to be. (Perry was only 26 at the time as well, so maybe youth was a factor.) So while he voted for Carter, he was not a "Jimmy Carter Democrat" - he was a "Reagan Democrat", voting for Reagan in 1980 and 1984.
I remind you that Perry only switched parties in 1989. He supported Carter, Mondale and Dukakis.
Nope. Pure falsehood. Perry has stated publicly, long before he decided to run for president, that the last Democrat he voted for in a Presidential general election was Carter in 1976. So that means he voted for Reagan in 1980 and 1984 and Bush41 in 1988. That was not unusual for Southern Democrats - many voted GOP for President and Democrat in local elections. They made up a large part of the "Reagan Democrats" that helped Reagan win 2 elections.
Perry is unfit to be president.
Perry is EXTREMELY well qualified and fit to be President.
“I am presently reading a book about the Dallas cowboys...”
Uhhhhhhh...this is not opinion. Either he was the Boss or he wasn’t. Looks like he wasn’t. Or was he? A better analogy would be; who was the head coach of New England in the 2004-2005 season? There is only one correct answer.
well you might want to check this wikijunk blurb.
1988 convention piece only mentions Hightower and Richards. Hightower is the Dummie that Perry beat like a drum as a REPUBLICAN. There is a Doc somewhere that proves WHO was algores CP in Texas. Ofcourse I wouldn’t want to claim it either. I will keep looking. Perry doesn’t want to say anything until he has the actual docs in hand. Perry is not stupid.
“he was a “Reagan Democrat”, voting for Reagan in 1980 and 1984.”
Pure speculation and wishful thinking on your part.
Reagan endorsed Bush. Perry endorsed Gore.
These are the facts.
Found this in an Autin-american article.
Seems Gore was so pathetic he DIDN’T even have a Chair/Co-Chair/teamleader/playground monitor
“Austin consultant George Shipley, who advised Gores 1988 campaign, told us in an interview that Perry “made, to my knowledge, one, possibly two press tours, but he was not what I would call that active in the campaign.”
Sherman lawyer Bob Slagle, who supported Gore while chairing the states Democratic Party, told us in an interview that Perry “may have been chairman for some area around Haskell County,” Perrys home county, but he was no more than that.
Similarly, two staff members in Gores 1988 effort said Perry was not its Texas chief.
Tennessee lawyer Tom Jurkovich, Gores Texas director, told us by email that “we may have named (Perry) to a steering committee or as one of several campaign co-chairs, typically honorific titles with no real role ... (Perry) wasn’t highly involved in the campaign, however, and had zero operational responsibility.”
Mike Kopp of Nashville, who did press outreach for Gore, was more emphatic, saying in an interview: “We didnt have a chairman in Texas; we didnt have co-chairs,” either. “We werent that organized; we didnt have that strong a ground game.”
True. I wasn’t trying to convince anyone of the truth of the claim with my first post though. I just wanted to add a little more context and offer another source. I posted the whole section of his early political career to give a little more context to the claim.
Also, I just noticed that the source in Wikipedia for the claim that Perry was Al Gore’s chairman is the same site that you linked to (albeit the Wikipedia link is dead now).
Somebody has the paperwork. Now I believe in 'conversions' and even 'miracles', but October surprises are something that seems to happen like clockwork every presidential election year.
Pure speculation and wishful thinking on your part.
Reagan endorsed Bush. Perry endorsed Gore.
These are the facts.
Nope. I posted the facts - you keep trying to twist the facts. Perry endorsed Gore in the Texas primary - but he voted for Bush in the general election.
What's the matter is Perry beating your preferred candidate? Well, I guess he must be, since at the moment, he is beating ALL OF THEM. Sounds like sour grapes to me.
I imagine that it will come up in the debate, so it will be interesting to see how Perry responds.
“They made up a large part of the “Reagan Democrats” that helped Reagan win 2 elections.”
Reagan Democrats? You’re making that up! Whoever heard of a Reagan Democrat! ... hmmmmmphh.
Methinks you are talking to a wall of ignorance. And I agree, Perry is probably the best prepared on the roster as of today. I WOULD vote for Palin, if/when she declares (and support her, too) even though, sadly, I am not sure how electable she is, but if for no other reason than we have to end the RINO circus and flush as many of the old turds as possible from the Grand Old Potty. Well, that and it might be huge fun to watch the heads explode on both sides.
THE DUMMIES will not ADMIT that algore didn’t even have a Texas Chairman. ROFLMAO. Hope Perry NAILS RonNut tonight.
See Post #23.
Thank you for your input.
He supported a democrat, did he not?
Did he not then support Dukakis once he got the democrat nomination?
Furthermore, I fail to see how asking for an explanation from Mr. Perry regarding why he would EVER have thought Al Gore would make a good president makes me a 'ronpaulnut'.
RE: "the usual herd of PDS coyotes" -- Please provide one shred of evidence from my posting history that indicates that I am dislike, or am opposed to, Mr. Perry as a presidential candidate. Since you accuse me of being part of this "usual herd", you must have such evidence, right?
In my opinion, people who unwaveringly support a particular candidate, never questioning that person's past decisions or actions, never challenging that person to provide reasonable explanations for his past behavior, and then blindly attacking anyone who DOES ask questions of said candidate, are every bit as 'nutty' as the wackiest Ron Paul supporter, regardless of the candidate to which they have pledged their allegiance.
Interesting. Most people do not let complete strangers stand with them in the voting booth.
In your dreams!
This is not a secret - Perry has publicly stated that the last Democrat for whom he voted in the general presidential election was Carter in 1976. Since he is the only one to know, I take his word over those who are just making assumptions, especially people who don't even know how politics worked in Texas in those days.
You have a point.
Anyone in Perry’s position who is willing to publicly admit to having once voted for Jimmy Carter is unlikely to be anything less than completely forthright regarding his subsequent votes.
Your same ol same ol algore smear has long been super detailed and settled as ZERO, thus you were not asking a question and instead trying to soil a candidate with the same ol same ol RONPAUL distortion smear tactics.
“Ron Paul is one of the last natural born Citizens of the United States who I would support for president”. Is it down to either paul or nobama? If you don’t want to be ID’d as a paulnut it might be a good thing to QUIT ACTING LIKE ONE.
The last thing I care to do is research your prev posts only to see that you may be pulling the paulnut pattern of proclaiming Palin to hide your preference for the little Martian. Patience is long gone for that kind of BS.
You have no idea who I am or what I think/believe. However, just in case you are NOT simply an arrogant, ignorant, bullying horse's ass, I will address your accusation.
I WAS asking a question, because I had not previously heard any of the accusations made against Mr. Perry which were noted in the article posted. In all honesty, I was not even aware until yesterday that he had once been a democrat.
Having read the posted article, I mentioned, albeit in a somewhat 'smart-ass' way, that I would like to hear Mr. Perry's explanation for having once supported a wacko like Gore. You, whether you are willing to admit it or not, horribly misinterpreted my post and horribly over-reacted. You attacked me by accusing me of something that no one else who has ever read anything that I have written has EVER accused me of - being a Ron Paul supporter.
Your insulting posts, bereft of useful information as they were, added NOTHING to the conversation and taught me nothing about the candidate you claim to support. There is no way such a response could ever win someone over to your side of an argument, and in fact such comments are much more likely to reflect negatively on 'your' candidate.
Fortunately, another Perry supporter took my question seriously and posted a quote from Mr. Perry which gave the explanation I had requested. This person, without resulting to personal insults, provided me with information that left me with a more positive opinion of Mr. Perry.
I certainly hope Mr. Perry has more 'die-hard' supporters who behave like the other Freeper than who behave like you.
When I get time I will look at your prev postings, but in the mean time I say BS, thinking having seen WayneS on many Perry threads.
Now THAT is BS!
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.