Texas Gov. Rick Perry Entering 2012 Race

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
gilliam said:
I haven’t made up my mind yet on this race but I wouldn’t put a lot of stock into the fact that this particular Republican is bashing Perry.

The reason why you are seeing so many ex-Bush team people bashing Perry is that there is a lot of bad water between Perry and the Bush team. Especially after Perry started to say Bush’s economic policies were not really conservative. The Bush team wants Paul Ryan or Chris Christie or a number of other folks they feel would be in their camp going forward. So take it with a LARGE grain of salt that is is in any way significant that they are Republicans criticizing Perry. No matter what Perry says going forward until there is only one nominee, we should expect the Bush team to belittle Perry…

some history
The alleged bad blood between Governor Perry and former President Bush dates back to the 1998 when Bush was running for governor and Perry was running for lieutenant-governor.

“Bush had token opposition and wanted to get a really big win, and also wanted to win a majority of Hispanics. Rove’s team didn’t want to go negative at the end, because that would suppress Hispanic turnout in places where Bush was going to get some crossover votes,” explained Mackowiak, a Republican strategist who previously worked for Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson. “There was a difference in the strategy, of what the Lieutenant Governor campaign wanted and what the Governor’s team wanted.” Perry was in a much closer race than Bush and ended up going negative on their Democratic opponent, despite the wishes of Karl Rove and the Bush camp. And so a legendary feud was born.
fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/08/19/tim-mak-rick-perry-taps-former-bush-donors-for-money-despite-ongoing-feud/

Everything is bigger in Texas, including political feuds.

If you are keeping notes on what Bush aid said what, see:
tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/ws-revenge-ex-bushies-gang-up-on-rick-perry.php
Click to expand...
Keen insites Gilliam, thanks.
 
comrade1789 said:
Great Question! Most Dems seem to deny the truth of biology and psychology in regards to human sexuality and abortion.
Click to expand...
That’s because most, if not all, the pro-life Democrats (64 voted for the Stupak Amendment) got voted out last election. And who’s left?

There are pro-life Democrats out there but their constituents don’t want them apparently.
 
ProVobis said:
That’s because most, if not all, the pro-life Democrats (64 voted for the Stupak Amendment) got voted out last election. And who’s left?

There are pro-life Democrats out there but their constituents don’t want them apparently.
Click to expand...
They got voted out because after the Stupak Amendment was remOved in conference they still voted for the Health Care bill they put Party before life and they paid the price
 
I think the whole “feud” rumor between Bush and Perry is being over played anyway. IMO it’s in Perry’s favor to be seen as not best buds with Bush since he needs to distance himself and be his own candidate. Why some Repubs are acting like this rumor is a negative for Perry makes no sense. Many many people had major problems with Bush, heck last election much of Repub party almost acted like Bush never existed.
 
Cider said:
Many many people had major problems with Bush, heck last election much of Repub party almost acted like Bush never existed.
Click to expand...
Well…his own party accused him of socialism just before he left office. Can we say TARP and bailout?
 
estesbob said:
They got voted out because after the Stupak Amendment was remOved in conference they still voted for the Health Care bill they put Party before life and they paid the price
Click to expand...
Wonder if they knew what else was in the bill? If so, it must have been transmitted to them in a trance since they certainly did not read it.
 
mary_bobo said:
Wonder if they knew what else was in the bill? If so, it must have been transmitted to them in a trance since they certainly did not read it.
Click to expand...
HAHA.

“We have to pass the bill to find out whats in it” - Pelosi.
 
comrade1789 said:
Great Question! Most Dems seem to deny the truth of biology and psychology in regards to human sexuality and abortion.
Click to expand...
Yes, for some reason when it comes to pelvic activity and the results thereof, common sense goes straight out the window.
 
GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry told New Hampshire voters Wednesday that he does not believe in manmade global warming, calling it a scientific theory that has not been proven.

“I think we’re seeing almost weekly, or even daily, scientists that are coming forward and questioning the original idea that manmade global warming is what is causing the climate to change,” the Texas governor said on the first stop of a two-day trip to the first-in-the-nation primary state.

He said some want billions or trillions of taxpayer dollars spent to address the issue, but he added: “I don’t think from my perspective that I want to be engaged in spending that much money on still a scientific theory that has not been proven and from my perspective is more and more being put into question.”

His comments came at a packed breakfast meeting with local business leaders in a region known for its strong environmental policies. And he made his global warming comment in response to a question by an audience member who cited evidence from the National Academy of Sciences.

But Perry’s opinion runs counter to the view held by an overwhelming majority of scientists that pollution released from the burning of fossil fuels is heating up the planet. Perry’s home state of Texas releases more heat-trapping pollution carbon dioxide – the chief greenhouse gas – than any other state in the country, according to government data.

cnsnews.com/news/article/perry-says-he-doesnt-believe-global-warm
 
Whether or not he is a believer in mand-made global warming is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that he isn’t yet another politician whose faith in global warming is so great that they are willing to give billions and trillions of the tax payers dollars to friends and associates in order to fix the problem.

Time to free up some of the energy that we know works in order to get the economy on the move again. That just may take a revolutionary restructuring of the government bureaucracy though.
 
It almost doesn’t matter whether he does or doesn’t. China has overtaken the U.S. as the biggest producer of CO2 emissions and adds a new coal-fired plant every ten days. India is heading in the same direction.

I don’t personally believe human activities are causing global warming. But even if i did, I would have to recognize that nothing the U.S. does or doesn’t do will affect the outcome.
 
China and India do not have the luxury of sacrificing their economies over the fate of the saps-sucking frog or even the polar bear.
 
Darryl1958 said:
China and India do not have the luxury of sacrificing their economies over the fate of the saps-sucking frog or even the polar bear.
Click to expand...
If everyone else is doing it, I guess that means it’s okay… :rolleyes:

I think Perry is wrong, though I can’t say I am surprised.
 
Raskolnikov said:
If everyone else is doing it, I guess that means it’s okay… :rolleyes:

I think Perry is wrong, though I can’t say I am surprised.
Click to expand...
Your cynicism is duly noted.
My argument though is somewhat different than what you project it to be:

If everyone else is doing it, that means that the best course to take is not to spend trillions of dollars on taking the high moral road— to no effect!
The best course to take would be to pray to St Jude over yet another lost cause.

More pragmatically though,
if America sustains a healthy economy, then chances are that, if or when the consequences of global warming take effect, Americans will actually have some money and therefore options to deal with those consequences.

As with all other environmental problems, only the countries that have been able to afford to have been able to. Countries with the best of intentions are generally the most polluting because they can’t afford the solutions. they’ve invested all their capital into a future that doesn’t exist. In their attempts to make tomorrow a heaven on earth, they make the present a hell, all with the best of intentions, and all to no effect.
For tomorrow never comes. We just do not know what the future will hold for us, and it is invariably different than what even the smartest experts have predicted it will be.

Rather than panicking over what may or may not happen in the next century, the best course of action is to take care of the economy that we have now, with the technology we have now.The more that we take care of the economy now, the more that the economy will take care of us in the future.

If not for ourselves,then for our children. It is the compassionate thing to do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top