Another Flip Flop from Rick Perry (D) Texas

[candycorn]

Here is what Rick Perry said his position is....for the time being. It's a close race to see what expires first; the milk in your fridge or Perry's position on...anything.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a potential GOP presidential candidate, said he supports a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman and takes away the right of states to decide who can get married.

Perry, in an interview with the Associated Press, said a decision on whether he'll run for the White House can wait until Labor Day.

"Yes sir, I would. I am for the federal marriage amendment," Perry told the AP in a telephone interview Saturday. "And that's about as sharp a point as I could put on it."

The issue of gay marriage has tripped up Perry in recent weeks.

Perry, a favorite of social conservatives, touched off concern when he said earlier this month that New York's decision to enact a same-sex marriage law is "fine with me." That drew rebukes from the right, including from GOP presidential hopeful Rick Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator.

The governor sought to clarify his "fine with me" remark in an interview with Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council. He told Perkins that he's not OK with marriage, but believes in states' rights as contained in the 10th Amendment.

Perry said he would run on a platform centered on the need to create jobs if he decides to make the 2012 White House race.

 

[Truthmatters]

why did you label him a D?

 

[JoeB131]

Here is what Rick Perry said his position is....for the time being. It's a close race to see what expires first; the milk in your fridge or Perry's position on...anything.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a potential GOP presidential candidate, said he supports a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman and takes away the right of states to decide who can get married.

Perry, in an interview with the Associated Press, said a decision on whether he'll run for the White House can wait until Labor Day.

"Yes sir, I would. I am for the federal marriage amendment," Perry told the AP in a telephone interview Saturday. "And that's about as sharp a point as I could put on it."

The issue of gay marriage has tripped up Perry in recent weeks.

Perry, a favorite of social conservatives, touched off concern when he said earlier this month that New York's decision to enact a same-sex marriage law is "fine with me." That drew rebukes from the right, including from GOP presidential hopeful Rick Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator.

The governor sought to clarify his "fine with me" remark in an interview with Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council. He told Perkins that he's not OK with marriage, but believes in states' rights as contained in the 10th Amendment.

Perry said he would run on a platform centered on the need to create jobs if he decides to make the 2012 White House race.

Hmmmmm, smells like fear.

sounds like you are trying to find any reason to rip into Perry, even on a trivial issue like this one.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but DOMA is unconstitutional, and will eventually be struck down. That means the 39 states that have decisively voted to define marriage the same way President Obama has defined it- as one man and one woman - would be stuck with the few states where an activist judge or legistlature has done.

Frankly, I don't care. We could have gay marriage for the whole country, we can send them off to Jesus Camps for reparitive therapy. Not my biggest concern right now.

My biggest concern is the incompetent in the White House has made it so hostile to business right now that we are spiralling into another recession when we haven't recovered from the last one yet.

 

[candycorn]

Here is what Rick Perry said his position is....for the time being. It's a close race to see what expires first; the milk in your fridge or Perry's position on...anything.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a potential GOP presidential candidate, said he supports a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman and takes away the right of states to decide who can get married.

Perry, in an interview with the Associated Press, said a decision on whether he'll run for the White House can wait until Labor Day.

"Yes sir, I would. I am for the federal marriage amendment," Perry told the AP in a telephone interview Saturday. "And that's about as sharp a point as I could put on it."

The issue of gay marriage has tripped up Perry in recent weeks.

Perry, a favorite of social conservatives, touched off concern when he said earlier this month that New York's decision to enact a same-sex marriage law is "fine with me." That drew rebukes from the right, including from GOP presidential hopeful Rick Santorum, a former Pennsylvania senator.

The governor sought to clarify his "fine with me" remark in an interview with Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council. He told Perkins that he's not OK with marriage, but believes in states' rights as contained in the 10th Amendment.

Perry said he would run on a platform centered on the need to create jobs if he decides to make the 2012 White House race.

Hmmmmm, smells like fear.

sounds like you are trying to find any reason to rip into Perry, even on a trivial issue like this one.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but DOMA is unconstitutional, and will eventually be struck down. That means the 39 states that have decisively voted to define marriage the same way President Obama has defined it- as one man and one woman - would be stuck with the few states where an activist judge or legistlature has done.

Frankly, I don't care. We could have gay marriage for the whole country, we can send them off to Jesus Camps for reparitive therapy. Not my biggest concern right now.

My biggest concern is the incompetent in the White House has made it so hostile to business right now that we are spiralling into another recession when we haven't recovered from the last one yet.

Well, I don't call having to have the US Government's blessing to get married a "trivial matter". Additionally, I don't think forcing 12 year old girls to get inoculated against STDs is a trivial matter either. To each their own.

Not my biggest concern either but if you're going to label yourself a conservative, it would help to have some conservative principles based on less government interaction. Instead, he wants to amend the constitution right out of the box. Politically, its extremely suspicious how he said he didn't have a problem with NY's ruling on gay marriage then says he wants to amend the Constitution federally to ban it.

 

[candycorn]

why did you label him a D?

I'm sorry....he's not a Democrat? I thought that I had read somewhere that he was.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Yea cuz the Hopey Changey One and Democrats never Flip-Flop on anything. Remember when your boy just hated raising those Debt Limits when the other side had the power? Now he's telling us it's our sacred patriotic duty to raise the Debt Limit. Now that's a Flip-Flop. Yikes!

 

[JoeB131]

Well, I don't call having to have the US Government's blessing to get married a "trivial matter". Additionally, I don't think forcing 12 year old girls to get inoculated against STDs is a trivial matter either. To each their own.

Not my biggest concern either but if you're going to label yourself a conservative, it would help to have some conservative principles based on less government interaction. Instead, he wants to amend the constitution right out of the box. Politically, its extremely suspicious how he said he didn't have a problem with NY's ruling on gay marriage then says he wants to amend the Constitution federally to ban it.

Wow, you are trying to drag up the Gardisil thing again? Really?

I think amending the constitution wouldn't be the best way to go. (I also think it's practically impossible, no matter how good the GOP does next year, and they are going to do really good if they nominate Rick.) But we wouldn't be having this discussion if the people who support gay marriage actually followed the democratic process and didn't keep trying to sneak it in the back door. (Pun Intended.)

If want gay marriage, you get 51% of the population of the country to agree that's what the law should be. Not some judge in some state ignoring the will of the people and deciding he's going to change the law, all on his own, no matter what they said at the ballot box.

Obviously, there's a problem of two principles on the conservative side conflicting here. Protecting marriage from redefinition vs. the right of states to make their own laws. I'm not really sure how it gets resolved at the end.

But Perry is no more slippery than "The One", who also says that he supports the traditional definition of marriage, but his Justice Department (when it isn't handing automatic weapons to Mexican Drug Gangs) won't be bothered to actually defend the law Congress passed.

 

[candycorn]

Yea cuz the Hopey Changey One and Democrats never Flip-Flop on anything. Remember when your boy just hated raising those Debt Limits when the other side had the power? Now he's telling us it's our sacred patriotic duty to raise the Debt Limit. Now that's a Flip-Flop. Yikes!

Perry is a Democrat is he not?

 

[masquerade]

He was a Democrat, at one time.

 

[Seawytch]

Well, I don't call having to have the US Government's blessing to get married a "trivial matter". Additionally, I don't think forcing 12 year old girls to get inoculated against STDs is a trivial matter either. To each their own.

Not my biggest concern either but if you're going to label yourself a conservative, it would help to have some conservative principles based on less government interaction. Instead, he wants to amend the constitution right out of the box. Politically, its extremely suspicious how he said he didn't have a problem with NY's ruling on gay marriage then says he wants to amend the Constitution federally to ban it.

Wow, you are trying to drag up the Gardisil thing again? Really?

I think amending the constitution wouldn't be the best way to go. (I also think it's practically impossible, no matter how good the GOP does next year, and they are going to do really good if they nominate Rick.) But we wouldn't be having this discussion if the people who support gay marriage actually followed the democratic process and didn't keep trying to sneak it in the back door. (Pun Intended.)

If want gay marriage, you get 51% of the population of the country to agree that's what the law should be. Not some judge in some state ignoring the will of the people and deciding he's going to change the law, all on his own, no matter what they said at the ballot box.

Obviously, there's a problem of two principles on the conservative side conflicting here. Protecting marriage from redefinition vs. the right of states to make their own laws. I'm not really sure how it gets resolved at the end.

But Perry is no more slippery than "The One", who also says that he supports the traditional definition of marriage, but his Justice Department (when it isn't handing automatic weapons to Mexican Drug Gangs) won't be bothered to actually defend the law Congress passed.

When did it become okay to put minority rights to the "will of the people"? If we had waited for the "Will of the People", interracial marriage would not have become legal until 1992. It was passed by "activist judges" in 1967...

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Yea cuz the Hopey Changey One and Democrats never Flip-Flop on anything. Remember when your boy just hated raising those Debt Limits when the other side had the power? Now he's telling us it's our sacred patriotic duty to raise the Debt Limit. Now that's a Flip-Flop. Yikes!

Perry is a Democrat is he not?

Perry is a Republican. He has supported Democrats in the past though. And that might just help him if he runs against the Hopey Changey One. Lots of Independent Democrat-leaning Voters are just itching to dump The One. Perry might just benefit from this.

 

[candycorn]

Well, I don't call having to have the US Government's blessing to get married a "trivial matter". Additionally, I don't think forcing 12 year old girls to get inoculated against STDs is a trivial matter either. To each their own.

Not my biggest concern either but if you're going to label yourself a conservative, it would help to have some conservative principles based on less government interaction. Instead, he wants to amend the constitution right out of the box. Politically, its extremely suspicious how he said he didn't have a problem with NY's ruling on gay marriage then says he wants to amend the Constitution federally to ban it.

Wow, you are trying to drag up the Gardisil thing again? Really?

Just informing the board of Perry's brand of conservatism. Maybe they'll think twice about just assuming he's a conservative since he's a Republican (for now anyway).
I am heartened that you're not feigning ignorance and know it is the Gardasil shot he wants to foist onto the 12 year olds.

In fairness, it does more than prevent STDs, its prevents cervical cancer. However at the age of 12, the need for such a drug is suspect at best.

I think amending the constitution wouldn't be the best way to go. (I also think it's practically impossible, no matter how good the GOP does next year, and they are going to do really good if they nominate Rick.) But we wouldn't be having this discussion if the people who support gay marriage actually followed the democratic process and didn't keep trying to sneak it in the back door. (Pun Intended.)

Nice pun...gotta laugh at that one.

If want gay marriage, you get 51% of the population of the country to agree that's what the law should be. Not some judge in some state ignoring the will of the people and deciding he's going to change the law, all on his own, no matter what they said at the ballot box.

Laws are supposed to protect the minority populations; not endorse the views of the majority. We wouldn't need free speech laws if all speech were popular, for example. And getting 51% of the country isn't a way to do anything; getting 51% of the state maybe but we don't have nationwide referendums on laws.

Obviously, there's a problem of two principles on the conservative side conflicting here. Protecting marriage from redefinition vs. the right of states to make their own laws. I'm not really sure how it gets resolved at the end.

How about just letting people love who they want?

But Perry is no more slippery than "The One", who also says that he supports the traditional definition of marriage, but his Justice Department (when it isn't handing automatic weapons to Mexican Drug Gangs) won't be bothered to actually defend the law Congress passed.

Oh...so now Obama is the standard? Strange way to end your post IMHO.

 

[candycorn]

Yea cuz the Hopey Changey One and Democrats never Flip-Flop on anything. Remember when your boy just hated raising those Debt Limits when the other side had the power? Now he's telling us it's our sacred patriotic duty to raise the Debt Limit. Now that's a Flip-Flop. Yikes!

Perry is a Democrat is he not?

Perry is a Republican. He has supported Democrats in the past though. And that might just help him if he runs against the Hopey Changey One. Lots of Independent Democrat-leaning Voters are just itching to dump The One. Perry might just benefit from this.

He flip flopped on his party affiliation too?

Seems like Ricky has had trouble making his mind up his entire career in professional politics. And to think that in some allegedly conservative circles....they talk about principles and decry professional politicians.

Dunnam: Is Gov. Rick Perry a hypocrite?

Here's a quiz: Which anti-government Texas politician has spent most of his adult life living off government checks?

Answer: Gov. Rick Perry.

Listening to Perry, you'd never know that he's one of the longest serving employees of the State of Texas. For close to 20 years, Perry has been a full-time state employee. For six years before that, he was a part-timer. How he gets away with so much "I'm anti-government, I'm an outsider" rhetoric is called the old Big Lie technique: Say something long enough and loud enough and people think it must be true.

Perry has mastered the art of backroom politics, taking hypocrisy to new heights. He lives in a $10,000-a-month, taxpayer-funded mansion yet rails against out-of-control government spending. At least Mike Huckabee had the modesty to move into a double-wide when the Arkansas governor's mansion was remodeled.....

Huck would be a man I would consider voting for.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

I agree Perry is not the ideal Conservative Candidate. But he does deserve props for creating a lot of Jobs in Texas. His Job-Creation Numbers are second to none. No one even comes close,and that includes The One. And his Democrat past might actually benefit him in the General Election. There are many Independent Democrat-leaning Voters who are desperate for an alternative to this President. Perry could be what they're looking for.

 

[candycorn]

He was a Democrat, at one time.

Ahh, thanks.

 

[candycorn]

I agree Perry is not the ideal Conservative Candidate. But he does deserve props for creating a lot of Jobs in Texas. His Job-Creation Numbers are second to none. No one even comes close,and that includes The One.

If the oil industry was based in Rhode Island, Rhode Island would have more jobs created than anyone else. Having industries in your state posting record high profits is the ONLY reason that there are jobs being created in Texas. But you tend to reap those benefits if you're the governor...right or wrong.

And his Democrat past might actually benefit him in the General Election. There are many Independent Democrat-leaning Voters who are desperate for an alternative to this President. Perry could be what they're looking for.

Not likely. They don't want forced injections of a potentially deadly drug for their daughters or a Constitutional amendment forcing you to get the Government's blessing for your marriage.

Thanks but no thanks.

 

[JoeB131]

When did it become okay to put minority rights to the "will of the people"? If we had waited for the "Will of the People", interracial marriage would not have become legal until 1992. It was passed by "activist judges" in 1967...

I'm just curious where you get the "1992" figure. Even by 1967, most of the states had already struck these laws off their books. Heck, if only such a law had been in force in Hawaii in 1961, imagine the trouble we could be saving ourselves now...

 

[Antiderivative]

Rick Perry is an asshat, just like the OP.

They should both take their belongings and leave this country . America would be better off for it.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

I agree Perry is not the ideal Conservative Candidate. But he does deserve props for creating a lot of Jobs in Texas. His Job-Creation Numbers are second to none. No one even comes close,and that includes The One.

If the oil industry was based in Rhode Island, Rhode Island would have more jobs created than anyone else. Having industries in your state posting record high profits is the ONLY reason that there are jobs being created in Texas. But you tend to reap those benefits if you're the governor...right or wrong.

And his Democrat past might actually benefit him in the General Election. There are many Independent Democrat-leaning Voters who are desperate for an alternative to this President. Perry could be what they're looking for.

Not likely. They don't want forced injections of a potentially deadly drug for their daughters or a Constitutional amendment forcing you to get the Government's blessing for your marriage.

Thanks but no thanks.

Well,you know what they say about opinions right? I don't think Flip-Flops matter anymore though. If they did,most of these kooks in there now wouldn't be in office. This current President has a whole lot of Flip-Flops on his record. So if this does become an issue,i don't think it helps this President. But i guess we'll see.

 

[Seawytch]

When did it become okay to put minority rights to the "will of the people"? If we had waited for the "Will of the People", interracial marriage would not have become legal until 1992. It was passed by "activist judges" in 1967...

I'm just curious where you get the "1992" figure. Even by 1967, most of the states had already struck these laws off their books. Heck, if only such a law had been in force in Hawaii in 1961, imagine the trouble we could be saving ourselves now...

Gallup: