Rick perry is scary.

[Mustang]

RICK PERRY IS SCARY.
Overheard on CNN.com:
Time to leave the country?

"Hey, Rick: What brand of gun would Jesus tote?"–RationalDoc

Why Rick Perry is headed to the White House
Why are Americans gearing up to elect another Texan for president? asks fellow Texan James Moore, an Emmy-award winning former news correspondent and co-author of the best-seller, "Bush's Brain." Although Perry "hates to govern, loves to campaign, and barely has a sixth grader's understanding of economics," writes Moore, his "coyote-killer good looks, $2,000 hand-tooled cowboy boots, supernova smile and Armani suits will create a product Americans will want to believe and buy."His prediction had many CNN.com readers planning to leave the country.
Overheard on CNN.com: Time to leave the country? – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs ... n-cnn-com/

He's scary because he's successful at being Governor. Plus he looks like another Ronald Reagan.

I'd be scared too if I supported that pencil-neck in the White House.

Heck your average Student Body President has shown more leadership and class then Obama.

Perry has more actual leadership then Obama will ever have.

One of Perry's accomplishments.


Rick Perry's NAFTA Superhighway Problem
8/12/2011
Rachel Alexander

Move over Mitt Romney. Rick Perry has a bigger problem to defend from his tenure as governor. Remember the NAFTA Superhighway project? It was to consist of a two-mile wide $184 billion transit system of toll roads, rail lines and utilities from the Texas-Mexico border all the way up to the Minnesota-Canadian border, to make it easier to ship foreign goods from China and other countries into North America. It became so unpopular in Texas that the Texas portion of it, called the Trans-Texas Corridor, was renamed and mostly disbanded a couple of years ago. Perry was the only gubernatorial candidate in 2006 of four major candidates who supported it. Even the Democratic candidate opposed it.

Rick Perry's NAFTA Superhighway Problem - Page 1 - Rachel Alexander - Townhall Conservative





Perry’s campaign website lists the Trans-Texas Corridor as one of his accomplishments, http://www.rickperry.org/accomplishments/transportation “Rather than taking decades to expand these important corridors a little bit at a time, Governor Perry developed the Trans-Texas Corridor plan.”But is it something Perry really wants broadcast as an achievement?

The Texas Republican Party’s 2010 platform includes a plank specifically opposing the Trans-Texas Corridor. https://www.1888932-2946.ws/TexasGOP/E-ContentStrategy/userfiles/2010_RPT_PLATFORM.pdf Some of the opposition to the NAFTA
Superhighway has been dismissed as conspiratorial, but loud objections also came from people concerned with border security and one million rural interests and farmers that stood to lose their land to eminent domain. Blog Management - Transportation leaders acknowledge failures of TTC-35 project, hint at future I-35 strategies

Wasn't that plan scrapped?

 

[Immanuel]

I gotta be honest here.. if it ain't obamaa I'm going to vote for it. It's just that simple.

I feel pretty much the same way that you do with a slight modification:

If it ain't got a (D) or an (R) after it, I am going to vote for it.

I have not seen enough of Perry yet to say I don't like him, but I don't see it very likely that I will vote for anyone who is part of the Party Elite. I've lost trust in both parties. If that means I throw away my vote then so be it.

It doesn't mean I won't be pulling for honest change, but, real change does not appear to be in the forecast for 2012.

Immie

 

[WillowTree]

I gotta be honest here.. if it ain't obamaa I'm going to vote for it. It's just that simple.

I feel pretty much the same way that you do with a slight modification:

If it ain't got a (D) or an (R) after it, I am going to vote for it.

I have not seen enough of Perry yet to say I don't like him, but I don't see it very likely that I will vote for anyone who is part of the Party Elite. I've lost trust in both parties. If that means I throw away my vote then so be it.

It doesn't mean I won't be pulling for honest change, but, real change does not appear to be in the forecast for 2012.

Immie

that's your perogative I guess, and it's what the dimwits have their hopes pinned on.

 

[Immanuel]

I gotta be honest here.. if it ain't obamaa I'm going to vote for it. It's just that simple.

I feel pretty much the same way that you do with a slight modification:

If it ain't got a (D) or an (R) after it, I am going to vote for it.

I have not seen enough of Perry yet to say I don't like him, but I don't see it very likely that I will vote for anyone who is part of the Party Elite. I've lost trust in both parties. If that means I throw away my vote then so be it.

It doesn't mean I won't be pulling for honest change, but, real change does not appear to be in the forecast for 2012.

Immie

that's your perogative I guess, and it's what the dimwits have their hopes pinned on.

So be it. But as long as people continue to vote only because their candidate has a (D) or an (R) after their names then we have no hope anyway. We may as well go to the insane asylum and grab the first patient we see and shove them into the oval office.

What's the difference if we elect the incompetent fool that holds the office now or one of the party elite being offered to us by the Republican Party? Come to think of it, at least Obama has proven himself incompetent. Do we really need a competent liar in the office?

Immie

 

[LilOlLady]

Perry already has a record that hurts him with voters concerned about illegal immigration. In April, he stated that he would not support a version of Arizona’s SB 1070 for Texas. In 2001, he signed a bill allowing the children of illegal immigrants to receive in-state tuition at Texas universities. He opposes using E-Verify, the federal electronic system for verifying prospective workers’ immigration status.

Breaking News and Conservative Opinion on Politics - Townhall

 

[Foxfyre]

You present with empty opinions. You say Obama is Bush on steroids. Now tell us in specifically what way.

I said Perry is Bush on steroids because he is another cowboy emulation. The same white hat, cowboy boots and brush-clearing bullshit, except that Perry is a real Texan whereas Bush is a Connecticut Yankee with an affected Texas accent.

Bush was Governor of Texas, so is Perry. Perry even resembles Bush. So I see them as being cut from the same cloth -- except that Perry is a much thicker cut.

Now how is Obama like Bush?

Bush spent like a madman . . . two unfunded wars, Medicare part D, etc.

Obama is spending like a madman. He's added how much to the debt in what, 2 1/2 years?

If Bush sucked and Obama is a third term Bush . . then wouldn't it stand to reason that Obama sucks? Yes, yes it would.

Drawing parallels between Perry and Bush because each were/are Gov of Texas and you liken them to white-hat-wearing-cowboys? Oh, that's a nifty reason to give someone a yea or nay. I'm going to research how Perry governs and his stance on things before forming an opinion.

Obama isn't spending as much as it might first appear by looking at debt numbers.

First of all, the federal gov't is suffering from the same problem as the states in that tax revenues have fallen because of a drop in employment. While Bush drove DOWN tax reciepts by reducing taxes, Obama has had tax reciepts drop even further because people are out of work.

Added to that are unemployment compensation and a rise in the use of food stamps. Those aren't choices so much as they are necessary expenditures. That is, unless you would prefer to see more homeless people lining up outside of soup kitchens.

The stimulus was passed to help the states with their budget shortfalls (they had a drop in state income tax and sales taxes), and to replace the contraction of spending in the private sector.

And finally, the wars were finally put on budget. They weren't before. Remember all those defense supplementals that were passed in the Bush years? That's because the spending on the war wasn't counted as part of the budget.

So, you see that President hasn't gone on some wild liberal spending spree as conservatives and Republicans would have everyone believe.

The one point you're leaving out of your analysis is that the debt clock is still running twice as fast as it was before because they are spending so much more than they are taking in. That is the message we are trying to get through the thick myopic skulls in Washington. Don't spend more than you take in. In fact, spend much less for awhile so that we can restore our credit rating. And make some sensible policies permanent for awile so business that has any venture capital left can risk letting go of it and start expanding and hiring again.

This is not a difficult principle.

I work damn hard for $1,000 and, while I don't mind paying my fair share of NECESSARY costs of doing government, I resent it a whole lot when my $1,000 is spent on some stupid grant or benefit that NONE of us would have spent our own money on just because it has a noble sounding title.

I want my elected representatives to treat my money with as much respect as I do. Is that too much to ask?

I believe Rick Perry or ANYBODY running against Obama in 2012 would do that far better.

 

[WillowTree]

I feel pretty much the same way that you do with a slight modification:

If it ain't got a (D) or an (R) after it, I am going to vote for it.

I have not seen enough of Perry yet to say I don't like him, but I don't see it very likely that I will vote for anyone who is part of the Party Elite. I've lost trust in both parties. If that means I throw away my vote then so be it.

It doesn't mean I won't be pulling for honest change, but, real change does not appear to be in the forecast for 2012.

Immie

that's your perogative I guess, and it's what the dimwits have their hopes pinned on.

So be it. But as long as people continue to vote only because their candidate has a (D) or an (R) after their names then we have no hope anyway. We may as well go to the insane asylum and grab the first patient we see and shove them into the oval office.

What's the difference if we elect the incompetent fool that holds the office now or one of the party elite being offered to us by the Republican Party? Come to think of it, at least Obama has proven himself incompetent. Do we really need a competent liar in the office?

Immie

That, dear man is what the Tea Party is all about. They're saying to Republicans "stop being dimocrats." See?

 

[bripat9643]

I liked the speech, but he missed the part where he should thank Obama for the stimulus money he used to balance his state budget. That wasn't very nice. You must give credit where credit is due.

Why should he thank Obama for that? His children and grandchildren will be paying for it.

 

[Foxfyre]

that's your perogative I guess, and it's what the dimwits have their hopes pinned on.

So be it. But as long as people continue to vote only because their candidate has a (D) or an (R) after their names then we have no hope anyway. We may as well go to the insane asylum and grab the first patient we see and shove them into the oval office.

What's the difference if we elect the incompetent fool that holds the office now or one of the party elite being offered to us by the Republican Party? Come to think of it, at least Obama has proven himself incompetent. Do we really need a competent liar in the office?

Immie

That, dear man is what the Tea Party is all about. They're saying to Republicans "stop being dimocrats." See?

Damn, have to spread it around before I can rep you again.

 

[Foxfyre]

I liked the speech, but he missed the part where he should thank Obama for the stimulus money he used to balance his state budget. That wasn't very nice. You must give credit where credit is due.

Why should he thank Obama for that? His children and grandchildren will be paying for it.

Also Texas sends a lot more money to Washington than they get back.

 

[Immanuel]

that's your perogative I guess, and it's what the dimwits have their hopes pinned on.

So be it. But as long as people continue to vote only because their candidate has a (D) or an (R) after their names then we have no hope anyway. We may as well go to the insane asylum and grab the first patient we see and shove them into the oval office.

What's the difference if we elect the incompetent fool that holds the office now or one of the party elite being offered to us by the Republican Party? Come to think of it, at least Obama has proven himself incompetent. Do we really need a competent liar in the office?

Immie

That, dear man is what the Tea Party is all about. They're saying to Republicans "stop being dimocrats." See?

Oh yeah, I see.

Problem is that they are not the grassroots organization they once were or should have remained. Now they are infiltrated by Republicans who when push comes to shove will prove that they were Republicans all along. After all, that is where the money is at.

Bachmann may be an exception to that rule. But, I am not certain that a) she is ready for the job of President, if she ever will be and b) I don't believe she can be elected. I think the liberal elite will end up destroying her just as they destroyed Sarah Palin. They can never ever allow the Republicans to elect the first woman into the Oval Office.

Immie

 

[WillowTree]

So be it. But as long as people continue to vote only because their candidate has a (D) or an (R) after their names then we have no hope anyway. We may as well go to the insane asylum and grab the first patient we see and shove them into the oval office.

What's the difference if we elect the incompetent fool that holds the office now or one of the party elite being offered to us by the Republican Party? Come to think of it, at least Obama has proven himself incompetent. Do we really need a competent liar in the office?

Immie

That, dear man is what the Tea Party is all about. They're saying to Republicans "stop being dimocrats." See?

Oh yeah, I see.

Problem is that they are not the grassroots organization they once were or should have remained. Now they are infiltrated by Republicans who when push comes to shove will prove that they were Republicans all along. After all, that is where the money is at.

Bachmann may be an exception to that rule. But, I am not certain that a) she is ready for the job of President, if she ever will be and b) I don't believe she can be elected. I think the liberal elite will end up destroying her just as they destroyed Sarah Palin. They can never ever allow the Republicans to elect the first woman into the Oval Office.

Immie

Well, I hate to tell you this but that's what the liberal elites do, they destroy everything that is good about America. Conservative women are on the top of their personal destruction list. I don't have a problem with Mrs. Bachman being President. She certainly can't do worse than what we have now.

 

[Missourian]

With just a quick cursory review of Perry's track record and stated positions that hold up pretty well under scrutiny, Perry:

* is pro life but would not work to overturn Roe v Wade
* is pro unalienable rights and personal freedoms as the Constitution intended
* is tough on crime, most especially repeat sex offenders
* favors states making policy on drug use instead of the federal government
* pro education vouchers/school choice
* pro environment and energy independence - opposed to Cap & Trade
* is an advocate of free trade
* is pro voter I.D.
* is pro states rights
* is anti earmarks
* would repeal Obamacare as quickly as could be done and promote real reforms that would push healthcare costs to more affordable levels.
* encourages involvement of fathers as the best single antidote for poverty, crime, and school dropouts.
* is pro 2nd amendment
* is pro military/strong defense/strong homeland security
* sees reform of Social Security and Medicare to bring back into solvency as a critical issue now.
* pro sealing the border, making sanctuary states/cities illegal, denying all but immediate humanitarian assistance to illegals, and pro temporary legal work programs.
* the states and the feds should use overwhelming force to shut down the drug cartels.

Texas remains one of the nation's most tax friendly states, produced 70% of all jobs created in 2009 and has done almost as well in 2010 and so far this year.

I think Perry could be a formidable candidate in the 2012 election process.

Mind if I borrow this post from time to time...I'll attribute it accordingly.

 

[candycorn]

Rick Perry's 2012 Presidential Campaign website is up and running.

Rick Perry for President | Join Today

It's www dot rickperry dot org if you don't trust links.

I especially liked this part of the website:

The Perry record also includes a significant commitment to border security to stop the in-flow of illegal immigrants, weapons and drugs. Perry has ordered border surge operations that have reduced illegal crossings, and allocated hundreds of millions of dollars for border security operations that put more boots on the ground and utilize technology to detect, track and deter the criminal element.

Uhhh....you might have missed 1 or 2 or 12 million there Ricky.

I guarantee you he'll blame Obama for the immigration problem even though he's done zilch himself.

 

[Missourian]

Rick Perry on the issues at Ontheissues.org:

Rick Perry on the Issues​

 

[Foxfyre]

With just a quick cursory review of Perry's track record and stated positions that hold up pretty well under scrutiny, Perry:

* is pro life but would not work to overturn Roe v Wade
* is pro unalienable rights and personal freedoms as the Constitution intended
* is tough on crime, most especially repeat sex offenders
* favors states making policy on drug use instead of the federal government
* pro education vouchers/school choice
* pro environment and energy independence - opposed to Cap & Trade
* is an advocate of free trade
* is pro voter I.D.
* is pro states rights
* is anti earmarks
* would repeal Obamacare as quickly as could be done and promote real reforms that would push healthcare costs to more affordable levels.
* encourages involvement of fathers as the best single antidote for poverty, crime, and school dropouts.
* is pro 2nd amendment
* is pro military/strong defense/strong homeland security
* sees reform of Social Security and Medicare to bring back into solvency as a critical issue now.
* pro sealing the border, making sanctuary states/cities illegal, denying all but immediate humanitarian assistance to illegals, and pro temporary legal work programs.
* the states and the feds should use overwhelming force to shut down the drug cartels.

Texas remains one of the nation's most tax friendly states, produced 70% of all jobs created in 2009 and has done almost as well in 2010 and so far this year.

I think Perry could be a formidable candidate in the 2012 election process.

Mind if I borrow this post from time to time...I'll attribute it accordingly.

Feel free and no need to credit it. I got most from the On the Issues site and a bit from recent position statements from other sites. It is all in the public domain.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Rick Perry is a Dominionist. If he's elected, we can kiss religious freedom and separation of church and state goodbye.

 

[Foxfyre]

Oh baloney, Sky. We have had devoutly religious and openly Christian presidents in the past. Our Founding Fathers not only prayed unashamedly in public, spoke often of their religious faith, they held church services in the chambers of Congress. And no theocracy developed. They wrote the First Amendment into the Constitution as the very first Amendment after all.

To suggest that Rick Perry would take away anybody's religious freedom is absurd and comes across as either disingenuous or really paranoid.

The very best insurance to protect religious freedom in this country is to put Christian conservatives into power.

 

[GWV5903]

RICK PERRY IS SCARY.
Overheard on CNN.com:
Time to leave the country?

"Hey, Rick: What brand of gun would Jesus tote?"–RationalDoc

Why Rick Perry is headed to the White House
Why are Americans gearing up to elect another Texan for president? asks fellow Texan James Moore, an Emmy-award winning former news correspondent and co-author of the best-seller, "Bush's Brain." Although Perry "hates to govern, loves to campaign, and barely has a sixth grader's understanding of economics," writes Moore, his "coyote-killer good looks, $2,000 hand-tooled cowboy boots, supernova smile and Armani suits will create a product Americans will want to believe and buy."His prediction had many CNN.com readers planning to leave the country.
Overheard on CNN.com: Time to leave the country? – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs ... n-cnn-com/

Can they take Obama with them? I'll pay for his one way ticket....

 

[Sky Dancer]

The very best insurance to protect religious freedom in this country is to put Christian conservatives into power.

Bullshit. Say goodbye to separation of church and state. I may as well leave the country. Not only am I endangered as a non-christian, but as a lesbian as well.

That's what you conservatives are after. A Christian Theocracy.