Governor Rick Perry..............Why?
How did Governor Rick Perry become the top pick of the GOP candidates for president?
I’m trying to grasp the tangible evidence that catapulted Governor Perry over every other GOP presidential candidate. He was rated by several polls near the top of the GOP candidate list before he even made his formal candidacy announcement. Once he announced, if you believe the media, the GOP candidate to oppose Obama had been selected.
He’s not the only Governor in the race…what is it? My gut impression is that Perry has an excellent publicity apparatus that has flooded the media with ”Rick is great” slogans, not to mention his democrat background. Frankly, my observation of his appearance in two candidate debates, based on performance and substance, leaves me with less than a favorable impression.
Given, some candidates have more favorable “stage presence” than others…surely Perry’s stage presence provides much room for improvement. He is slow on his feet, searches for words, seems uneasy, and awkward in his answers. Occasionally I have the urge to reach down his throat and pull some words out…
So, being the smooth, articulate Gingrich, Bachmann, Cain, Romney, Santorum, perhaps others, Governor Perry is not. However, the method of message delivery doesn’t necessarily count a candidate out…Senator McCain proved that. He couldn’t hit his butt with both hands on the stage.
Then how about substance? Has Governor Perry demonstrated substitutive justification that supports his top of the GOP candidate pile? I have heard him speak and others seem to verify that job creation in Texas accounts for a majority of the employment created in the U.S. over the last two years. Other than jobs, nothing else of significance has surfaced to give one a “tingle down the leg”, in fact, Governor Huntsman claims himself as the job king. Ron Paul says Perry has put Texas in debt, raised taxes and Perry hasn’t refuted Paul. Perry has also taken serious hits on his support for tuition assistance for illegal aliens, his answer for the illegal alien border problem, and the effort to force a questionable inoculation for 11-12 year old girls against cervical cancer without a “parental opt-in”.
Perry’s background hasn’t even been touched yet. There is considerable fodder that should raise serious questions as to his conservative credentials. He should be required to explain his democrat background, international involvements, etc. He may provide a satisfactory answer, but it hasn’t been asked yet.
A point here. Are we going to allow the media to select the candidate to oppose Obama by pushing other credible, qualified candidates into the background while focusing on the two the media desires? We allowed the 2008 GOP presidential candidate to be selected by the media and the political apparatus. As Governor Palin says, “how’s that working out for ya?”
Are we about to select another “McCain” to oppose Obama? We all know Obama made McCain look like the ignoramus he really is…the most valid evidence of the “peter principle” one could imagine. Will we repeat the same error hoping for a better outcome?
Let’s get the strongest candidate that will carry the constitution, bill of rights, and Founding Father principles into the White House…maybe it will be Rick Perry but I’m not sold yet.
I am sold on the courage, strength, moral clarity, solid credentials of Michele Bachmann. Why? Given everything else, her heart beats for America and it will stop before she betrays her principled constitutional positions. She took both Perry and Romney to the woodshed during the CNN debate, and did so with poise and clarity.
We need Bachmann’s titanium spine and leadership. Is she perfect? Probably not, is anyone?
Harry Riley, COL, USA, Ret
Katy is absolutely right. We must send Michele money if we want her to have any chance at all. The media is not going to give her coverage - that doesn't mean that we should follow suit and dismiss her as unelectable. The media wants us to have another McCain - it's up to us to see that it doesn't happen again.
Perry is the media's candidate, not those of us that believe in a limited government, oaths and national security. Just as with McCain in the last election, Perry and Romney are the only two candidated that get main stream credit, much of which is not deserved. As with Romney, Perry is far to "slick" and has a history of changing his spots.. agenda and party. By far, Newt is the best debater of the candidates and any debate between Newt and Obama would be fun to watch. Obama would get his worthless communist butt kicked. Bachmann has the core beliefs burning in her soul, but not the experiance America requires, if we are to reverse the damage done to this nation under the communist left of Obama and comrads. As of today and with all we've seen and heard to date about the Republican candidates, if the primary were to be held today, I'd have to vote for Cain. Cain has the experiance and the wisdom to find business solutions to this nations problems.
I'd also add one other key factor to this issue. Just electing a conservative will not by its self, save this nation. Time in NOT in favor of America. Please take the time to consider what happens if we don't retain a majority in the House and have a veto proof majority of conservatives in the Senate. Should we lose the House and not gain the majority in the Senate, it makes little difference in which Republican may be elected as President.
So a good question to ponder, is which candidate could work with a new Congress that has republican majorities in each house? Paul, which I believe is the best "Constitutionalist" presently running, however I fear that his ideas of pulling our military out of all bases, not in the US, mixed with his profound lack of understanding of the threat from radical Islam, concerns me that even with majorities in both houses, gridlock would continue.
I for one will be voting for what's in the Best Interest of America... rather than concern myself with "popular" choices.
I will not vote for Rick Perry, Ron Paul, Cain, Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum or any current 2012 GOP created fallacy called a presidential nominee. As a Conservative American all those I listed are not worth my vote and will not be able to convince me they are worth it. Not one current possible nominee is a conservative whether they are a tea party wanna be or not. Not one current possible nominee has a record of leadership we can trust, in fact each one owes their position to the system and not one, not even Ron Paul will change he system of what we have now. To be honest, I have met unemployed people who are more conservative, have better common sense and a backbone, that the charlatans we are to supposedly to choose from do not have. If one of these people is nominated, I refuse to vote for them. I am not voting for the GOP version of Obama. Everyone claims to be a conservative like Reagan, BS not one has done anything close to what Reagan did or could do. Not one has the courage to even talk like him. Reagan would DO it and then come out and say it. He would do what the Constitution stated and then bold faced look right into the camera and challenged a liberal Congress to stop him if they dared. Not one of these pretenders has the true essence of conservatism nor leadership and if you feel anyone of these people is worthy, you've been duped and you are no better than any of Obama's supporters.
Now are you all going to wake up, dump ALL current nominees and help find a real one, or are you going to sell us out and force yet another fake conservative on us one more time. Ever since 1988 we have had fake conservative lead us in ALL our actions, it is time you all either dump them or take the blame for continuing the process of destruction.
As for me, I will NOT vote for anyone of these people, I cannot, I am a conservative and if I have to I will vote for myself, at least I will be voting for someone who is real.
Who cares who you vote for as you are blinded to the Ron Paul revolution. I guess you are the perfect one so you should run.
Jacqlyn.....you have posted this presentation more than once......we get it. PFA is not a vehicle to run political advertisements. If you want to add discussion regarding Ron Paul, please do, but dispense with the political ads.