Tag Archives: Rick Perry

2012 GOP Presidential Nomination: And Then there Were Three.

Very soon, the 2012 GOP Presidential candidate field will be whittled down to the final three candidates. Substance is quickly winning out over rhetoric, as numerous GOP presidential hopefuls have dropped like flies as the tour headed into the very important primary states of South Carolina and Florida. So much for the money-grubbing, irrelevant media circuses of Iowa and New Hampshire. As the younger generation likes to say, “It’s game on” in the battle to represent conservative Americans in 2013 and beyond as the next president of the United States of America.

Texas Governor Rick Perry dropped out of the race this week and gave one of the most heart-wrenching, eye-opening, intense speeches to ever be given by a candidate that is dropping out of contention for the Presidential nomination. Perry is a man of conviction and a deep-seated love for American family values, exceptionalism and culture that was very evident throughout his speech. Also noted, is the fact that Governor Perry, unlike some 90% of the self-serving politicians today, came right out and endorsed Newt Gingrich for the 2012 GOP Presidential nomination. He took a stand for what he believes is the best candidate before the critical SC and Florida primaries.

In last night’s CNN GOP Presidential debate, Rick Santorum’s decent performance was overshadowed by Newt Gingrich, and his slaying of the CNN’s John King and the media corporations blatant protectionism of Barack Obama’s reelection bid. Yes, Newt once again showed the world that he is the only candidate to take on both Barack Obama and his media operatives in 2012. This is rapidly coming down to a battle between Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul, who is apparently incapable of facing the reality that his stances on legalizing drugs and ignoring the dangers of a nuclear Iran truly do make him unelectable. In all actuality, the 2012 GOP nomination battle is now between the moderate Mitt Romney and the proven conservative Newt Gingrich. Rick Santorum is currently polling poorly in both South Carolina and Florida, the irrelevant and convoluted Iowa caucus results be damned. Rick Santorum needs to show conservatives across the country that he truly wants what is best for America and gracefully suspend his campaign, as the honorable Governor Rick Perry has done. Santorum;s big problem will be that after he drops out, he will be faced with the question of just who he will endorse. Heading into the critical primary states votes, anyone fence-sitting and refusing to take a stand, such as Michelle Bachmann has done, is doing a disservice to conservative America.

 

And then there were three actually two GOP candidates remaining for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination. The lines are drawn in the sand quite clearly now for all concerned and informed Americans across the land. Moderate, fence-sitting Mitt Romney, or the true fireball of a proven conservative, Newt Gingrich. Ron Paul? He is just as unelectable today as he was proven to be in 1984, when he lost his election bid for the U.S. Senate, then again in 1988 when he lost in the presidential election while running as a Libertarian, and finally in the 2008 GOP primaries where he averaged under 10% of voter-support across the nation. Ron Paul has refused to face the reality of his numerous past failed campaigns, no matter how low he sinks in the polls/GOP primaries. When a country faces the danger of giving Barack Obama four more years of  tearing apart everything that America stands for while waging class warfare that is dividing this great nation, to not unite behind the strongest candidates remaining is just plain irresponsible. Those candidates are Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney. 

 

Mitchell & Ray – January 19th

When: Thursday, January 19th, 10pm Eastern/7pm Pacific

Where:Streaming Internet Radio

What: Join independent political commentators Michelle Ray and Rich Mitchell as they discuss the issues impacting Americans.

 

Tonight: Tonight: SOPA / PIPA blackouts, Perry drops out, and what happen to the Conservatives?

Guests: Tom Dougherty & Tj Thompson

Show Recording: [mp3player width=300 height=75 config=fmp_jw_widget_config.xml file=http://media2.conservativedailynews.com/shows/mitchell-and-ray/show_1-19-12.mp3]

and .. the non-flash, iGadget-friendly version:

Stupid News, Iowa, New Hampshire, Libertarian ideology & Ron Paul

Since Perry's Out, I'm With Romney

As reported, Gov. Rick Perry has dropped out of the presidential race.

Which candidate will I support now?

Backstory: Originally, I favored Mitch Daniels- a solid fiscal conservative who pushed for, and got, a balanced budget multiple years in a row, an increase in Indiana’s credit rating to AAA for the first time ever; and substantial reform in Medicaid with the Healthy Indiana Plan. Mitch is also solidly pro-gun and pro-self-defense; indeed, after the devastating Indiana Supreme Court decision curtailing an individual’s right to defend his home, I wrote a letter to Governor Daniels expressing my outrage, and received a wonderful reply from his staff. His message of a social issues moratorium- criticized by some on the right as proof of Mitch’s “closet liberalism”- was sound advice, proven more sound every day this Presidential primary continues. This moratorium allowed him, among other things, to defund Planned Parenthood by approaching it as a budget issue rather than a social issue.

But “My Man Mitch”, one of our party’s few Democrat Whisperers, announced he wasn’t running. I was devastated. After a few months of searching for a similarly authentic personality, one with fiscal bona fides to match Mitch’s, I found one: Governor Rick Perry of Texas.

Perry’s authenticity resounded in me; his eleven-year record of economic performance in Texas couldn’t be seriously challenged; he wasn’t afraid to part ways with generic GOP thinking when he disagreed with it, particularly on immigration issues; and he attracted a loyal following. On that last point, I must say this: Some of the nicest people I’ve met recently on Twitter and Facebook are people I’ve encountered by advocating on behalf of Rick Perry. He didn’t just attract supporters, he attracted good and decent supporters. Unfortunately, he didn’t attract enough of them.

Rick couldn’t overcome his initial debate performances- likely a result of the pain medication he took following his back surgery. His later debate performances were extraordinary, but too late to save the campaign.

So now that he has dropped out, who should I support?

I suppose it’s fair to say I’m on the “Anybody But Obama” bandwagon. We’re not just choosing the next President. His success or failure will also decide our success or failure in retaking the Senate- which is crucial to our cause- as well as success or failure, to some degree, in state and local elections. Whomever occupies the White House for the next four years will also replace at least two, perhaps as many as four, Supreme Court justices- determining the composition of the Court for the next twenty years. We must, at any cost, win in November. To quote a great fictional leader, “all other concerns are secondary”.

We have four contenders for the nomination now. We can safely eliminate two right away: Ron Paul and Rick Santorum. Paul doesn’t have enough support among registered Republicans to win the nomination, and Santorum, despite the recent endorsement of the Family Research Council, doesn’t appeal enough to moderate elements of the party to win the nomination either.

So, I am left with two choices: Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney.

I’m not going to get into either candidates’ record, since both are substantially lacking in genuine conservatism. My one and only concern is stated above: Which has a better chance of defeating Barack Obama.

And my choice- this is difficult to type- is Mitt Romney.

Romney has the better organization of the two, by far. Gingrich’s campaign staff have already walked out on him once, and his organization failed to get him on the ballot in Virginia. Romney’s organization, by comparison, has made no missteps.

Romney is inoffensive to the middle. Let’s remember that he won election in a heavily-left state. He has appeal to moderates and independents. Some people on the right discount the notion of “electability”- I don’t. We won’t win by “energizing the base”, which is merely political speak for “preaching to the choir”. We win by getting 270 electoral votes, and that means convincing the- gasp- moderates and independents to vote our way. By comparison, Gingrich has a history of turning people off. For example, he recently told gay people to vote for Obama. Let’s also remember that he once was so offensive, his own party turned on him and pushed him out of leadership in the House.

Central to our success in November is convincing the unconvinced middle that our view of deregulated, free market capitalism holds the key to our economic success. Romney, as is already known, spent a career as a venture capitalist. Dan Henninger at the Wall Street Journal makes a great argument that venture capitalists like Bain contributed heavily to salvaging the American economy in the early 1980s. By comparison, Gingrich has argued against venture capitalism, dipping into the bag of leftist talking points.

Let’s be honest: Mitt Romney is a salesman, and a damned good one at that.

I have reservations about Romney: He’s not entirely gun-friendly, he signed RomneyCare, and he’s spoken favorably of a national VAT tax. Gingrich has negative points against him, too: He’s not entirely gun-friendly either, he also has a long history of supporting government health care, his welfare reform plan is pretty shabby, and he believes FDR was “the greatest President of the 20th century“.

Let’s remember what I said earlier: This is not a choice of which candidate is ‘slightly more conservative’ than the other; it’s a choice of which has the best chance of winning the middle and becoming the next President of the United States.

I believe the man with the best chance is Mitt Romney.

Rick Perry To Drop Out

CNN reports Governor Rick Perry will drop out of the Presidential race today. The news is confirmed by Politico. As of the minute this report was being written, FOX Business confirmed on-air on the Varney and Company program that Perry will drop out.

Sources believe he will endorse Newt Gingrich.

CDN will report on developments.

UPDATE: Fox Business reports on-air that Perry will hold a press conference at 11am.

UPDATE: At press conference, 11:16 am, Perry officially suspended his campaign and endorsed Newt Gingrich.

Rick Perry and the Truth About Turkey

Governor Rick Perry has drawn quite a bit of criticism for his recent remarks regarding the country of Turkey during the Fox news/WSJ SC GOP debate on Tuesday night. When asked about his plans for cutting all U.S. foreign aid to zero,and whether Turkey still belongs in NATO, Perry responded as follows: “Obviously, when you have a country that is being ruled by what many would perceive to be Islamic terrorists, when you start seeing that type of activity against their own citizens, then yes — not only is it time for us to have a conversation about whether or not they belong to be in NATO, but it’s time for the United States, when we look at their foreign aid, to go to zero with it,” he said.

Note that Perry states in his answer that Turkey is “being ruled by what many would perceive to be Islamic terrorists.” He didn’t call them terrorists or identify any certain individuals as terrorists, but instead stated that many people would perceive the rulers of Turkey to be Islamic terrorists. So does Governor Perry’s statement carry any weight? Yes it does, and there are plenty of facts to back it up, which may be found by doing some very basic research on the subject of Turkey.

While the U.S. State dept, which is currently run by Hillary Clinton, has distanced itself from Perry’s statement, the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs came out with a very U.S. DNC-type statement in which they attacked Perry’s credibility, as opposed to putting up any facts to denounce his statement. “Those individuals who are candidates for positions requiring responsibility such as the U.S. presidency are expected to be more knowledgeable on global affairs and more careful in their statements,” the ministry said in a statement. “Turkey became a member of NATO when the governor was just 2 years old. … The U.S. has no time to lose with such candidates who do not even know America’s allies.” So just because Governor Perry was two years old when Turkey joined NATO., we are led to believe that he could not possibly know anything about the country of Turkey, and their eligibility for NATO admittance. With the Muslim brotherhood surging into power within Egypt due to the recent uprisings across the region, we see the political climate changing at a rapid pace today. The anti-American, anti-Israeli sentiment is at a dangerous level throughout the Middle East and North Africa today. Governor Perry obviously wasn’t referring to the Turkey of 50 years ago when he made his statement.

For some factual history of the examples of historic Turkish genocide, mainly aimed at wiping out Christians in the region, see this article. Millions of people were murdered or fled religious persecution by the Young Turks of the Ottoman Empire, and Turkey’s government has shown the propensity to deny those facts, even today. And recently, William Dalrymple penned “Christians Fleeing the Middle East’ in which he wrote, that Christianity is suffering “a devastating decline in the land of its birth.” While today’s Turkey proclaims itself to be a Republic, it appears to be anything but a free Republic when we read about the Turkish-Muslim Persecution of Christians.

Fast forward to today. In this Fox News article, we see that recently the Turkish government has expelled the Israeli Ambassador, that Turkey’s [lack of] freedom of the press currently resembles that of Russia, and that Turkish authorities have recently met with Hamas leaders. Add to that information the reports that violence against women are up some 1400%, (2002-2009) and that the director of the Turkish Research Program, Mr. Capaptay, wrote an essay that stated that the Turkish government has “neutered domestic checks and balances” since 2002, a “consolidation of power” that could have consequences for its relationship with the U.S. He noted that Turkish officials have demonized Western nations, and polls show the Turkish people mostly do not view the U.S. Favorably. To Governor Perry’s credit, he stands by his statements, as he recently stated, “When you see the number of actions against your citizens that we would consider to be terrorist acts, I stand by my statement,” Perry said. “You need to be putting protections in place for your citizens if you’re seeing those types of attacks against, particularly, well, particularly females. That is particularly heinous from my perspective.”

Finally, some pundits and assorted academics have falsely argued that Turkey does not currently receive and U.S. Foreign aid, in another attempt to discredit Perry’s statements. Apparently, the very same government-paid propagandist who wrote the essay mentioned above, Mr. Capaptay of the “Turkish Research Program” are incapable of telling the truth and doing proper research to back up statements, such as the following: “First, Turkey does not receive U.S. foreign aid. Some time in the 1980s it was phased out, so this is not your mother’s Turkey,” U.S. Aid to Turkey has been “phased out” since 1980? Not according to the U.S. Government it hasn’t, as seen here. That shows Turkey receiving $5.4 million from the U.S. In 2011 and another $5.6 million slated to be given to them in 2012. Keep in mind that those figures are only for “base appropriations.” For instance, in FY 2009, the U.S. Government gave Turkey $7 million tax dollars for.. “economic development.” Mr. Capaptay would be advised to be careful with his own “inaccurate statements” as per his condescending statement to governor Perry concerning U.S. cash being given to Turkey today.

In conclusion, Governor Perry is 100% correct in demanding that the U.S. reset all foreign aid back to zero, reevaluate each case, and then reestablish the programs based on protecting American interests and preventing U.S. tax dollars from funding anti-American regimes. And yes, that should include Islamic-terrorist supporting governments and anyone else caught promoting and/or aiding them. Why in the world does the United States government continue to dole out billions of taxpayer dollars to hostile countries out to destroy America?

S.C. GOP Presidential Debate Notes

The FoxNews/Wall Street Journal S.C. GOP Presidential debate last night contained a slight twist: The addition of twitter social media interaction. While it was hailed as giving voters a more direct way to ask questions and get involved with the debate, it really isn’t as much of a “thinking outside the box” addition as some claim it to be. Tea Party groups and numerous conservative websites have been doing this since the start of the GOP Presidential debate season. CDN has been live-streaming many debates and allowing voters to interact during the GOP debates.  Readers may also vote for who won last night’s debate by clinking that CDN debate link.

Debate notes:  Token Fox News Liberal Juan Williams stooped to new lows with a semi-hidden racism claim posed as a question aimed at  Newt Gingrich about his remarks about having school kids work as janitors and other positions at their schools as a way to promote work ethics and self-pride, while also teaching them the value of money.  Newt was strong throughout the debate, which has been the case in all of the previous debates. He offers well-defined, concrete solutions for America. Williams was embarrassed as he should be, especially when he attempted to circle back and hit Newt with underlying, perception-nudging charges of racism a second, and even a third time. Typical Liberal class warfare tactics there Mr. Williams.  Shame on you.

Fox News put a twitter report on TV this morning with data compiled from twitter activity last night. To show how  determined Ron Paul’s supporters are today, they overwhelmed the twitter debate data in pushing Ron Paul to a supposed win by stating that Paul answered the questions the best. None of that kind of thinking was to be found anywhere in my debate notes. Paul stated that he would lower tax rates to zero last night. He fumbled the question about whether America has the right to kill her enemies, such as happened with Bin Laden. The Iowa Republican had an excellent summary that begs to ask the question, “Just what makes anyone actually believe that Ron Paul won this debate?”

Ron Paul: The Texas congressman told a flat out lie when he was asked about comments he made last year WHO Radio about giving the order to kill Bin Laden. Paul said on Simon Conway’s show, three times, that he would not have given that order. He said during the debate that he never said that. Unfortunately for Ron Paul, there is videotape evidence.

Paul then made it worse by saying we should have worked with Pakistan to get Bin Laden. Newt Gingrich took Paul apart for those comments, saying the Pakistanis were compliant in hiding Bin Laden. It was an awful moment for Paul and anyone except his diehard fans can see that. There were other problems, including an exchange with Santorum on gun rights that Paul lost. Overall, it was a terrible night for the libertarian icon.

 

Rick Santorum scored big points for hitting Romney on his nasty attack ads, and Ron Paul on gun rights issues. Santorum still appears to be fighting to be heard in these debates, which could be viewed as unfair in numerous ways. The only questions he seems to get are on religion, abortions, and assorted social issues which he tried to answer by pointing out his fiscal conservative credentials as a U.S. Senator. Without a fair shake,  Santorum could very well be the next candidate to join Jon Huntsman in dropping out,  possibly after the Florida primary.

 

Mitt Romney showed exactly who he is last night, in a heated debate about his non-committal  statement as to if he would release his tax returns for all to see. Gov. Rick Perry refused to let Romney off the hook,  and a moderator pointedly asked Romney if he would release his tax returns, to which he basically replied, “maybe.”  It was a simple yes or no question.  Mitt Romney stood tall with pat answers for most of the night, yet did little to install a much-needed conservative confidence with voters with many of his answers. Governor Perry reemphasized the need to get government out of people’s lives and return the numerous stolen powers of the federal government back to the states.  Had  Governor Perry made the commitment to run for the 2012 GOP nomination for President much earlier than he did, he would surely be polling much higher than he is currently.  It’s still a long ways  to go until Nov. 6, 2012, yet it is certainly looking very much like a race between Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney.

The Wall Street Journal representatives added a level of credibility to this debate, for which they are to be highly commended for.

As the above picture shows us, the 2012 Presidential elections are a critical turning point in American history. We must limit the U.S. Government to spending less than what is taken in if we are ever to avoid a Greek-style collapse.  Federal revenues must be increased through free-market expansion, and debt spending must be eliminated, while keeping our nation secure under the umbrella of a strong military. Take another look at the debt chart above. That is what the 2012 elections are all about.

 

 

Family Research Council Endorses Rick Santorum

Tony Perkins

CDNews had the privilege of being invited to the Family Research Council’s conference call on Saturday, where Tony Perkins, President of the FRC, announced that a group of 150 conservative leaders had chosen Rick Santorum as their Presidential candidate.

Among the highlights of the conference:

Mr. Perkins gave a synopsis of the meeting at Judge Paul Pressler’s ranch outside Houston, Texas. Surrogates of every candidate except Jon Huntsman spoke before the group. Mr. Perkins said the group’s three primary issues were, foremostly, the repeal of Obamacare; the debt ceiling issue; and the pro-life movement. Mr. Perkins said the group focused on determining the candidate who best reflected the conservative mindset and was most likely to succeed in defeating Barack Obama. He said economic issues were extremely important to the group.

Mr. Perkins said the event was not an anti-Romney event, and very little time was spent discussing Romney’s record. He said there was no discussion of Romney’s religion, and that if it was discussed it was a sidenote.

Mr. Perkins said that the group of conservative leaders would manifest their support for Santorum through their PACs and other means. Mr. Perkins said the organization would not call on Rick Perry or any other candidate to drop out of the election. Mr. Perkins couldn’t name the leaders involved in the group’s ballot process, but he said some may soon emerge with endorsements for Santorum and he estimated that other activites supporting Santorum would emerge within about 24 hours.

Mr. Perkins said there was no discussion of eventually supporting Mitt Romney, and that the participants were not resigned to the belief that Romney would be the eventual nominee. He said there was some discussion about Romney’s abortion record, but that very little time was spent on the topic.

Mr. Perkins said Santorum’s record of stability and consistent articulation of economic and social issues appealed to the group, and that the group hoped to overcome Santorum’s fundraising deficit through public support.

Mr. Perkins said there had been some concerns about Rick Perry’s “stumbles” during the race. He said that he expected passionate support whether the nominee were Perry, Gingrich, or Santorum, but that the most passionate support was for defeating Obama.

He said there was not a fear that the group’s support for Santorum was coming “too late”, following Iowa and Hew Hampshire. He believed that the support was coming at a “good time” in the primary process.

Mr. Perkins said FRC would be releasing a wirtten statement soon regarding the event.

 

 

 

Out of luck in Virginia: Judge rules against Perry, Gingrich and Huntsman

A federal judge has dismissed Gov. Rick Perry’s legal action by which he had hoped to regain access to the Virginia primary ballot.

Former Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Gov. Huntsman had also joined on to Perry’s suit as they also had failed to gather enough signatures to make the ballot. Now it appears that only Mitt Romney and Ron Paul will be eligible for Virginia’s 49 delegate votes during that state’s open primary on “super Tuesday” March 6th.

Federal district judge John A. Gibney Jr. explained his ruling by saying that “In essence, they played the game, lost and then complained that the rules were unfair.”

The legal basis for the suit was not the reason Judge Gibney threw it out, instead the judge went on to say that “Had the plaintiffs filed a timely suit, the Court would likely have granted preliminary relief. They are likely to prevail on the constitutionality of the residency requirement, and, had they filed earlier, they would have been able to obtain the requisite 10,000 signatures”

The suit was originally filed as a challenge to Virginia’s strict registration requirements. Specifically, the legal action contends that the requirement that even those that gather the signatures be eligible voters in Virginia is overly restrictive and a violation of the first amendment protection of free speech.

Too Dumb to Live?

“Dumber than a bag of hammers”, “one peanut short of a snickers “, “dumber than a rock”…  I could go on….  And I will!  “A few fries short of a happy meal”.  “One clown shy of a circus”….

 

Dumber than a post… a doornail…. an entire sector of the population that doesn’t have to pay taxes and will subsequently vote for the candidate that promises them the world using other people’s money…

 

We often use phrases like this to describe people or more accurately, people’s actions, as being ill advised, immature, adolescent, persnickety, childish, self-indulgent, knee-jerk, hasty…. In a word – stupid!

 

For example, the guy who tries to ride his scooter down a staircase – A few beers short of a six-pack.  How about this: robbing a house by attempting to go down the chimney – a couple of cards short of a full deck.  This was my favorite: attempting to dissect, while still alive, a presidential contender to find all of his faults, only to realize that you’ve killed off all the viable candidates and are left with only a couple of duds.  BWAAHAHAHAA!!  Oh! That one kills me everytime!

 

And, unfortunately, I believe we may have just killed off our country.

 

2012 marks the 50th anniversary of our Supreme Court officially telling God to take a hike.  You remember, don’t you?  Back in 1962?  Engel v. Vitale – the Supreme Court case that banned prayer from public schools – was brought by several students from New York State who thought that voluntary (yes, I said voluntary) prayer in public school violated their First Amendment rights. The prayer that was so offensive read like this:

 

Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen.

 

A utilitarian prayer to say the least, this was also one that was not forced on anyone. Yet a group of activist lawyers appealing to an activist judiciary were successful in ripping the right of the freedom to express your religious beliefs from everyone else, just to placate a few who did not believe that way.  One taco short of a combo plate, if you ask me.

 

Perhaps I do have a different First Amendment than these folks did, but mine reads like this:

 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibit the free exercise thereof……

 

In the world of common sense, a voluntary (for those educated in the public schools, that means you don’t have to do it) prayer is not the equivalent of Congress creating a law that establishes a national religion. Furthermore, in this increasingly shrinking world of common sense, one could arguably state that banning a “voluntary” prayer would tend to stomp on that last part of the First Amendment, “nor prohibit the free exercise thereof.”

 

Yet because we did not want to anger a few, we ripped fundamental rights away from the vast majority. Out goes God, in comes political correctness.

 

It’s been downhill from there folks.

 

I recently checked out a book from my local library. I needed to show them a photo ID. I recently took a test for teacher certification in a specific subject area. I needed to show them a photo ID. My wife and I just swapped out a Christmas present for another item at Walmart. We needed to show them a photo ID.  I’m going to go vote for my Congressman, a Senator, a President and many other state and local officials on November 6 of this year.  You’ll never guess what I don’t need to show them??  Dumber than salt!

 

A modern definition of insanity is attempting to do the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Republicans, who started with eight or nine viable candidates for president, all of which would be better than the current occupant, have a macheted their way down to basically one.  Herman Cain rises up (click, click) BOOM!  See ya!  Michele Bachmann does well at the Ames Straw Poll?  KABLAM!  Down you go!  Rick Perry comes out with favorable numbers?  RIP, TEAR, SLASH!  He’s out here!  Newt Gingrich surges from the bottom of the pack.  SUPER-PACK, SUPER-PACK!  He’s done!

 

Who’s next? We haven’t finished “vetting” candidates yet!…… we have to find someone to go up against Mitt Romney!…….  oh crap!  Only Ron Paul is left!

 

If you are experiencing flashbacks to 2008 or 1996, take comfort – you’re not alone.  TOO DUMB TO LIVE!!

 

So I ask the question: Is America now simply just too dumb to live? Have we destroyed every person that could lead us back to our former glory, all in the name of vetting?  At the same time, have we turned a blind eye to the fact that now almost half of the electorate either doesn’t have to pay federal income tax or is on some form of federal aid? Do you think people like that are ever going to vote to make the hard choices that this country needs to make in order to fix itself?  Have fun going down the chimney!

 

Perhaps Alexis de Tocqueville was right:

 

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”

 

Remember some of chants of the OWS protesters, “This is what democracy looks like!”  Yeah, folks, it does.  That’s why our founding fathers didn’t touch democracy with a 10 foot pole. They specifically called for a republican form of government, one that would not run headlong into hasty decisions, but one that would take it’s time, deliberate, debate and then finally decide.

 

We don’t want to do that anymore as Americans. We want our patience and we want it right now!  That, my friends, is too dumb to live!

 

If we are to survive as a country, we are going to have to eradicate this type of thought. My question to you is this: with all of the “dumb” we have done in this country over the last 50 years, have we come to this moment – a pivotal one in our history – confident that we will elect leaders that will make the difficult choices to get us back on track? Or have we finally hit that tipping point, where all we can do is watch in horror as a once great nation collapses in on itself?  Have we really become “too dumb to live”?

New Hampshire results didn't change anything

Mitt Romney’s long-expected triumph in New Hampshire came to be and yet .. nothing changed.

New Hampshire is home to all of 12 total delegates in the GOP nomination fight where 1,144 are required to secure the republican spot which means having won the state doesn’t put Romney much closer to the end goal.

With no one changing anything in their election plans after New Hampshire, did it matter?

Conservatives are still searching for an alternative to Romney that will more closely line up with their principles which the Granite State was unable to define – being a mainly moderate-to-liberal area it should be no surprise.

South Carolina is the first primary in a Conservative state and will likely present Conservatives with the candidate that will be the anti-Romney – or if Romney runs away in the southern state, perhaps no alternative exists.

Look for Huntsman’s New Hampshire showing to fizzle in S.C., Paul and Perry will fight a place in the bottom half and Santorum/Gringrich will have another neck-and-neck battle, but this time for second. Romney will likely take South Carolina, but the question remains how decisive a win he manages.

 

VA ballot printing blocked by Federal Judge till after Perry hearing

photo: theblaze.com

Until he issues a ruling on Gov. Perry’s ballot challenge, U.S. District Judge John A. Gibney Jr. has ordered the Virginia State Board of Elections that a directive be sent to each of the state’s local boards ordering them not to print any absentee ballots until after the emergency motion is heard on Friday.

Virginia needed to start printing ballots this weekend and mail them out by Jan 21 in order to get absentee ballots overseas in time. Virginia’s primary is on March 6th.

Perry campaign spokesman Ray Sullivan said, “This is a positive development for the presidential candidates and the citizens of Virginia and we look forward to the hearing on January 13th.”

As it stands, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul are the GOP candidates qualified for Virginia’s primary. In order to qualify Candidates must get 10 thousand signatures, 400 from each of the 11 counties.

Republican presidential candidates Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Jon Huntsman, just last week, received permission to join Perry’s challenge. The Candidates claim Virginia’s rules violate “freedoms of speech and association protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments.”

In a Richmond Times-Dispatch article, Chairman Charles E. Judd and secretary Donald Palmer, of the Virginia Board of Elections, said an injunction requiring the addition of Perry’s name to the ballot would pose difficulties given the Jan. 21 deadline to mail absentee ballots 45 days ahead of the primary. “There’s so much that has to be done I don’t know physically how we’d be able to do it, and that’s my concern,” Judd said.

Palmer agreed saying, “What we did today was the whistle for the train to leave the station,” he said. “Right now, election officials are preparing and programming the ballots for the overseas and military voters.”

“Time is of the essence if there is going to be any additional names. That deadline is the 21st of January, but this process takes two to three weeks of getting the ballots tested, prepared, printed, shipped back to the election officials and sent out to the overseas military.”

Rick Perry Can't Debate? (VIDEO)

This weekend, Rick Perry did a phenomenal job in back-to-back debates in New Hampshire.

David Gregory asked a typically loaded liberal question of Jon Huntsman: Name three spending cuts which will cause people “pain”. Then Gregory asked Perry an audience question: “Is it un-American for Americans to feel relieved when the government helps them?”. Perry took on both questions, rejecting the “government compassion” rhetoric and talking about the dignity of being self-sufficient- a core principle of conservatism- and he did it with a good laugh line to boot (at 1:00):

This was Perry’s best moment, in my opinion: Rick Santorum infers that libertarians are anarchists (a constant theme from him), bickers with Ron Paul, and then Perry delivers his best line of the weekend (at 1:07):

I’m sure we could expect more of these debate moments, but Rick doesn’t seem to be getting much air time in the debates now. Certainly not as much as was given to the other candidates.

On Twitter, I saw this tweet from @evanpower which best encapsulates the question for GOP voters now:

Everyones excuse on why Rick Perry shouldn’t win was he cannot debate, now that he has shown he can, what’s the issue?

Good question!

January 7th 9pm ABC/Yahoo! News Republican Debate

Saturday at 9pm Easterm, ABC, Yahoo! News and WMUR teamed up to produce the first of two New Hampshire GOP debates this weekend.

Poll after the debate:

[poll id=”35″]

Participants: Jon Huntsman, Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul, Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum

Moderators: Diane Sawyer, George Stephanopoulos and local TV anchor Josh McElveen

Replay:

<as soon as available, but here’s some of it>
video platformvideo managementvideo solutionsvideo player

ABC News 2 minute highlight:

video platform
video management
video solutions
video player

Which Rick Is More Conservative?


Rick Santorum said the following in a radio interview (VIDEO):

“One of the criticisms I make is to what I refer to as more of a Libertarianish right. They have this idea that people should be left alone, be able to do whatever they want to do, government should keep our taxes down and keep our regulations low, that we shouldn’t get involved in the bedroom, we shouldn’t get involved in cultural issues. That is not how traditional conservatives view the world. There is no such society that I’m aware of, where we’ve had radical individualism and that it succeeds as a culture.”

We’ve “never had a society” where low taxes, low regulation, broad personal liberty, and minimal government intrusion “succeeds as a culture”?

Let’s see how “traditional conservatives view the world”:

Barry Goldwater:

I’m frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in “A,” “B,” “C” and “D.” Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?

Walter Williams:

… liberty refers to the sovereignty of the individual.

Government is necessary, but the only rights we can delegate to government are the ones we possess.

Calvin Coolidge:

Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration has been minding my own business.

Ronald Reagan:

If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. (…) The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is.

Now compare this quote from Rick Perry’s book:

Our citizens are tired of big government raising their taxes and cooking up new ways to micromanage their lives, our citizens are tired of big government killing jobs with their do-gooder policies. In short the people are Fed Up!

Ask yourself this: Which candidate is most likely to leave you alone, get out of the way of business, lower your taxes and “make government as inconsequential as possible”? Which man represents “traditional conservatives” best?

This is yet another on my list of reasons to love Rick Perry.

(Photo credit Pool/Getty Images North America)

« Older Entries Recent Entries »