The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Tenth Commandment
You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.
Ted Cruz for President 2016
Sarah Palin for Disappointment of the Year
Donate to TBD
NOTICE
New visitors should read my "about" and my "comment policy" pages. It should help clear any confusion regarding your first-time or subsequent comments.
Deb Fischer was in third place, 16 points behind the front-runner establishment-picked candidate. Jim DeMint endorsed the other non-establishment Conservative candidate, who was in second place and finished a dismal third place. Sarah Palin endorsed Deb Fischer, who went from 16 points down to winning by 5 points. Not bad for an irrelevant person’s endorsement, eh?
Oh, and immediately after Deb Fischer won the Primary over the Establishment Candidate, Jim DeMint endorsed her. No dilly dallying around. No sour grapes. No nothing. He was happy to endorse Deb Fischer with his Conservative endorsement.
What does a Sarah Palin endorsement mean? If you read the comment section at the above link, you will find out exactly what it means. Cornhuskers who were considering voting for someone other than Fischer heard of Palin’s endorsement. That meant they needed to do research. It did not mean they had to mindlessly vote for “Palin’s Pick”. And, upon doing their research, they found Deb Fischer to be just what the doctor ordered.
Make no mistake, the Republican Primary in the Cornhusker State was the NCAA Finals. The General Election is just a formality as the Democrat stands no chance to win in the strongly Conservative state of Nebraska, especially after the Cornhusker Kickback destroyed the current Democrat Senator so much so that he had to “retire” and get a carpet-bagging replacement for himself on the Democrat ticket. Immediately after Deb Fischer won the Republican Primary, she was declared by PPP (a Democrat polling outfit) to be a 10 point favorite over Kerrey, a 12-year New York State resident who moved to Nebraska specifically to run as the Democrat replacement for the Cornhusker Kickback bribe-taker (who cannot even go to a pizzaria without getting booed out of the place).
You know who this helps? Ted Cruz of Texas. Yes, the irrelevant Sarah Palin, whose endorsements cause people to research and then vote for her endorsements, has endorsed Ted Cruz over some cat named Lt Gov Dewhurst. And Dewhurst’s dishonest smears of Ted Cruz are all over Conservative radio in Texas. I know. I live in Texas and I listen to Conservative talk radio on my way to and from work.
Rick Perry has endorsed David Dewhurst. Sarah Palin has endorsed Ted Cruz. Rick Perry was in danger of losing his Republican Primary bid for Governor to squishy Kay Bailey Hutchison until Sarah Palin rode in on her white horse and endorsed Rick Perry. Now, their competing endorsements will tell a tale. Having endorsed Ted Cruz long before Sarah Palin did, I welcome Sarahcuda’s endorsement of my candidate of choice. And I expect Mama Grizzly will have more pull in the great state of Texas than Texas’ own Republican Governor Perry.
Be afraid. Be very afraid. We’re coming for YOU! Your stupid claim that the TEA Party was short-lived and irrelevant will come back and bite you in the arse, come 2014. You will be Primaried out of office (unless you “retire” first).
This is stupid. If the Republican establishment loses to a candidate backed by both Sarah Palin and Herman Cain, of course the Tea Party wins. What else could explain it?
by Sarah Palin on Tuesday, May 15, 2012 at 9:35pm ·
As recently as a week ago, Deb Fischer was dismissed by the establishment. Why? Because she is not part of the good old boys’ permanent political class. The message from the people of Nebraska is simple and powerful: America is looking for real change in Washington, and commonsense conservatives like Deb Fischer represent that change. I applaud Moms like Deb Fischer who are bold enough to step up and run on a conservative platform to restore America and protect our children’s future. Congratulations to the people of Nebraska. As the Huskers’ fight song goes: “The eyes of the land, upon every hand, are looking at you. Fight on for victory!”
Radical Leftist Socialist Democrats, such as Barack Obama and Perry Hood (Perry for those who met his lying ass years ago on Delaware Liberal or for those who met his lying ass years ago on Colossus of Rhodey (found in my side bar) or for those who met his lying ass on Common Sense Political Thought (found in my side bar), or Wagonwheel (and a sock puppet) for those who found his lying ass on The First Street Journal (found in my sidebar)), are very busily giving Barack Obama all the credit in the world for “saving the US from a second Great Depression and turning the US around.” But is it so? The turn-around, such as it is, did not begin until 2011. There may have been a deceleration in the decline in 2010, but any economist worth his salt will tell you, the closer you get to zero economic activity the harder it will be for the rate toward zero economic activity to continue. It’s only logical. No matter how difficult the times, there will still remain recession-proof jobs. People still need to eat. And after eating, they still need toilet paper. And they will still need garbage collection. So, why is it Obama and the rest of the Socialist Democrats feel worthy to claim any sort of “recovery” (such as it is, and it’s no recovery at all) which took place in 2011? It is because, for some of them, they know there are a huge number of absolutely politically ignorant people in the US who vote out of their absolute ignorance. For the rest of them, it’s due to their arrogantly ignorant and willfully ignorant hatred of anything that has a Conservative tag or an affiliation with the Founders and Framers.
Let’s look at some facts.
Wisconsin elects Governor Walker. Governor Walker keeps his campaign promises. Democrats shirk their responsibilities and flee to Illinois. The Republican agenda is passed anyway. Wisconsin citizens save money on their property taxes for the first time in years, many public schools went from deficit spending to being in the black, Wisconsin went from Democrat Deficit to Republican Balanced, Wisconsin became most improved economic outlook of all 50 states.
John Kasich, the man who became the Budget Committee Chairman after the Republican wave election of 1994 and handed Bill Clinton his “balanced” Budgets that Democrats praise, becomes Governor of Ohio. And proceeds to keep his campaign promises. Ohio’s budget goes from deficit to balanced without a tax increase. Ohio’s economy turns around much more strongly than the US economy.
A more fiscally Conservative Republican takes over for a fiscally irresponsible Democrat as Governor of Pennsylvania.
Southern states see their Legislatures become majority Republican and lose their majority Democrat status for the first time since Reformation (that would be the 1860s for the historically illiterate (read Democrats) among us). Note: that would necessarily mean majority Republican for the first time, since the Republicans supplanted the Whigs most fervently with the Abraham Lincoln election, which the southern states didn’t want.
Republican-led Texas has lowered its unemployment rate down to 7 percent — more than one full percent lower than the US average — despite Obama’s Contempt of Court actions to destroy domestic oil production and despite the Obama administration’s EPA war on Texas electric output.
Over 700 Democrat seats became Republican seats. Actually, a swing of over 700 seats net from Democrat to Republican, counting the very few seats that went from Republican to Democrat.
And after all that (and more that I didn’t list), the national economy quit sinking like a rock and showed signs of growth. And, of course, Democrats are claiming credit for all the work Republicans did. Just like during the Clinton administration, when Republicans tortured to death the Bill Clinton Big Government agenda and replaced it with a smaller (but not small), far less intrusive (but still intrusive), far more fiscally responsible (but still fiscally irresponsible) government agenda.
On the flip side, Democrat-run Illinois pumped multiple massive tax increases — the last happening 3 hours before they lost the vote power to cause it to happen, as the new Legislators would take their seats 3 hours after the vote — and Illinois went from a continuous slow uptick in total jobs in the state to a sudden retraction. After the last, and most major, tax increase from Illinois Democrats, businesses began to flee the state and jobs began to disappear. A net loss in total jobs occurred immediately after that huge tax increase on producers — people and businesses. And that net loss kept accruing for months on end. In fact, I have not seen any report that that sudden turnaround to despair has stopped or even slowed.
California has been losing huge numbers of businesses as they flee that Leftist state. In the wave TEA Party elections, California bucked the trend and pumped Democrats into office. And California’s unemployment rate is further above the national average than Texas’ is below. Businesses are fleeing California, other businesses are refusing to even bother trying to build in California, people are fleeing California.
If you look at economic activity and what rebound it has had, and you plot it according to the time it occurred and the location it occurred, you will find that growth in activity most clearly shown in states that were Republican and stayed Republican, or in states that were Democrat and became Republican. States like California and Illinois, which were Democrat and remained Democrat (doubled down on dumb-o-crap agendae), have suffered greatly. Perhaps even moreso after the 2010 TEAnami than before. Definitely the differences are stark: Conservative and Republican area has amplified its economic superiority over Socialist Democrat area. Just a quick perusal of the facts as I have noted above proves my case. A far more in-depth examination would only serve to prove my case even further. No detached logical fact-based reasoning could result in anything even remotely related to oppositional toward my declaration.
Go ahead. Look at the numbers. Look at the improvement. And look at it state by state and district by district. Or, if you’re a radical leftist like the Democrat power-brokers, don’t. Because radical Leftists will not like what they find (if they even bother to search for Truth, as they are not known for their Honor).
What caused me to write this article? The comment section on a The First Street Journal article covering vote fraud in Philadelphia. Read it.
For those legitimately wanting documentation, there are multiple articles covering Wisconsin, Illinois, Meatchicken (I’m a Buckeye through and through, so it’s excruciatingly painful to type out the name of that state), California on Truth Before Dishonor. And they have all manner of links. Of course, you could be Perry Hood, who demands documentation as a mere ploy to shut down discussion of facts he deplores and then never admits the facts absolutely support what his mortal enemy (not some foreign country but, rather, Conservatives in the US) say, in which case, don’t even bother.
As reported by Ace, TX Governor Rick Perry has proposed as many as eight constitutional amendments he’d like to see ratified if he becomes president. Some are good ideas, some aren’t so good. Let’s take a gander and judge …
Organized Prayer in Public Schools Amendment. The first question is, “organized by whom?” If it’s school officials, forget it. As it is currently, schools are permitted to have Bible study groups with school official sponsors, provided they meet after school hours. And students (and staff) are permitted to pray already — silently — and many districts allow for an “official” moment of silence to do said praying if one so chooses. In today’s vastly diverse America, “officially” sanctioned prayer is a terrible idea. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: LAME.
Pro-Life Amendment. While I respect (and even agree) with Perry’s sentiments on this, I thought conservatives were all about federalism. One of the major complaints about Roe v. Wade is that it took the decision about abortion away from the individual states, allowing for abortion across the land (with certain restrictions). I’d also want to see what, if any, exceptions would be made under the amendment. Rape? Incest? Life of mother? HUBE-O-METER SAYS: UNDECIDED.
Pro-Marriage Amendment. Again, what’s the big deal about letting states decide how they’ll treat marriage? Not allowing such is something that conservatives should abhor. In this respect, social conservatives aren’t much different than liberals in extending federal reach into areas where it ain’t wanted. Admittedly, of course, the former’s method is more representative and more difficult a process; however, the results end up the same. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: LAME.
Balanced Budget Amendment. “Bring it on,” is all I can say here. Anything that mandates that we get our fiscal house in order should be OK with everyone. Most versions of such an amendment usually have emergency measure exemptions; I assume Perry’s would too. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: BRILLIANT.
Repeal of 16th Amendment. Again, a hearty “Bring it on!!” The Founders, in their infinite wisdom, knew such a tax was an abomination; apparently, our politicians in the early part of the last century thought (wrongly) that they were wiser. The dreaded 16th Amendment gave rise to the United States’ own version of the KGB (the IRS), and philosophically it runs afoul of the 13th Amendment in that it mandates uncompensated servitude (employers doing the work for government withholding taxes — yeah, I know that’s a very libertarian argument, but it’s a damn good one). It also was ratified under very suspicious circumstances (see: The Law That Never Was). Of course, it’ll take a good plan to replace the federal income tax; I’ve always been in favor of a national sales tax as a replacement, as it would give consumers the choice as to when, where and how to pay their taxes (i.e. for things they want). But that doesn’t seem to be Perry’s idea. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: BRILLIANT.
Repeal of 17th Amendment.This site gives a very detailed examination of the pros and cons of the 17th Amendment — direct election of senators — and at least in this realm, Perry’s penchant for minimal [federal] government power seems consistent with conservatism. However, in my view, more democracy is better in this area, and if you think we have gridlock in Washington now, imagine what it’ll be like when state legislatures refuse to choose US senators due to in-fighting, leading to numerous vacancies in the federal Senate. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: LAME.
Abolition of Lifetime Tenure for Judges. I happen to agree with the philosophy that appointment of judges (and lifetime tenure), rather than the election of them, serves to make judges less political. But whether this philosophy actually holds true is another matter. I tend to doubt it. We all know how the US Supreme Court will decide on most issues, because it has a clear conservative and liberal bloc. These justices’ appointment and lifetime tenure hasn’t made them any less political. Thus, all that being said, I don’t see a hassle with a definitive time limit on the tenure of federal judges, some or all of them. Perry’s idea is for an 18-year limit, staggered so that every two years a certain number’s terms are done. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: BRILLIANT.
Congressional Veto Over SCOTUS Decisions Amendment. Again, those very wise Founders devised a way by which Congress can thwart a [lousy] Supreme Court decision: the constitutional amendment. (Y’know, the very thing Rick Perry likes proposing!) Perry’s amendment would allow a two-thirds vote in the House and Senate to nullify a SCOTUS decision, thus making the [amendment] process considerably streamlined — no three-quarters of state legislatures needed. I agree with Perry himself that this “risks increased politicization of judicial decisions,” and besides, you wouldn’t really need this amendment if the lifetime tenure of judges is abolished. HUBE-O-METER SAYS: LAME.
We have two Republican Presidential candidates: Romney and not-Romney. The not-Romney flavor of the week is Michele BachmannRick PerryHerman Cain Newt Gingrich.
Michele Bachmann started out as the Sarah Palin who was in the race candidate, but she gaffed a bit overmuch. She won the Ames, Iowa straw poll. And Rick Perry entered the race at roughly the same time, after guaranteeing Texans he wouldn’t, and immediately supplanted Bachmann as the not-Romney front-runner. But Perry’s big government Trans-Texas Corridor and crony-capitalism Gardasil problems, compounded by his denigration of the vast majority of Americans (more importantly, the vast majority of Conservatives) cost him his front-runner status.
Enter Herman Cain as the not-Romney front-runner. His 9-9-9 plan was enticing but it depends on being a stepping stone to elimination of the Federal income tax. When has Big Government ever eliminated a huge form of money-sucking? Never happened and likely never will; therefore, a new form of money-sucking that doesn’t immediately eliminate an old form will only be permanently added to the old form, thus killing more productivity and further impoverishing Americans. Cain’s lack of foreign policy understanding is another major failing.
Enter Newt Gingrich as the new not-Romney front-runner. The man who sat on the couch with Nancy Pelosi and declared Global Warming to be a major issue that Government needed to fix. He has later apologized for that major fiasco. He’s also the man who endorsed DeDe Scozzafava for NY-23 over the Conservative candidate. It sure didn’t help when she bowed out and immediately endorsed the DEMOCRAT candidate instead of the Conservative candidate. Then there’s Newt’s moral failings in his personal life. His adulterous activities while his then-wife was very sick.
Mitt Romney, of course, is a huge NO to any Conservative. His RomneyCare, his pro-abort/anti-abort/pro-abort/anti-abort stance, his Big Government Can stance, his “whatever position you have is what I have today” stance. And Jon Huntsman is Mitt Romney without the cache or the cash.
No matter who the not-Romney front-runner is, and there have been several, Romney cannot get out of the mid-20s, despite running for President for 6 years. There’s good reason. Romney is bad for the country. Romney, who will never be considered a Conservative, would do serious damage to the grass-roots Conservative movement should he be elected — while simultaneously continuing the serious damage Obama has done to the country. No, we need to choose a seriously flawed Conservative out of the bunch of seriously flawed Conservatives, and not a “finger in the air” hyper-moderate like Romney.
But that’s just it. Which seriously flawed Conservative will eventually stick as the not-Romney candidate? And will the Conservative voters — whose numbers far outweigh the moderate Republicans — coalesce around a single not-Romney?
CONCORD, N.H. — New Hampshire’s primary could be held as early as Dec. 6, 2011, Secretary of State William Gardner warned today.
In a statement issued Wednesday afternoon, Garnder, who sets the date, said that if Nevada sticks with its current plan to hold a caucus on Jan. 14, “I cannot rule out the possibility of a December primary.”
Gardner wants Nevada to accept a date of Jan. 17 or later in order to keep the 2012 primaries from spilling into 2011. But if it does not, he said, “The dates of Tuesday, December 13th, and Tuesday, December 6th are realistic options, and we have logistics in place to make either date happen if needed.”
And RS McCain continues to hammer away at the “corrupt jackals who run the Florida GOP” (and I agree fully with the description) as being the ones wholly to blame for this chaotic fiasco.
Just to remind you: Florida is to blame for all of this, as I have been warning since Sept. 28. The corrupt jackals who run the Florida GOP did this evil thing for their own selfish reasons, in contravention of RNC rules to which they had agreed. Their disastrous decision to move the Florida primary from March to Jan. 31 was undertaken with the approval of – and quite possibly under orders from — Florida GOP Chairman Lenny Curry, reputed to be a close ally of the Crist-like RINO Senate candidate George LeMieux.
South Carolina Republicans also have placed the blame squarely on the Florida Ruling Class Establishment Republicans’ shoulders, and South Carolina is none too pleased.
And if New Hampshire moves its ‘First in the Nation’ Primary to December 6, Iowa will move its Hawkeye Caucii up to late November. And the whole outrageous anti-grass-roots over-the-top front-loading is all due to the arrogance of Ruling Class Establishment Republicans in Florida, who in 2010 tried to foist a Senator Crist on Floridians but failed spectacularly when the grass-roots chose the Conservative Cuban-American Marco Rubio instead of the squish-tastic Ruling Class Establishment Republican-turned-Independent Charlie “orange is beautiful” Crist.
The RNC declared any state moving its Primary or Caucuses up ahead of February 6 would lose half its delegates. Florida knew that when it moved its Primary to January 31, forcing the early states to move theirs up as well. So now, Florida, South Carolina, Nevada, New Hampshire, Iowa will all lose half their delegates as a result of Florida’s egregious actions. Does that help the Florida Ruling Class Establishment Republicans’ favorite candidate, Mitt “three positions on every issue” Romney? Not exactly.
In the previous survey, conducted in late August, Perry led the field at 38 percent, Romney stood at 23 percent, while Cain was at only 5 percent.
Cain’s numbers are sky-high among Republican primary voters. Fifty-two percent view him favorably, versus just 6 percent who see him unfavorably. Among Tea Party supporters, his favorable/unfavorable score is 69 percent to 5 percent. And among Republicans who identify themselves as “very conservative,” it’s 72 percent to 2 percent.
In follow-up interviews with respondents supporting Cain, they argue that he’s not a politician, and that he seems real. “He has common-sense answers and is in touch with the heartbeat of America,” said one respondent, a 46-year-old male from Florida…
Despite Cain’s rise and Perry’s fall over the past month and a half, Romney’s standing in the Republican horse race hasn’t changed — it was 23 percent in August, and it’s unchanged at 23 percent now.
Perry’s lost 22 points since the last poll — and not a single one went to Romney. That’s how reluctant base voters are to back him over some other conservative in the field.
While RS McCain linked to Nate Silver’s reasoning why an early New Hampshire Primary won’t necessarily benefit Romney (but is the reason behind all these early states front-loading so drastically), I have another reason why it won’t necessarily benefit Romney. New Hampshire should be a clear Romney win, being that New Hampshire is more squish than Conservative and there are multiple candidates gunning for the Conservative, anti-squish vote. Nevada might be a Romney win because Nevada has a higher percentage of squish voters. But both states will be losing half their delegates due to the early Primary/Caucuses. While Iowa and South Carolina are clearly more Conservative and will also be losing half their delegates, Romney was depending on an early Florida to freeze out his Conservative opposition and win Florida (which is losing half its delegates). But Florida polling shows Cain has a commanding lead over Romney in Florida.
There is only Romney vying for the squish left-wing of the Republican Party voters. Asterisk Huntsman doesn’t count. But there are 5 vying for the Conservative base of the Republican Party voters: Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum. Combined, they have a large majority of the vote, and those voters are not going to drop a Conservative choice to pick up the squish option. Just not going to happen.
After Iowa and New Hampshire (which lose half their delegates), two of the five Conservative options will drop out. After Nevada and South Carolina (which lose half their delegates), a third Conservative option will drop out, leaving two Conservative options, who will pick up the voters who had sided with the Conservative options who dropped out, going up against the squish Romney, who cannot get past that quarter of the vote line despite the risings and fallings of Conservative options.
So Florida’s move, causing all the other moves and all five states to lose half their delegates, will weed out several second-tier Conservative options and concentrate the Conservative vote early. And the remaining Conservative candidates will have more time to focus their attention directly on Romney and get their message out without the clutter of the also-rans. Florida’s move, pushing 5 states way too early, could cause TWO Conservative candidates to beat the squish Romney, pushing the squish Romney to third place. Instead of locking up the nominating process for the Ruling Class Establishment RINO, Florida may have sealed Romney’s fate as a failed candidate. And I won’t shed a tear if that is the result.
First there was Erick Erickson’s MILF joke and his subsequent banning of people on Red State who were offended at his highly offensive remarks, and his refusal to apologize for his highly offensive remarks. Then there was Erick Erickson’s highly offensive innuendos regarding another woman, Jamie Radtke, and Erickson’s ties to her well-connected Republican Primary opponent. And of course we have Red State impugning the intellect and integrity of anyone who criticized Rick Perry.
After Sarah Palin decided that she would not be running for President this time around, Erick Erickson provided this childish response:
And now he has the audacity to ask if we can all be friends. C-c-can’t we get along? C-c-can’t we all just get along? Actually no, Erick, bless your heart. You have one heck of a lot of growing up to do before you can sit at the grown-ups table.
American voters disapprove 55 – 41 percent of the job President Barack Obama is doing, an all- time low, and say 77 – 20 percent that the economy is in a recession, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. Voters say 44 – 11 percent that the economy is getting worse, not better, while only 29 percent say the economy will improve if the president is re-elected.
…
Obama’s rating on the economy are the biggest red flags. With jobs and economic growth almost certain to be the biggest issues in the 2012 general election, less than a third of voters think a second Obama term will help matters. His approval numbers on the economy are almost as bad, 32/64, and only 66% of Democrats approve, while 29% disapprove. Independents disapprove 26/69. Voters now give an edge to Republicans in Congress on economic leadership, 43/41, never a good sign for an incumbent President.
As Morrissey points out, Obama’s hard Left turn has cost him lots of points in the polling numbers. Obama was doing poorly enough when he was merely a radical Leftist. Now that he’s becoming a radical radical Leftist, to play to his very tiny base, he’s losing even more independent voters. And he’s still doing rather poorly among Democrats. A 66/29 economic approval among Democrats and a 26/69 economic approval among independents is a sure-fire way to get fired from the job the Democrats and independents hired Obama to do.
And Obama trails both Mitt “three positions on each issue” Romney and Rick Perry in the Quinnipiac polling numbers. The radical Left like to mock Rick Perry as an “extremist” when — aside from being nothing of the sort — independents and Republicans alike prefer Rick Perry to Barack Obama. The radical Left need new talking points, because the ones they’re using now aren’t selling their battery-powered Edsel to the public.
Sarah Palin has decided not to run for President this time around. I endorsed her for President a long time ago. The endorsement is in my sidebar and will remain there for the foreseeable future, although I will not in any way agitate to draft her or to try to rally to get her to run Third Party (which would be an unmitigated disaster).
by Sarah Palin on Wednesday, October 5, 2011 at 7:48pm
October 5, 2011
Wasilla, Alaska
After much prayer and serious consideration, I have decided that I will not be seeking the 2012 GOP nomination for President of the United States. As always, my family comes first and obviously Todd and I put great consideration into family life before making this decision. When we serve, we devote ourselves to God, family and country. My decision maintains this order.
My decision is based upon a review of what common sense Conservatives and Independents have accomplished, especially over the last year. I believe that at this time I can be more effective in a decisive role to help elect other true public servants to office – from the nation’s governors to Congressional seats and the Presidency. We need to continue to actively and aggressively help those who will stop the “fundamental transformation” of our nation and instead seek the restoration of our greatness, our goodness and our constitutional republic based on the rule of law.
From the bottom of my heart I thank those who have supported me and defended my record throughout the years, and encouraged me to run for President. Know that by working together we can bring this country back – and as I’ve always said, one doesn’t need a title to help do it.
I will continue driving the discussion for freedom and free markets, including in the race for President where our candidates must embrace immediate action toward energy independence through domestic resource developments of conventional energy sources, along with renewables. We must reduce tax burdens and onerous regulations that kill American industry, and our candidates must always push to minimize government to strengthen the economy and allow the private sector to create jobs.
Those will be our priorities so Americans can be confident that a smaller, smarter government that is truly of the people, by the people, and for the people can better serve this most exceptional nation.
In the coming weeks I will help coordinate strategies to assist in replacing the President, re-taking the Senate, and maintaining the House.
Thank you again for all your support. Let’s unite to restore this country!
God bless America.
– Sarah Palin
I first found the news on Common Sense Political Thought. Allahpundit at Hot Air has reported on the announcement. He added a lot of nonsense but had some good thoughts as well.
Maybe she’ll focus now on challenging Begich for Senate in Alaska in 2014, which would be a huge first step back towards national viability down the road. She’s 47 years old, fully 25 years younger than McCain was when he was nominated three years ago. No rush.
Update: Perry issues a brief statement: “Sarah Palin is a good friend, a great American and a true patriot. I respect her decision and know she will continue to be a strong voice for conservative values and needed change in Washington.”
Update: My guess is that Cain benefits the most from her absence. Like her, he’s a Beltway outsider, and like her, he seems like a real person, not a talking-points machine like the Romneybot or a back-slapping gladhander like Perry. Authenticity has always been key to Palin’s appeal among her supporters and that’s Cain all over. Besides, where else could her supporters go realistically? Romney’s too centrist and Bachmann’s a lost cause. And Perry’s been knocked by Palin (sometimes by name, sometimes not) for both his crony-capitalist tendencies and his Gardasil initiative, so unless she ends up endorsing him, there’s every reason for her fans to think he’s a nonstarter.
I had the same thoughts about Senator Begich and 2014 when I read the news on CSPT. If she were to replace that Alaska Democrat, her term would be up around the same time the 2-term Republican President finished and she would still be plenty young enough in her mid 50s to take the Presidency then.
Needless to say, I’m very disappointed…and very worried because none of the other announced candidates fully understands what bad shape we are in.
and adds an answer to that concern. “Well, maybe, but then the task falls to the Tea Parties to inform them.”
Allahpundit has the major problems with Romney and Perry pretty square. And Bachmann, my second choice? Is she a lost cause as Allahpundit, himself far too squishy, suggests? With her gaffes and the rumors of her campaign team travails, she may well be. I have called Perry my third choice of three on previous occasions, stating there is nobody else, but I may have to take a good long look at Cain — who is lacking in foreign policy — because Perry was my “third of three” for a reason. I just don’t like Big Government types. I also deplore being called heartless by a man who is standing firmly to the Left of 80 percent of the public.
So, with the best of the best out, I’ll have to look for the best-looking wallflower and ride that horse to town.
Matt Lewis says he’s improving on this issue. I guess, but that’s mainly because after you’ve tried to win over voters by calling them heartless, there’s really nowhere to go but up.
I’m not so sure. I think Rick Perry is, at best, going sideways and not up. Allahpundit goes on to quote MSNBC.
“We have, for decades, had a federal government that has absolutely failed in its constitutional duty to defend our border,” Perry said.
“I’m a governor. I don’t have the pleasure of standing on the stage and criticizing. I have to deal with these issues,” he later added.
Perry continued, “In 2001, we had this choice: Are we going to kick these children over to the curb and say you cannot have access to college? Because the fact of the matter is there’s no way they could pay the out-of-state tuition. And are we going to have them on the government dole over here because they’re not educated? Or are we going to have them in our institutions of higher learning, paying in state tuition, pursuing citizenship?”
How about we quit enabling illegal aliens in their illegal activities? Ever think of that, Governor Perry? Allahpundit notes Rick Perry opposes E-Verify, his wife has framed the question of either tuition subsidies or welfare payments — to illegals — a Left-wing Big Government false dichotomy fallacy, not only do illegals get in-state tuition subsidies (paid for by the tax-payers) but also tax-payer funded financial aid.
No, Rick Perry is not a small government Conservative. On this issue, he’s not a Conservative at all. As I said before, Rick Perry is a Bell Curve Tenther and not a True Tenther in that he supports State-level Big Government at the expense of the citizens. And I have no doubt that, if he were to become President, he will drop all pretenses at being a Tenther altogether for his Big Government approach.
And that Left-wing Big Government false dichotomy fallacy? How about we don’t subsidize the education of illegal aliens? How about we don’t give tax-payer funded Welfare to illegal aliens? How about we don’t allow businesses to hire illegal aliens? Do you know what that would do? It would save the tax-payers lots of money and it would stop enabling the illegal aliens and their illegal behavior. That would be the Small Government Conservative approach, and that would encourage the illegal aliens to return home.
UPDATE RS McCain mocks Rick Perry and his hole-digging self-inflicted and possibly politically-fatal wound.
Go back just 10 days — before the Orlando debate, before the Florida straw poll — and remember how Perry was the unstoppable juggernaut, the bandwagon everyone was going to ride to glory.
And now it’s over. Completely and irretrievably over. How over is it? Mitt Romney is mocking Perry as a RINO sellout[.]
When even Flip Flopney tags you for being clearly to the Left of the Conservative base, you know you done a bad thing. Seriously Rick, stop digging. Put that shovel down and don’t pick it back up again.
Morgan Freeman hardest hit (along with Common Sense Political Thought’s radical Leftist commenter Perry Hood).
How dare those raaaaacist TEA Partiers vote for a black man to replace the half white, less-than-half black Socialist in the Oval Office? Don’t those raaaaacist TEA Partiers know the black man they voted for is blacker than the Socialist in the Oval Office?
Conservative businessman and economist Herman Cain won the Florida Straw Poll going away, gaining more votes than the next two combined. The biggest losers in this straw poll were Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann. Rick Santorum cracked the 10 percent barrier.
Cain garnered 37.1 percent of the votes while front-running Perry, who lobbied very hard for the vote, managed a mere 15.4 percent and Romney, who didn’t campaign all that hard for the straw poll, garnered 14.7 percent of the voting. Bachmann, her star having fallen prior, finished last in the voting at 1.5 percent while Jon Huntsman, the squish alternative to the squish Romney whom Liberals are trying to foist on Republicans (when those selfsame Liberals know full-well they’ll be voting for the Democrat regardless), managed a meager 2.3 percent.
A personal observation about Herman Cain from my corner of the world: In talking with, or just overhearing, various friends, family, professional acquaintances, people at the next table at the restaurant, etc., I’ve noticed that lately Cain is getting a little more air under his wings in a “I kind of like that Cain guy” sort of way. We’ll see what kind of a lift this gives him, but his name recognition is certainly on the rise, and today’s straw poll results might give him added momentum.
RS McCain, not to be confused with his distant cousin, the left-of-center John McCain, is downright giddy.
Yes, we have “entered a new phase,” the phase where talking heads on the Sunday morning shows will be discussing the first draft of Rick Perry’s political obituary. Didn’t I try to warn everybody about the “Phantom Menace”?
Don’t doubt my Jedi senses on this one, folks. I’m getting spooky vibes. . . .
Yeah, I know political journalists aren’t supposed to believe in “omens.” Still, there’s something vaguely . . . hinky about the way Perry’s stealth campaign has been operating here in Iowa.
Call me crazy. Attribute my forebodings of doom to irrational prejudice. Say what you will, and I don’t care, but I felt a need to put on the record my instinctive sense that there’s something fundamentally wrong about the Perry campaign.
That was on Aug. 9, four days before Perry officially announced.
Now here we are, six weeks later, and the Perry bandwagon is inarguably in the ditch — thanks to Perry’s own “tin ear” blundering and the triumph of my man Herman Cain:
The Georgia businessman won more votes than the Republican primary’s frontrunners — Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney — combined.
Where is my vindication? Where are those who scoffed at my prophetic foresight?
Not only did Cain pull it off, it wasn’t close. The numbers: Cain 37%, Perry 15%, Romney 14%. A total embarrassment for Perry, and it actually could have been worse. Here’s what Florida state representative Matt Gaetz tweeted before the vote:
Romney campaign is having their #Presidency5 delegates vote for Cain to skew results. #dirtytricks
If that’s true, and no one knows if it is, then Romney’s supporters might have pushed Mitt to second and Perry all the way down to third simply by sticking with their guy.
Allahpundit goes on to report how badly Perry wanted to win the straw poll and then how terribly Perry spun the resounding straw poll defeat. It’s real a piece of work.
As I reported in a previous article, Rick Perry’s downfall was widely viewed as his adamant stand to the Left of a very clear majority of the voting public regarding immigration-related issues. His problems with his unilateral Big Government crony capitalism “pay to play” Gardasil Executive Order and his subsequent “erroneous” memory also came into play. He became a detriment to himself and a live grenade for the Conservative/TEA Party base, so they pitched that hot potato and selected someone else.
Now here’s where RS McCain and I disagree. (And Mr McCain, feel free to beat me up on your site. I could use the hits you would deliver me. (Or is that too much violent rhetoric for the Leftist weenies to handle?)) But first a bit more agreement. RS McCain offers some advice — in a very impolitic fashion — for the false Conservative Bill Kristol: Quit offering up Chris Christie. Absolutely. Perry lost the straw poll because he was too Liberal, too Big Government, too crony capitalist. Christie, the New Jersey Rocket Man, is more Liberal than Perry.
The Conservatives that are flying away from Perry will not be flying to someone even more Liberal than Perry. They want a Conservative. While Christie is a very unique political creature in that he is a Moderate with a backbone, and he went viral multiple times showing his spine, he’s still an unacceptable Moderate outside Liberal Land. He’s great for New Jersey, not so great for the US.
The reason I believe people selected Cain (other than that hinky Romney campaign stuff) is because Cain is a businessman and a Conservative who won’t go in for the lobbyist “pay to play” schemes but will get the Business of America (is business) back on track. Well, that’s not the whole reason. (Mr McCain, here it comes.) Cain is a place-holder, but not a place-holder place-holder. Cain is currently “the best of the rest” among available Conservatives and, yes, getting more looks. Rick Santorum is not getting any traction, although he benefited from the twin-failings of the two previous Conservative Rock Stars in Michele “gaffe-tastic” Bachmann and Rick “Conservative tips, Liberal roots” Perry. And Newt “Scozzafava, Pelosi” Gingrich isn’t going anywhere. Ron “crazy man” Paul? Whatevs.
But Cain doesn’t have the foreign policy/relations chops and he won’t have those chops in time to be sworn in. I definitely like Cain but I see him more taking over as Department of Labor Secretary where the name can be changed to Department of Business and he can get to work repurposing the department to allow for a much better environment for business and economic growth within the US.
It is highly unlikely Cain will win the nomination. But Perry and Bachmann left the door wide open for the Thrilla from Wasilla to step in and take the mantel. And just to be crystal clear (since there was that little edginess in those body blows to Bill Kristol), my endorsement in my sidebar has been present for quite some time now. Just wanted to help you out, Mr McCain, in your effort to give me a beat-down.
But here, let me conduct an informal poll. Those who believe I’m onto something regarding Cain can vote by “hitting my tip jar” for 5 dollars, while those who believe Mr McCain is right regarding Cain can vote by “hitting my tip jar” for 10 dollars. That way, I can better judge the opinions of the readers. (Or you can be cheap and just write a comment, taking note of my “about” page and my “comment policy” page.)
As all the politically aware know, there was a Republican Presidential debate down in Florida yesterday. And the top Republican announced candidates were there. And consensus has it: Rick Perry flopped once again.
The cringe-worthiest moment, by a hair, was when Perry botched what should have been his most potent attack on Mitt Romney’s chronic flip-flopping. As I noted on Twitter when it happened, any random high schooler at the CPAC conference in Washington could have done better than this.
If this is how Perry’s going to take Obama on in debates, we’re in trouble. Someone inject him with some Red Bull and a dash of Herman Cain’s personality.
…
Transcript:
PERRY: “I think Americans just don’t know sometimes which Mitt Romney they’re dealing with. Is it the Mitt Romney that was on the side of…against…the Second Amendment before he was for the Second Amendment…was it was..before he was before these social programs, uh, from the standpoint he was standing, uh, for Roe vs. Wade before he was against Roe, uh, Roe vs. Wade…uh…he was…uh for Race To The Top…
Uh…[pause]…he’s for Obamacare and now he’s against it…I mean, we’ll wait until tomorrow and, and, and wait to see which Mitt Romney we’re really talking to…
As I commented last night on Twitter, Rick Perry has begun to remind me of the Minnesota Vikings in these debates. He starts off strong and runs up a lead in the first half, starts coasting, and then eventually turns the ball over repeatedly and loses. For the third debate in a row, Perry lost steam in the second half, lost focus — and in this case lost the ability to put together a coherent sentence in an attack that was clearly rehearsed. Perry leaped at the chance to attack Romney as a flip-flopper, which shouldn’t be that hard to do, and … well, see for yourself:
…
Some might argue that debates don’t prove anything about how a candidate will function as President, but that’s not entirely true. First, one has to win the election, and offering incoherent ramblings on television is no way to do that. Second, voters have to have confidence in a candidate’s abilities to win their support, and anyone watching this part of the debate had to be wondering whether Perry is really up to the task of debating Barack Obama, or dealing with the media in a press conference, which is most certainly part of the job.
I’d expect Perry’s numbers to soften up after this performance. And with that comes an opening for a late arrival into the race, especially if Romney’s numbers don’t move upward.
Perry looked like a loser last night: “Cringeworthy.” We’ll get the results Saturday of a Republican straw poll in Florida, and if Perry doesn’t win that, the “Anybody But Romney” vote may start looking around for another horse to ride.
Seriously, um, dude, you gotta … I mean if you’re … spit it out, dude! If Rick Perry were Ricki Perry the female governor of Texas, the mainstream media would be asking “Are you ditzy?” But since he’s a man…
If that was Perry’s most cringeworthy portion of the debate, there is another portion where Perry turned the tractor beam into a repulsor beam (Star Trek TNG), and that was his illegal immigration fiasco.
Perry lost big in his continued defense of DREAM Act illegal alien student preferences. Frank Luntz’s focus group on Sean Hannity’s show after the debate unanimously panned Perry on immigration and especially took umbrage at his condescending line about critics not having a “heart.” Which follows on his similarly-toned line from the last debate about how Republicans should care about students no matter what their last names sound like.
Rick Perry may have forfeited his lead in the Republican presidential field during Thursday night’s debate in Orlando when he declared that those who oppose subsidizing college education for illegal immigrants are heartless.
“If you say that we should not educate children who have come into our state for no other reason than they have been brought there by no fault of their own, I don’t think you have a heart,” Perry said, after being criticized by former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for a Texas policy providing in-state tuition for illegals.
Romney, who vetoed a similar tuition bill in Massachusetts, pointed out that this amounts to a $22,000-a-year discount for illegal aliens, as compared to the tuition that would be paid by U.S. students from the other 49 states attending universities in Texas. “That doesn’t make sense to me,” Romney said.
It didn’t make sense to former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum either. “You’re sort of making this leap that unless… the taxpayers subsidize it, [immigrants] won’t be able to go [to college].… The point is, why are we subsidizing it?… And why should they be given preferential treatment as an illegal in this country?” . . .
Perry’s support for Texas DREAM need not cost him the support of those who are strongly opposed to amnesty for illegal immigrants or who strongly support — as Perry puts it — “more boots on the ground” to secure our borders. In other words, Perry should reassure voters he’s not squishy on border security nor does he favor amnesty for illegals — and deflect attention from the Texas DREAM Act as much as possible, not call attention to it with self-righteous pronouncements.
I have a different piece of advice for Perry: Stop alienating most of the voters and the vast, vast majority of Republicans and TEA Partiers. As I noted in my article Numbers Democrats Don’t Want You To See (and apparently neither does Rick Perry):
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey [August 23, 2011] shows that only 32% of Likely U.S. Voters believe children of parents in this country illegally should be allowed to attend public school here. Fifty-three percent (53%) do not believe those young illegal immigrants should be allowed to attend public school.
…
Seventy-two percent (72%) of voters believe parents should be required to prove they are legal residents of the United States when registering their child for public school. Twenty-one percent (21%) oppose such a requirement.
Several states have made illegal immigrants eligible for lower in-state tuition at colleges and universities, but 81% of voters oppose such a move in their state. Just 12% think illegal immigrants should be eligible for these tuition breaks in their home state. Opposition to allowing illegal immigrants to be eligible for in-state tuition is slightly stronger than it was back in October 2007.
The vast majority of voters are in direct opposition to the Democrats’ position on educating illegals, but again, the Democrats don’t want the voters to know they are in such a vast majority while the Democrat leadership is holding the extremist position. This issue also definitely hurts Governor Perry as he stands alongside the Democrats (in a “me, too” position) in contradiction to the vast majority of the public.
So, Rick Perry’s “heartless” lashing out was lashing out at 81 percent of American voters. Not a good way to win anyone’s vote. But there’s yet another piece in the chain of events in Perry’s debate collapse. Michelle Malkin provides evidence that Rick Perry’s Liberal tactic anecdotal heart-string pull for his unilateral Big Government crony capitalist “pay to play” Gardasil Executive Order was a case of, errr, erroneous memory.
As I wrote in my Sarah Palin Suddenly Electable article, much of Palin’s improving polling stems from other Republicans flaming out and people taking a second look at Sarah Palin. I also explained in The Palin Paradox if one makes the premise of Palin knowing she’s running but waiting for the right moment to run, Perry’s mid-August entry into the race — after he promised his Texas voters he wouldn’t — pushed Palin’s timeline back. With Perry’s debate implosion the last couple debates, I believe Perry just pushed Palin’s timeline back forward again.
Consider if you will the premise that Sarah Palin knows she’s running for President but is just biding her time, waiting for the right moment to announce her candidacy. Now, I don’t know if the premise is true, but I believe she was leaning toward a run in June and is leaning much more strongly toward a run now. But consider for the sake of discussion that the premise is true. When should Sarah Palin announce her candidacy?
Back in July, I explained why a later announcement date would benefit her.
Why Sarah Palin can and maybe should wait ’til August or September to announce:
Her FaceBook notes will continue to go viral.
Her speeches and interviews will continue to go viral.
The Undefeated will be widely watched as it opens in more cities after its Premiere.
The media can’t stay away from a Sarah Palin story, even when she goes to ground.
It’s not costing her a cent.
The longer she stays out, the longer the other Republican candidates have to take some of the heat from vetting and a deceitful media.
The other Republican candidates still have to consider Sarah Palin in all they do and say.
This is still true today. As I noted in my July article, Palin is the most vetted candidate out there today, and she isn’t even officially a candidate. She needs to wait till the other candidates are more vetted before she enters, else they won’t be vetted until after the Primary season. But the timing got shifted. In August, Rick Perry — who guaranteed he would not be running for President during his most recent Gubernatorial campaign — announced his candidacy for President. And suddenly, the Aames Straw Poll meant very little. The other candidates lost media time as Rick Perry took the oxygen out of the room and jumped to the top of the “leader board.”
A couple debates later and Perry’s developing issues. His Trans-Texas Corridor Executive Order — which the Texas Legislature nixed — has shown a unilateral Big Government approach to things. His Gardasil Executive Order — which the Texas Legislature likewise nixed — has shown a unilateral Big Government approach and a link to crony capitalism. He is weak on the illegal immigration and educating illegals fronts. And there are other stories coming out claiming to show other weaknesses in his Conservatism. Now, I don’t know if those other stories are valid or if they’re part of a smear campaign, but it is highly likely had Palin announced prior to now, none of his difficulties with Conservatism would have had the exposure they got without Palin in the race. As a result, Perry’s poll numbers are beginning to wane, which will help when Palin decides to announce.
A couple days ago, a new poll came out showing Palin’s electability to be much stronger, and I wrote my analysis regarding the cause of the stronger electability numbers. Along with the other Republican candidates being more strongly vetted was the fact the 3-year-long smear campaign against Palin has lost its lustre as more and more the desperate loons spew forth with even more desperate trash that even Liberals have to object to. The other candidates haven’t been vetted nearly as stridently as Palin has. They haven’t had to face the level of vindictive smearing Palin has. But with her sitting on the sidelines, the other candidates are indeed getting vetted (and smeared) and their polling numbers are sagging because of it.
While Palin was at her floor in polling, others have reached their peaks. Now, as the others are falling off their peaks, Palin is rising from her floor. As she showed with her Northeast bus tour and her Midwest bus tour, wherever Palin goes the media follows and the other candidates lose media attention. She sucks the oxygen out of the room just by being there. This is both a benefit and a drawback for her as, while the other candidates can’t get their message out as effectively, neither do they get vetted (or smeared) as much. And as we saw in the 2008 Primary and General, the media may not smear a squishy Republican in the Primary but most definitely will in the General.
Therefore, it is imperative that the Republican candidate for President be vetted as much as possible prior to winning the Republican Primary, and Sarah Palin’s entry into the race would instantaneously shut off the vast majority of the vetting of the other candidates as she takes the oxygen out of the room and everyone but everyone pays attention to her.
So it’s best that Sarah Palin wait as long as possible before entering the battlefield. But therein lies the Palin Paradox. Her chances of winning increase the longer she waits to enter as everyone gets vetted and loses steam, but if she waits too late, her chances of winning go to zero. It is a difficult challenge to get the announcement timing down right, and Perry’s mid-August entry did shift the timing to a later date, but how late is too late?
I’m coming to hate Perry Bots, just because they are so freaking wed to spreading memes– dumb ones, at that! It’s not to Ronulan levels of annoying, yet, but cut it out! You’re not doing him any good.
Same way that not all Ron Paul supporters are the annoying, brainless sort of Ron Paul supporter, not all Rick Perry supporters are these annoying cut-and-paste artists who haven’t got enough imagination to even rephrase the freaking arguments. I’d estimate that they’re less than one in ten, actually– the Ron Paul supporter thing is highly biased by the way that folks who agree with ‘im on some points don’t want to be associated with the nutjobs. If this can’t be stopped, Perry is going to face similar problems. Heck, for all I know, that’s part of someone’s plan. Heaven knows that dumber plans have been implemented, and probably even been successful.
Focusing on the mandated vaccination for an STD for school girls, I’ll list off a few, with responses:
“It had an opt-out, it’s not really a mandate.”
That opt-out is exactly the same as for every other mandatory vaccine in Texas. You ask the gov’t to send you the form, fill it out, get it notarized and then you get permission to not be vaccinated with whatever for two years. (In theory, at least.)
“It’s horrible that Bachmann is giving support to the anti-vaccine movement!”
Possibly the locations I’m most familiar with– Seattle, Portland and SoCal– messes with the sampling I have in this, but none of the folks I know who are “anti-vaccine” are feeling validated by anything a Republican would say, because THEY ARE LIBERALS. The same sort of folks who think “organic” means “healthier” and “more nutritious.”
“It’s OK, Perry was just making it so the insurance companies would pay for the vaccine.”
Oh, that’s a lovely defense of someone going for the Republican nomination: his goal wasn’t to abuse his power and interfere with parental rights by mandating a new STD drug on little girls from a company that gave him money and hired his friend– he was just trying to force a private company to pay for something he personally thought was a good idea.
“Perry said he messed up/is sorry/wouldn’t do it that way again/etc.”
Where? Please, seriously, I’ve asked for folks to give a link to exactly what he actually said, and nobody will do it– there is a WORLD of difference between him saying “that looked really bad,” “I shouldn’t have used an executive order,” “I should have gone with an opt-in instead of an opt-out” or “I would not do something like that again.” Or even, “yeah, I was an utter idiot with my rhetoric on that…sorry.” (The “pro-life” justification, the various polio claims, etc.)
“Watch this video with an interview of people who know someone who died of cervical cancer!”
Wow! Women dying is a bad thing– I had no idea! I am now utterly on the side of government ordered everything that someone claims could save a few in a hundred thousand lives, if someone can find an emotional argument for it, and to heck with any consideration for personal rights!
“You just hate science/are ignorant/are anti-medicine!”
No, you ad hominem slinging idiot; there’s no shortage of medical professionals who also did not think it was a great idea. Even the “preventing cancer” thing isn’t open-shut, even with those who go from “associated with” into “causes.” While you’re at it, could you pleaseeducate yourself on HPV, and stop spreading flat misinformation? At least figure out a bit about the various types, and pay attention to the stats that folks throw around…. While I’m dreaming about people paying attention to the facts, stop citing Wikipedia. It’s a handy jump-off point, but it’s worthless on anything where there’s debate precisely because it’s a wiki.
Can we please agree to leave that in the capable hands of the Democrats and mainstream media (which are one and the same)? Let’s have our differences of opinion and let’s base those differences of opinion on facts about our various candidates’ positions and records. But let’s cut out the trash talk and leave that to the Leftists and mainstream media (which are one and the same).
I am not a Rick Perry supporter. I am a Sarah Palin supporter. And since Truth Before Dishonor is mine, Truth Before Dishonor has already endorsed Sarah Palin for President. But Dana Pico, an author here, has endorsed Rick Perry on this very site. And I very clearly said then that I don’t need the trashing of Rick Perry or their supporters in that thread. I gave my opinion on things I don’t like but also gave my opinion on things I do like about my third choice. And I based it on historical record.
Over at Hot Air, yesterday’s Quotes of the Day article was about Rick Perry’s truthful statement that Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme and the fact he won’t back down from that truthful statement. But like all long comment threads, it devolved into something else. And I want to get past the lamest of circular firing squad malignings and get to the phony math that one commenter in particular used in his poorly thought out maligning of Governor Perry’s record.
As of 8/31/01 (the end of the 2001 fiscal year, the last for which George W. Bush exercised budgetary authority), outstanding debt of the State of Texas totaled $12.561 billion.
Below is a summary of outstanding debt at the end of each fiscal year under Perry’s authority.
2001 – 2010
Debt growth: 184.2% (12.3% per year)
Inflation: 18.7% (1.9% per year)
Population growth: 18.2% (1.9% per year)
Debt growth in excess of inflation and population growth: 147.3% (10.6% per year)
The effect of the 2001 amendment allowing the DOT to issue debt was seen in the 18% increase in the State’s debt between 2001 and 2002. However, DOT debt hardly accounts for the 184.2% total increase in the State’s debt during Perry’s governorship.
steebo77 on September 12, 2011 at 2:22 AM
___________________
Increase in expenditures, 2001-2010: 106.5% (8.4% per year)
Inflation, 2001-2010: 18.7% (1.9% per year)
Population growth, 2001-2010: 18.2% (1.9% per year)
Increase in expenditures in excess of inflation and population growth: 69.6% (6.0% per year)
Let’s start with some basic math, shall we? A percentage increase in anything over 10 years does not break down into 1/10th of the percentage increase per year. The basic Law of Compounding covers that, so all the “per year” bits are very much wrong. Next up, some basic algebra. You cannot add unlike items. 2a + 3b =! 5ab. Growth in “inflation” plus growth in “people” does not equal growth in “inflation people”. Again, dealing with that math problem, the Law of Compounding comes into play. Growth in inflation plus growth in people plus growth in inflation with the people growth will come closer to the truth.
Now for some “inflation” talk. Back when Carter (the worst President since the 1940s until Obama surpassed him and became the worst President ever) was President, food and energy were part of the metric in determining inflation. Since then, those two items — which increase in cost much faster than the rate of inflation — were removed from the official inflation rate, thereby artifically lowering the actual inflation rate. That right there puts a hammerlock on Budget v Inflation. But let’s continue. Healthcare expenses always increase faster than inflation. And State Budgets must account for Medicaid (which is a healthcare expense that always increases faster than inflation), a Federally mandated State expense. Education expenses increase much faster than inflation. And State Budgets must account for education expenses. And States use energy, which increases faster than inflation. All of these points, compounded by population growth, illegal immigrant population growth, the Law of Compounding, drive a rather large hole in Budget v Inflation.
Now, Steebo77 likely bungled his way into his failed-math maligning of Rick Perry, but that would make him an unwilling failed-math willing maligner. I have said before, and I continue to believe, Rick Perry is a Big State Government Bell Curve Tenther, but I will not use multiple-stage bad math in an attempt to destroy Rick Perry, a man who would do a lot to help the US recover from the Socialism of today’s Democrat Party machine and Ruling Class, Inside-The-Beltway Republicans.
That is a lie in the form of a question the radical Left use constantly, and have been using constantly for years. Libertarians have formulated plans to rescue the nation’s economy. Conservatives have formulated plans to rescue the US economy. Those plans have been put out for public examination. Many of them have been available for examination for years. But the radical Left demand that Libertarians and Conservatives have no plan, just a raaaaacist hatred for “the black President.”
As “anecdotal” evidence of the radical Leftist mantra in action, I give you one Perry Hood, who regularly chants that mantra at Conservatives on Common Sense Political Thought. Delaware Libertarian found it necessary to write an entire article solely devoted to pointing out Perry Hood’s dishonorable lying chant.
So not only has an alternative been offered here, Perry, you went on record as agreeing with substantial parts of it–even though you seem to have … forgotten that part.
You have offered engaging insights and shown the willingness to admit that part of President Obama’s plan is a massive gamble with our future.
And you’re certainly free to disagree with anything we offer.
But please, stop suggesting that libertarians here have not been discussing solutions…
That article was written in March, 2009 so Delaware Libertarian was already tired of Perry Hood’s radical Leftist, wholly dishonest chant of “where’s your plan” way back in early 2009, right after Barack Obama was sworn in. People were tired of the lying accusation that the opposition had no plan years ago because there were plans years ago which were readily available for discussion, but Perry Hood soldiers on with his radical Leftist, dishonorable chant even to this day. Because he is incapable of allowing himself to be drawn in to discussing the various Conservative and Libertarian plans that are readily available for discussion.
Sarah Palin has a plan. Paul Ryan has a plan. Michele Bachmann (that’s one “l” and two “n”s, people) has a plan. Rick Perry has a plan. Tea Party Express has a plan. Tea Party Patriots has a plan. Contract From America has a plan. Freedom Works has a plan. Americans for Prosperity has a plan. Conservatives have plans. Libertarians have plans. Republicans have plans. There are many plans on the Conservative and Libertarian sides. There have been plans since before Obama became President. And they have been available for public discussion from the get-go. So radical Leftists like Perry Hood have to lyingly claim we have no plan in their wholly dishonorable, age-old, and worn-out chant “where’s your plan” in order to not have to discuss the plans they are dishonestly avoiding discussing.
Aside from all that, I have a question to ask the dishonorable radical Leftists like Perry Hood: Where’s your Budget? The radical Leftist Nancy Pelosi refused to even attempt a Budget from April, 2009 until the day the American people overwhelmingly threw her and the Democrats out of power in the House in the 2010 TEAnami. Despite Federal Law requiring they provide a Budget and the US Constitution giving them the responsibility of providing a Budget. To this day, Harry Reid has steadfastly refused to even attempt a Budget, again despite Federal Law requiring such and the US Constitution giving him and his fellow Democrat Senators the responsibility for such. It has been over 850 days. Where’s your Budget?
Dana Pico
DNW
Foxfier
Hube
Yorkshire
Truth Before Dishonor 