Press "Enter" to skip to content

What, Me Worry? About Rick Perry? Why Not?

Troy Jones says criticism of Rick Perry shows that we liberals are afraid of the Texas governor now focusing on answering God's call to run for President. Evidently the proper response from liberals to conservative candidates is to quietly accept their pollution of public discouse.

The Displaced Plainsman declines to acquiesce. He notes that Perry's likening of legitimate monetary policy to an act of treason justifies fear... or caricature. We may also rightly tremble, with alarm or giggles, at a D-student in economics who thinks he understands how to solve a recession.

Governor Perry shows a frighteningly familiar deliberate density. Here's Rick Perry trying to answer a simple question about why his state, with its focus on abstinence education, has the third highest rate of teen pregnancy:

GOP playbook: even if it's demonstrably false, keep saying it, over and over, and hope the people flipping channels only hear you.

Note also that while Governor Perry tries to take credit for the outstanding economic performance of a state with oil, seaports, and sunshine, he doesn't talk much about his state's educational rankings: 47th in the nation in literacy, 49th in verbal SAT scores, and 46th in math scores. Such educational results are perhaps to be expected from a Texas governor who thinks climate scientists are liars and that we can stop bad weather with prayer.

We've done eight years of a willfully obtuse Texas governor convinced he's doing God's will in the White House. We've seen eight years of such a regime bringing us recession, stagnant wages, resurgent deficits, income inequality, and endless wars and occupations of foreign lands. A little fear of repeating that mistake seems perfectly healthy.


  1. Steve Sibson 2011.08.18

    But he gets to go to Bilderbergers. Aren't they the ones calling the shots?

  2. Steve Sibson 2011.08.18


    Kids Count are setting up our kids for the Bilderbergers. They are not for kids, they are for using kids as political pawns to advance the NWO or more accurately, the New British Empire.

  3. larry kurtz 2011.08.18

    As long as the NWO is managed under the US Constitution, i applaud it, Steve. Statehood for Mexico.

  4. Steve Sibson 2011.08.18


    Are you talking about the orginal Constitution or the 14th Amendment one?

  5. Troy Jones 2011.08.18

    If Perry really makes you all scared, he moves up in my book. :)

    At the end of the day, the GOP has five potential nominees (in this order of probabability in my mind):

    1) Former Governor Romney: Successful business man and successful Governor who was able to lead with a Legislature of the opposing party.

    2) Current Governor Perry: Never lost an election and has led a state dealing with some of the most severe "dislocative challenges" because of its heavy illegal immigration challenge (if you nomalized their education results taking out the unique challenges related to immigration, Texas would be in the middle educationally) yet half the jobs created during the Obama Administration has been in his state. You'd think Obama-ites would love Perry. If it weren't for Texas, unemployment would be over 10% and Obama's popularity would be sub-GWB at the end of his Presidency.

    3) Former Governor Palin: Who despite attacking the good old boys and was praised by the liberals/progressives/moderates in Alaska until she was nominated for Vice President is now an athema to liberals. You guys are a hard bunch to figure out.

    4) Former Governor Huntsman: Former ambassador to China under Obama, successful businessman, and successful Governor.

    5) Former corporate CEO Cain: Successful businessman. In the end his lack of established political infrastructure will cause him to faulter. However, I expect him to be a Cabinet member in the next administration.

    The other three (Paul, Bachman and Gingrich) lack what is proving to be the most significant reason the Obama Presidency is implodinig: No executive experience. The Dems had a qualified candidate who could lead in Hillary but you passed. In the end, they will make interesting statements, impact the issues debated and how but will in the end flame out.

    As I read this post, I see two central comments of substance:

    1) Perry's belief it is God's will he run. My bet is everyone of the above people of religious faith believe it too. In fact, if they are people of faith and believe it is not God's will, they wouldn't be running. Doesn't mean it is God's will they win. We'll have to see. But, if you are going to trivialize their faith in every breath, you will insult every person of faith. Go for it Cory. :)

    2) Perry's statement Bernanke is committing treason. This is ill-advised hyperbole. Obama does it all the time too. While seldom fatal when used on occassion, Perry needs to tone down the hyperbole. He is now under the most intense magnifying glass in the world. Regarding the substance, I actually have a problem with what he said. While I do disagree with some of the actions of the Fed, I think overall they have done the best they can with a President who hasn't led on the fundamental problems causing economic stagnation.

  6. Steve Sibson 2011.08.18


    If you keep it up, you will get invited to the Bilderbergers too.

  7. Bill Fleming 2011.08.18

    Good overview, Troy, except for #3. That one just made me snicker a little. Csk, csk, csk. Like that. ;^)

  8. Troy Jones 2011.08.18

    Steve, what I wrote has nothing to do with who is my choice. Who do you think I favor? I'll bet you can't guess right.

  9. larry kurtz 2011.08.18

    South Dakota won't have a choice, Troy. Your earth hater will have already been selected for the chemical toilet.

    Steve, the US Constitution is the finest instrument ever created by the human hand: 14th Amendment and all.

  10. Troy Jones 2011.08.18

    What I said seems to parallel this analysis pretty close.

    There are two major items touched on I didn't:

    1) "Romney is a weak front-runner": Republicans have never had a clear front-runner this far from the election who didn't have to face this characterization as far back as I can remember. Not Reagan (everyone assumed ultimately GHWB would be the nominee at this stage). Not GHWB (As there became some Reagan fatigue, many thought Dole or Kemp would gain traction). Not GWB (McCain was supposedly "the man"). And we all remember where McCain was now (broke and virtually finished).

    I think this is true for both parties. Most people don't solidify behind anyone this early. There is talk and speculation but in the end, there is alot of fluidity. However, in the end, it becomes a choice between the "fron-runner" and one other person. Who wins a two person race is too hard to declare with any confidence since the race has yet to be run. What matters now is two things: Money and organization. The front-runner will have it. Any of the other challengers have yet to rise to the top.

    2) There is still time for another entrant. I agree someone might come in but they better do it quick if they want to have a chance. The only possible exception would be Jeb Bush as he'd have immediate money and organization. Maybe Christie. Just barely. Everyone else would be tilting at windmills unless they are positioning themself for VP or a future run.

  11. Stan Gibilisco 2011.08.18


    As a South Dakota Republican (on paper, anyway), I basically agree with the Wall Street Journal editorial, but what we've got right now will do the job.

    I believe that either Romney or Perry would beat Obama in a general election held today. Bachmann or Palin, no.

    Here's the catch: If Donald Trump, thinking (mistakenly) that he can win, enters the race as an independent, he will split the Republican vote, and Obama will sail into a second term no matter who runs on the Republican ticket.

  12. Steve Sibson 2011.08.18

    Who do you think I favor?

    Certainly not the top two in the Iowa straw poll.

  13. Steve Sibson 2011.08.18


    The two versions are 180 degrees opposite.

  14. Bill Fleming 2011.08.18

    Sibby, you like Ron Paul. I bet Troy likes Huntsman. Just hunches.

  15. Steve Sibson 2011.08.18

    Huntsman, a former governor? That means the National Governors Association has him linked up with the NWO Esablishment. Like I said, Troy will be getting an invite from Bilderbergers any day now.

  16. troy jones 2011.08.19

    Steve, do these burgers need catsup?

    You keep mentioning this food invite. And you cant guess who I'd vote for if the election were held today?

  17. Nick Nemec 2011.08.19

    I like mustard with my burgers.

    Troy will vote for whoever the GOP nominates. It could be sister Sarah, Ron Paul or the Vikings 3rd string quarterback, as long as they are under the GOP column.

  18. Troy Jones 2011.08.19


    Another way to say it it, I will not vote for Obama as I believe a random pick from the Highmore phone book would give us a better and more competent President. :)

  19. Steve Sibson 2011.08.19

    "I will not vote for Obama as I believe a random pick from the Highmore phone book would give us a better and more competent President."

    You just answered your question to me. You will vote for which ever candidate the GOP Establishment puts forward. It does not matter if it is candidate A, B, or C; the people in rule of the Establishment wins and will continue to rule the day. And by the way, they also control Obama.

Comments are closed.