The Right Scoop
Rick Perry has his adman to thank for his success. He cannot speak coherently in real time, and is simply too unintelligent to lead our nation. To continue to S carolina on the Texas taxpayer's dime is pure vanity. What a Christian.
Oh. That was a great ad. At first viewing, I was left with a feeling of quixotic jingoism, without quite knowing why. But, it took me a few more gos to really "get" the intracies of the Ad and the subtleties of the message contained therein. I don't want to ruin it for you, if you've only seen it once so far, but what really hit the message home for me were the shots of the Iowa farm lands, white people, the stars and stripes, cathedral spires, white people, the stars and stripes, church windows, white people in hats, the stars and stripes, white people at rallies, the cross, white people at church, white people, and finally, white people. Jefferson himself would be proud.
Here are some more;
http://www.voicesempower.com/the-texas-budget-boondoggle-part-2/
http://jobsanger.blogspot.com/2011/06/texas-budget-smoke-mirrors-lies.html
http://reason.com/blog/2011/08/15/rick-perrys-balanced-budgets
Perry Claims Federal Stimulus ‘Didn’t Create Any Jobs,’ Ignoring The 50,000 It Created In Texas
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/08/18/299174/rick-perry-stimulus-no-jobs/
Perry ducked state law on disclosing some stimulus money
Sources
U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Texas employment data. accessed 30 Aug 2011.
U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National). accessed 30 Aug 2011.
Weinstein, Bernard L., professor of business economics, Southern Methodist University. Interview with FactCheck.org. 30 Aug 2011.
Lavine, Dick. senior fiscal analyst, Center for Public Policy Priorities. Interview with FactCheck.org. 29 Aug 2011.
Fikac, Peggy and Patrick Danner. “Government fuels Texas jobs.” San Antonio Express-News. 26 Aug 2011.
U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Local Area Unemployment Statistics. accessed 30 Aug 2011.
U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Selected Labor Force Statistics, Texas and U.S. 19 Aug 2011.
U.S. Census Bureau. State and Country QuickFacts, Texas. accessed 30 Aug 2011.
U.S. Census Bureau. National and State Population Estimates, Components of Population Change. Cumulative Estimates of the Components of Resident Population Change for the United States, Regions, States, and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2009 (NST-EST2009-04). accessed 30 Aug 2011.
Texas Office of the State Demographer. Texas: Demographic Characteristics and Trends. Texas State Data Center. 19 Aug 2011.
Wial, Howard, economist and fellow, The Brookings Institution. Interview with FactCheck.org. 30 Aug 2011.
Smith, Virginia. “Shale gas is producing jobs, stimulating the economy.” Houston Chronicle. 11 Sep 2009.
Burtless, Gary, senior fellow in economic studies, The Brookings Institution. Email interview with FactCheck.org. 26 Aug 2011.
U.S. Energy Information Administration. Cushing, OK WTI Spot Price FOB (Dollars per Barrel). accessed 30 Aug 2011.
Texas Office of Consumer Credit Commissioner. Home Equity Loans in Texas: Frequently Asked Questions. accessed 30 Aug 2011.
Nussbaum, Debra. “Spending It: Focus on Home Equity Loans — 125 Percent Loans; Bigger Amounts May Bring Bigger Risks.” New York Times. 22 Mar 1998.
U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis. Bearfacts, Texas. 7 Jun 2011.
Mildenberg, David. “Texas Legislators Pass Two-Year Budget That Shorts Schools by $4 Billion.” Bloomberg. 28 May 2011.
Texas Legislative Budget Board. Summary of Conference Committee Report on House Bill 1 for the 2012–13 Biennium. May 2011.
Texans for Public Justice. “Phantom Jobs: The Texas Enterprise Fund’s Broken Promises.” 8 Sep 2010.
U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Minimum Wage Workers in Texas – 2010. 28 Mar 2011.
Kaiser Family Foundation. Health Coverage & Uninsured. statehealthfacts.org. accessed 30 Aug 2011.
Carnevale, Anthony P., et. al. “Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements Through 2018.” Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. Jun 2010.
Lol...you guys are to funny. Kevin I thought I was the only one over 50. Lol. Reading glasses sell for real cheap at Walgreens. :D
Per your link:
''Only 12 states bucked the trend of dropping state workers from the rolls.
In Texas, the number of state government employees rose by more than 7,300 between 2007 and 2011. ''
So Rick Perry's administration is increasing not shrinking!!!!!!!! And this is from your link!!! So explain how you can say it is shrinking when the government roles in Texas are increasing?
Whatever your drinking let me know because it must be great!
If I were in Iowa, this is the guy I would have supported. Sadly, it's looking like he is the Fred Thompson of this election cycle.
I like him but his boat set sail when he fumbled in the debates. He will never live those down.
Where do you think the US Bureau of Labour Statistics got their information? It came from the State of Texas that's where and as to your stats from the FED they are apples and oranges because they are not comparing the same things nor are they total annual numbers...your cut and paste says only 1/2 year since July (assuming 2011) My numbers are annual figures reported to the US Bureau of Labour Statistics by Texas and a report on the entire length of Rick Perry's time in office. The FED numbers appear to be monthly reports and do not reflect the entire timeperiod so again....you are cherry picking figures and they do not even match my annual and total tenure figures.
Use google and search those links. I have no idea why they do not work now. When I listed them they worked just fine. Those are the sources plus and article from Neal Cavuto but I forgot the link.
was I replying to you? I don't think so. As a national issue yes unemployment is a problem. Be we were discussing the breakdown of the Texas poverty line issue and unemployment had nothing to do with that. But since you have butted into this with your comment....you are right unemployment on a national level is the issue. So is spending and growth of government. That is a major warning light on Rick Perry because what he says and what his record says are exact opposites!
I think this is happening en masse (people giving him a second look). Perry is coming on strong, I just wish this Caucus was two weeks from now instead of today.
Can you not read?? Under Perry private sector employment has grown only 10 percent while government sector employment has out paced at 18.3 percent. So your arguement is a stupid one to make. Government should only grow at a MAXIMUM rate of 1/3 of the private sector...NOT THE REVERSE!
A darn good ad indeed. This is why I'm taking a second look at Perry. I'm torn between the two Governor's Romney and Perry and former Speaker. HELP!!! I don't live in Iowa but if I did I would have a tough decision to make, I live in loonyville aka Kalifornia, California.
Unemployment is not the issue. The issue is poverty level employment. Everyone could be employed if they all made minimum wage but I don't think the quality of life would be as nice as if you made more money and could afford to send your children to college.
So the question is more a point of quality of life or above poverty level lifestyle.
TEXAS BALANCE BUDGET AMMENDMENT
I did some digging and re-read the laws on Texas. Sorry to inform you but, the balanced budget ammendment in Texas is a joke!!!
As to the Texas Balanced Budget Ammendment/Law. You are correct it was passed in July of 2011. But it is a big huge coverup because the only way to get it through the legislature was to rig the accounting practices changing the way the State Budget is accounted. It does NOT include special projects, a large portion of school funding laws (i.e. removing form State budget), ignoring a growing population and delaying payments on bills coming due via a rollover process perpetually deferring actual impact until the next legislative session and the next and the next and the next (another accounting trick that just kicks the can down the road). I also contains provision that sweeping pet projects into an unfunded liabilities are that will fall outside of the State Budget (i.e. a huge black hole) and not be accounted for in that years budget.
The balanced budget ammendment also does not contain any provisions for the 31 billion in State Debt already incurred and turns it into a general unfunded liability fund where interest accrued does not fall under the State Budget.
Can you say this is one big lie???
I can....this is just one big lie because nothing is balanced!!!!!
You just say its not in the State budget and falls into the unfunded liabilities area and presto...chango....your budget is balanced.
This is a house of cards where tax and spend politicians are just kicking the can down the road. Some day real soon Texas is going to be bankrupt and it will come really fast because politicians will just sweep deficit spending under the rug and say it does not exist. This will be very very ugly when it finally comes apart and I feel sorry for Texans when it does.
People, in the real world, go to jail for things like this....!!!! Is this really how you want a President to fix the debt issue....just covering it up and saying it does not exist???
This is not bad....this is really really really bad and makes the State of Texas look like a bunch of liars.
Here is some sources:
http://wps.prenhall.com/hss_dye_politics_6/27/7115/1821680.cw/index.html
http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/pol...
http://www.newschannel10.com/c...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
lastly, while he is a liberal jerk he does have valid sources and good writeup.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01...
P.S. Texas also has taken 6 billion in Federal Stimulus money in 2011 that also accurs interest and must be paid back. (its also an accounting trick that is not included in the 31 billion outstanding debt....threfore actual true debt is 37 billion)
Your exclamation points and links provided have convinced me: Rick Perry is corrupt and incompetent. He was overwhelmingly re-elected due to voter fraud and all the people moving there are only doing so to collect welfare checks he's handing out.
I never said Perry was corrupt and incompetent. I said he is a GW Bush tax and spend politician what will grow the debt and government. So your sarcasm doesn't work.
So you're supporting Michelle Bachmann right? She's the purest candidate we have, although she's only been in the House for two terms. All others can be knocked down the same we you knock down Perry. Easily.
Perry is the only guy, out of the conservatives we have to choose from, that has governed a state (for 10 years). A state he has been overwhelmingly re-elected, whereas Mr. Santorum lost by the largest margin ever by a sitting senator. He goes from that loss to being the president? Shouldn't he have rebounded first with a mayoral or water commissioner win? Dog catcher...something. I guess if you live in Iowa for two years and have a meal with every person in the state you stand a good chance of doing well...in Iowa.
Not true. Bachmann also has baggage and is an earmarker just like anyone else in Congress.
The point of this is that there are only 3 real Conservatives in this race. Santorum, Gingrich, and Bachmann. Of the 3 only one has a proven record of actually making a balanced budget and paying down on Federal Debt and shrinking the size of government with no accounting tricks. That would be Gingrich. The most Conservative and a true defense hawk is Santorum who also has manny accomplishment but has less leadership than Gingrich. Lasty comes Bachmann who while Conservative has no record to speak of and no Accomplishments of success. (Too green and not ready) We don't need another Greenie like the current President in office even if she is Conservative. Also, there is no way Bachmann can win Iowa polling less than 8% and has gambled it all on Iowa or she is dead in the water.
Perry while a social Conservative is a GW Bush clone that will just allow for more debt and spend spend spend. Definitely what the nation does not need.
So in my humble opinion Santorum is the Strongest of the Conservative Candidates followed by Gingrich. If Perry got the nomination I would hold my nose and vote for him over Obama, Romney or Nutcase Ron Paul in a heartbeat.
Rick Santorum received very high ratings from mainstream conservative groups during his time in the House (two terms) and the Senate (two terms):
American Conservative Union -- 88%
National Right to Life Committee -- 100%
Americans for Tax Reform -- 95%
National Tax Limitation Committee -- 92%
U.S. Chamber of Commerce -- 88%
League of Private Property Voters -- 94%
As to his 2006 defeat; yes, the Arlene Spector issue was a bone of contention with Conservatives but one of the main reasons was Pennsylvania had a 3:1 ratio of registered Democrats to Republicans. In 2006, Santorum sought re-election to a third term in the U.S. Senate. His seat was considered among the most vulnerable for Republicans, and he ran unopposed in the Republican primaries. That plus Santorum's seat was a prime target of Democratic efforts to gain Senate seats in the 2006 elections and with Bush's approval ratings in the toilet Republicans were in for a massacre which is what happened.
But that was then and this is now where it is just the reverse. The nations has a hated sitting President that is vunerable because of his crappy record. Rick Santorum has the experience,is a fiscal conservative having a voting record to prove it, has the conservative credentials, has proven leadership accomplishments and the toughness to take it to a weak Obama.
Rick Santorum can win!
Please. Santorum carried water for all of GWB's big government programs. He's a 'big government' conservative Republican who's strong on social issues.
He has little appeal/charisma that's crucial in the general and no $. He would be a good president, but he can't win so it's either Perry or Romney (Gingrich has even less of a shot). Unless conservatives realize this then it will Romney which isn't the end of the world if we get a conservative Senate and House.
Read this: http://minx.cc/?post=324875
Please do not be swayed by ads designed to stir your emotions. A WOW ad will not earn my vote.
Voters whose positions change as easily as a willow in a breeze will ultimately choose the wrong.
We aren't buying corn flakes we are hiring the next Republican candidate for president.
I will make my choice based on a proven track record and on the candidates principles not on a slick ad campaign.
Ok then vote for him for his record.
The add though can be effective for those who are right brain dominant. Sadly, not enough people make their decisions on a candidate based on your last line.
You can say what you will about Rick Perry. There's one fact that is undeniable: he has never lost an election. If he floods the other primary states with ads like this, we just might see the Texas magic happen and rescue us from the inevitable Mitt Rino.
Perry/Rice 2012 because I will have your back, but One-bama will knife you in the back.
It just so happens that HotAir just posted and article on VP choices and Condi Rice was among them.
There's a strange amount of buzz around her. She woul bust open this election. Order extra duct tape because heads on the Left would be exploding everywhere.
Hmmm. Didn't like the idea at first (former Bush admin folk aren't politically very sexy) but there's definitely upside. Of course if it were to happen, the mantra would be that she's way smarter than him blah blah.
I totally agree that Newt's ad is much more powerful than is Perry's.
While Newt's ad does stir your emotions it is based in facts while Perry's is based on pure emotion.
Very Presidential. Loved it! Hope he can re-craft it to fit the national stage if he makes it...
This looks like a vacuous, superficial Obama commercial. And Perry sounded so pretentiously breathless. I even had the brief sensation I was watching some televangelist.
I don't hate Perry, but God help us if we are swayed by such trifles as cult of personality.
Very Well Made Ad. Very Professional. He is becoming as slick as RINO Romney. Problem is that his record in Texas says he is just another Big Government, Deficit Spending politician.
During his tenure are Govenor of Texas the State Government has grown by 24%. In 2010 the State of Texas Government was the largest employer. (hmmm sounds alittle like someone else currently in office)
During just this last year as Governor he added an additional 15% more in debt (more than 1.2billion doallrs) to the State Debt of Texas. (currently at 31billion up from 27 billion in 2010)
Has not had a balanced budget and just deficit spend his entire tenure.
I like his conservative views on Social Issues but his past shows him to be just another big spender like GW Bush. We don't need that right now.
...and Santorum is a porker...by his own admission: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfYBJf6oFnk
Not only supported Arlen Specter, but actively campaigned against Pat Toomey.
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Santorum-Haunted-Pro-abortion-Specter/2011/12/31/id/422684
And Newt is a skilled adulterer who's cozy with anthropogenic global warming theory. Also, he took $ from an organization that was partly responsible for global economic collapse. A devotee of Alvin and Heidi Toffler...oh my!
More vetting needed for both I guess.
Earmarks are not bad. It is the job of Congress to earmark funds to the States and appropriate funds of the Federal Government under the Constitution as the nations purse holder. So that is a moot point.
(for further information see Constitution of the United State of America)
Arlen Specter support is fully explained by the Glenn Beck interview of Rick Santorum and he provides an excellent reason for that decision.
http://www.therightscoop.com/rick-santorum-on-the-glenn-beck-show/
As to your Newt attacks....you are just playing the 17 point attack that all the paulbots were using back in December that are all half truths and false. If you want to play that game I have the actual facts and truths on each one. I did the research! Warning better know about each one because I do....(example what do you know about the Toffler and what is so bad? here is a hint....there is none because the charge is a false flag so don't even try)
Newt is not a lawyer either. Newt was in college and then doctorate program which were ,at the time, automatic deferments. By the time he exited college it was all over and there was no draft.
As to divorce....can you say Ronald Reagan. He broke that taboo.
Beck didn't buy it. The reality is that Santorum not only endorsed Specter, but campaigned for Specter and bashed Toomey on the stump. Not good. But he was paid back in the mother of all political whoopins in '06. Shortly thereafter he started campaigning and living in Iowa...;-)
How about Newt was married, then cheated on his wife and then divorced her for another woman who he then cheated on and divorced = political road kill.
Newt was eligible for the Vietnam. Why didn't he serve? Chickenhawk? I only make the charge that the media will in the general.
Perry? Oh yeah, he's the only candidate that has served his country. And to boot, he's not a lawyer. Win.
WOW!!! His patriotism seems to be unrivaled in this election...I think Perry just moved up a spot on my list!
He's the only one (other than R. Paul but he's not a Republican) that has served his country...flew C-130's.
This ad is wonderful and shows Perry for who is is, a honest caring patriotic man.
Rick Perry is the real deal. Perry is a very honest, honorable man who is a true consistent conservative. A proven good record at governing. Rick Perry can easily beat Obama, just contrast their records and Perry wins hands down.
Go Perry 2012
Sounds like he'd make a good neighbor. None of what you list qualify him to lead our Nation. The fact is, he is grossly unqualified and too unintelligent to lead this country.
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.