Rick Perry interview on The O'Reilly Factor

Rick Perry's Latest Ad

GOP Presidential Debate 11/9/11

Last night's debate will be going down in the history books.  Not for reasons I'd like, that much is certain.  However, I think this gaffe by Gov. Perry is being blown out of proportion.  Rather than do an order of who did the best-to-worst on this one, I'm just going to give you some thoughts on all the candidates' performances in order of current polls.  My order is going to be very similar to ones before this, so just enjoy my thoughts on each person.

Mitt Romney.  Everything I hear from the media says how wonderful Mitt Romney is, how polished, composed, and articulate he looks and sounds in every debate.  Yes, they're right.  However, Mitt is starting to look like a robot to me.  He "never" makes a mistake, something that is, eventually, going to happen, or even has happened, to every Presidential candidate.  Every one of them is human, and Mitt has so far avoided that fact.  His time for mistakes will come eventually, and I think it would be better if it happened on a stage with other GOP candidates, rather than on a stage with President Obama.  By making mistakes now, you become better informed of what you need to work on.  Last night, Mitt did nothing to hurt himself, but did nothing spectacular.  Most of what he said was general talking points.  I still can't shake the feeling that Mitt is in this for himself, not for the next generation of Americans.  Oh, and one of my all-time favorite lines in a Presidential debate:  Asked why Americans could trust him not to flip-flop on issues as President, Mitt answered:  "I've been married to the same woman for 25, oh, excuse me, I'll get in trouble, 43 years."  Somehow, I don't see that making the cut.

Herman Cain.  The Herman Cain we saw last night was certainly different from the one we've seen in previous debates.  Instead of the happy, jovial businessman, we saw an unhappy, almost miserable, Herman Cain who only gave true answers to some questions.  Many answers were simply brought back to the fact that America "needs" his 9-9-9 plan.  At one point, after the third or fourth time of mentioning it, the audience started laughing; which shows that, in order to keep his plan in credible standing with the American people, mention of it needs to be scaled back a bit.  Maria Bartiromo went out on a limb to ask Cain about the recent accusations against him (overall, was not a good night for Maria Bartiromo!).  Between the booing crowd and Cain's denial of doing anything wrong, the matter was closed very quickly.

Newt Gingrich.  It has been proved without a doubt that this man is brilliant.  He finally found his niche when it comes to debating and consistently gives strong, solid performances.  I always love to watch his banter with the moderators, sometimes even the way he scolds them for unnecessary or biased questions.  Maria Bartiromo certainly got her dose of Newt's medicine when she asked him how, specifically, the media has been wrong about the state of the economy.  I, honestly, do not believe that Newt can win the nomination.  The establishment would never let that happen; which is a shame in itself.  The establishment truly needs to get out of the nominating process and let the people choose their own nominee.  The same goes for the media.  Overall, strong performance by Newt, once again.

Rick Perry.  Here we go.  I'm going to get much disagreement over my opinion on this, but I'm going to say it anyway.  Gov. Perry's "gaffe" was not that bad!  Yes, it was a mistake.  It could even be classified as a bad mistake.  However, it was in no way "campaign-ending."  Every single person on that stage is human.  Most people already knew that about Gov. Perry before last night, but now it's been made official.  Why is that such a big deal?  With the numerous unnecessary federal agencies we currently have in place, it's no wonder it took the Governor a moment to bring to mind the specific one he was thinking of.  The fact that people are using this to question Gov. Perry's ability to debate President Obama is, frankly, a bit ridiculous.  President Obama has never worked to abolish any government agencies; rather, he's created many more.  On that point, any candidate on the stage could debate President Obama.  That is of almost no concern.  Even news anchors are saying, "Memory lapse, we've all been there, haven't we?"  Something that I have been waiting to hear from one of these Presidential candidates is the fact that they will fight for the next generation.  I heard it for the first time last night, and it came from Governor Perry.  He said, specifically, that he would fight for the next generation.  Overall, good debate performance before and after his slip.  During that slip, well...you make that decision.

Ron Paul.  Rep. Paul was one of the two people on the stage last night who had virtually nothing to lose based on his performance (the other was Mitt Romney).  Ron Paul has a steady stream of supporters who aren't going anywhere, anytime soon.  Personally, I do not agree with many of Rep. Paul's opinions.  The one line from him last night, though, that I agree with, was this:  When asked, if the student loan program was abolished, how people were supposed to pay for their college education (again, asked by Maria Bartiromo!), Paul responded, "The same way they pay for their cell phones and computers!"

Michele Bachmann.  Rep. Bachmann has mostly faded into the rest of the pack after winning the Iowa Straw Poll in August.  Last night's debate performance was different from the previous ones, and I think she did better last night than she ever has before.  She gave deeper answers and offered solutions to some issues, rather than just repeating talking points.

Rick Santorum.  I think we are, sadly, nearing the end of Rick Santorum's campaign.  His poll numbers are just not rising enough to sustain his Presidential bid.  I am a huge fan of Sen. Santorum, and I wish his campaign had gotten more of a start earlier in the race.  Many people have issues with the fact that he is such an outspoken supporter of traditional marriage and the sanctity of life.  This is part of the reason I am a fan of his!

Jon Huntsman.  For the first time, Jon Huntsman actually earned a bit of admiration from me last night.  He was the first person to go after Mitt Romney-- however small the attack, after being prodded by the moderator to do it, and even after he almost apologized for it while saying it.  He was the first person I have seen in a debate, outside of the fight between Gov. Perry and Mitt in the last debate, to truly go after Romney on something of huge importance.  Other than that...I've got nothing on Huntsman.

Many are saying that last night's debate, especially Gov. Perry's memory lapse, will be shown on news reels for years to come.  It is being called one of the worst debate moments in modern Presidential debate history.  However, I think Mitt Romney's response in the last debate was a bit worse:  "I can't have illegals, I'm running for office, for pete's sake!"  I don't know about the rest of America, but I'd rather have a human who can make mistakes as my President, than someone who looks like a robot and will do whatever is needed to win the highest office in the land.  I truly believe this needs to turn into a four-man race:  Mitt Romney, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Perry.  Those are the only four I believe still have a chance.  The rest...I like some of them.  I just don't think they have a chance at the nomination, and it would take away some distraction and give the other four more time in debates if these bottom four dropped out.  If we really want to defeat President Obama in 2012, conservatives need to get behind one candidate, not spread our support amongst four or five.  Having a smaller field will help us do that.

Herman Cain Allegations

A story has surfaced recently that accuses GOP Presidential hopeful Herman Cain of sexual harassment while he was head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s.  Supposedly, two different women filed complaints against Cain for harassment, and both received settlements to remain mum about what happened.  A third woman has also come out, saying that he harassed her as well, and she feared losing her job if she failed to do as he asked.  There are also, though very minor, claims from an Iowa radio host stating that when Cain came in for an interview, he made comments to two female employees that made them uncomfortable.

The catch in all this?  These are all anonymous allegations.  Politico broke this story earlier this week with no proof that any of these claims are true.  You would think that, in this case, Mr. Cain could come out and disregard the rumors.  He claims they aren't true, so what else would he have to do?  If they are really false, all he needs to do is come out and say very strongly that there is no credibility to these accusations.  Instead, Mr. Cain first came out saying that there was no settlement because he "didn't do nothin' wrong!"  Since then, the Cain campaign has been all-consumed with finding out who leaked this story to the press.  Personally, I feel this is the wrong way to address this.  If there is no substance to these claims, why be so determined to find out who leaked them?  Why not continue with the campaign as usual, knowing that when you run for President, you're going to find those people who want to tear you down. 

As of yesterday, the Cain campaign adamantly believed that the Rick Perry campaign was somehow behind this story.  Apparently, a pollster named Curt Anderson worked for Cain during his Senate run in 2004 (which he lost).  Cain claimed yesterday that Anderson was the only person he told about these allegations then, to make sure he knew if they ever came out publicly.  Cain says that he told Anderson of one claim, though, not two.  In a later interview yesterday, Cain said he was "almost certain" he told Anderson about the allegations.  The catch in this one?  Curt Anderson was recently brought on to the Rick Perry campaign, giving Cain reason to believe that Anderson leaked the story.  Mr. Anderson denies that he leaked this story to Politico, and has given them full permission to publicly say if he was the source of this story.  Since Politico has not yet done that, it gives reason to believe that Anderson was not the leak. 

Really, though, why does it matter where the story came from?  If this really happened, it should not be of such concern who brought it up.  We should be glad that this came up before the primaries so if these stories are true, the voters know before they go to the polls.  At this point, these sources are still anonymous.  The lawyer for one of the women who filed harassment claims against Cain in the 1990s is speaking with the NRA, and urging them to release her from the confidentiality agreement.  This story has only been out for a week and more than fifty stories have been released in the news about it.  One thing is certain, though:  We need answers, and fast.  Enough of dripping information out to keep people interested; people are going to become disinterested if this keeps up.  We need to know the truth about whether these allegations are true.  Mr. Cain should not be running from them and instead trying to find the person who leaked the story.  If they're such outrageous claims, why not say so every chance you get, rather than focus on finding the "culprit."

Perry's 2nd Iowa TV Ad

First TV Ad in Iowa for Rick Perry

Below is Governor Rick Perry's first television ad to air in Iowa. 

Another ad released by Perry camp

The tensions between Governor Perry and Mitt Romney continue to escalate, with the Romney campaign releasing http://careerpolitician.com/ and the Perry campaign releasing this video.  Personally, I think this video speaks volumes.

Debate Review 10/18/11

Let me start off by saying, I do not like when CNN sponsors these GOP debates.  They are too biased against every one of these candidates to properly moderate a debate.  Last night's debate was crucial for a couple reasons.  First, this was Herman Cain's first debate as an "official" frontrunner.  Second, this was looked upon by many as Rick Perry's last chance to gain his momentum back.  Third, Mitt Romney just needed to "keep his cool" and for him, nothing would change.  Here is my order, who did the best, to who did the poorest, based on what was said last night.  I will have facts to support all of my conclusions (since my order is almost always different from everyone else's).

#1: Rick Perry.  I know that there will be many people who disagree with me on this.  They will say that Governor Perry came across as rude, arrogant, and sometimes, just downright obnoxious.  However, for the most part, I have to disagree.  I think the governor came across as much more aggressive in this debate.  He proved that he would be able to debate President Obama.  He showed some energy and was prepared to take on both Romney and Cain.  I believe he truly did enough to bring this back to a two-man race.  He was the first person to really trip Mitt Romney up with true facts.  Here are facts to support why I put him in first place:  I believe that he is the first person to truly challenge Mitt Romney's "frontrunner" status.  There was a moment that was very intense between them, going back and forth over immigration.  Every word that Governor Perry said about Governor Romney's stance on this issue is true.  Secondly, I agree with Governor Perry that we need to drill for our own energy and create more jobs through that.  I agree with him that "the idea that we should not have our freedom of religion" is not right.  Lastly, we should defund the UN.  All of this is aside from the fact that I believe Governor Perry is the most qualified to be our president.

#2: Rick Santorum.  I believe Rick Santorum came in second in this debate, based on his statement that "the basic unit of society is the family."  I agree with him that, while creating jobs is important, every other candidate on that stage continues to overlook that fact.  Without the family, our society would be completely different.  They are the reason we are what we are today, and people need to remember that.  Another answer of Santorum's that I liked was his response to a question about a candidate's religion.  Asked about whether a candidate's religion should come into play when people choose who to support, his answer was that people need to not only look at religion, but at a person's values as well.  They should look at what their religion teaches and come to conclusions on what their values are.  Those are the reasons I believe Santorum placed this high.  Honestly, I do not think he has a chance at getting the nomination.  I do, though, believe that he is a strong voice for the traditional family that should not be ignored.

#3: Newt Gingrich.  Where to start with Newt?  I always say, he comes out strong in every debate.  One thing I do like about Newt is that he hardly ever attacks his opponents.  In fact, he sometimes even praises them.  He said that Herman Cain "deserves a lot of credit" for proposing a "very big idea" on tax reform.  I agree with him that it would be "very troubling" to have a president who would not take any faith into consideration when making decisions.  Where, he wants to know, would that person receive their guidance from?  It just doesn't work that way.  It would be very troubling to have a president who abandons religion.  (Just a quick fact, it was Mitt Romney that said he would abandon all religion as president.)

#4: Mitt Romney.  I really am not fond of Mitt Romney.  I don't know what it is, but something about him makes me believe he is in this solely for personal gain.  This debate was the first time, I think, we have seen him "lose his cool."  Many times through the duration of the debate, he was attacked hard, accurately, which made it harder for him to respond.  One thing I did agree with him on was that "we are an energy-rich nation that is acting like an energy-poor nation."  Other than that, I felt it was mostly downhill.  I felt he was very rude to Governor Perry on the issue of immigration.  He broke in during the governor's speaking time, then asked Governor Perry to stop talking.  He used a patronizing tone that I don't think will sit well with very many people.  Telling another candidate, "if you want to be President of the United States, you've got to learn to let other people speak" is not something you have a right to say.  The way that he put his hand on Governor Perry's shoulder and referenced his previous bad debate performances was disrespectful.  Mitt Romney has lied to the American people, evidenced by the fact that his book in paperback was not the same book that was in hardcover.  He edited words out when it suited his presidential run.  One thing I've noticed about Mitt; when he starts to lose composure, he laughs and his eyes get very red.  Watch videos from this debate and see if you notice the same thing.  Overall, this was Mitt's first, real, bad debate.

#5: Michele Bachmann.  Honestly, I feel like we hear most of the same things from her in every debate.  I do agree with repealing ObamaCare, as she does.  As she puts it, even the Obama Administration wants to repeal it, and they are arguing with themselves over it.  I agree with her that "we should not be cutting foreign aid to Israel", and that we should "look to Iraq and Libya to reimburse us for involvement in their wars."  We should also be looking to Egypt for reimbursement.  All of that foreign aid was wasted taxpayer money, as Congresswoman Bachmann makes clear.  As much as I do like her, I think her campaign has deflated beyond repair.

#6: Herman Cain.  We didn't hear much from Herman in this debate.  The first fifteen minutes were entirely devoted to his 9-9-9 plan, but after that he pretty much remained silent.  I do not think he did a sufficient job of defending his 9-9-9 plan, I think he could have done better.  His answer about negotiating with terrorists was not exactly clear to me.  One thing I do agree with is the fact that he will not apologize for wanting to "protect the American people, protect our border agents, and protecting our border."  Other than that, I am tempted to say this debate was a loss for Herman Cain.

#7: Ron Paul.  "Those people at Guantanamo aren't terrorists, they haven't been convicted of anything!"  Enough said.

Overall, I believe this debate was damaging for both Cain and Romney.  It was Romney's first bad debate.  Whether it was beneficial to Perry is yet to be seen.  It was very interesting to watch the exchange between Governor Perry and Governor Romney.  You can watch video of it and read the transcript here.  So interesting that Governor Romney says, "I'm running for office, for Pete's sake, I can't have illegals."  From this, it sounds like he only cared about employing illegals because he was running for office and didn't want it to hurt his chances.  This debate, though, like all of them, was fun to watch.  Debates are definitely good ways to get to know a candidate.  Not the only way, but a good way.

Rick Perry: America's Jobs Governor

The latest ad released by the Rick Perry campaign.

More Interesting Reads...

This first one is by the political analyst who was the first to say, in 2007, that Barack Obama would be our next president.  http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/06/24/five-reasons-why-believe-texas-governor-rick-perry-will-be-our-president-in/

Next is an article by Politico that says Mitt Romney may be "too unlovable to be inevitable."  http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1011/66113.html

Last article is about Herman Cain, and an interview he did on Meet the Press yesterday.  It outlines one of his opinions on gay marriage and some thoughts on foreign policy.  While most are covering what was said about 9-9-9 in this interview, these are two things most news stations are not sharing.  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/cain-missteps-on-foreign-policy-and-gay-marriage/2011/03/29/gIQAJWbtpL_blog.html

Drill, Baby, Drill!

Rick Perry unveiled the first part of his jobs plan this morning, promising to create 1.2 million jobs.  "The quickest way to give our economy a shot in the arm is to deploy American ingenuity to tap American energy,"  the governor said at a steel plant in Pennsylvania.  Today is his first major policy speech and is what he hopes will give his campaign a boost as well.  "My plan will break the grip of dependence we have today on foreign oil from hostile nations like Venezuela and unstable nations in the Middle East to grow jobs and our economy at home."  Governor Perry is right.  We have nearly unlimited natural gas, oil, and coal resources that are being wasted.  By not drilling on and off shore for our own energy, we give other countries the chance to do so.  An example of this is the fact that Cuban workers are set to begin drilling for oil off the Florida Keys in the coming months, using a Chinese-funded Spanish rig.  These nations will be profiting from our oil, that we could be taking advantage of, but we are not.  Not only that, but the odds of another disaster like the BP oil spill happening while these Cuban workers drill are at nearly 100%.  Those workers are just not skilled enough in how to drill properly, while the American oil workers are the best in the world.

Governor Perry believes that this is the best way to create the millions of jobs that are needed right now.  It would create thousands of jobs instantly.  Workers are needed to drill the oil, process it, then transport it across the country.  Not only that, but energy and gas prices would go down, since we would be supplying them ourselves instead of depending on another country for it.  We currently import nearly 49% (net) of our energy needs.  Drilling on and off shore is something we need to do, and have needed to for a long time.  This message of "drill, baby, drill" has been echoed by politicians before.  Probably most familiar, former Governor Sarah Palin put forth a similar message.  We need to actually do it.  One of the ways we can, to quote Governor Perry, is to tell the government environmental agencies to step down. 

I have personally read through this first part of Governor Perry's plan (energy is the first and largest part, but there is "more to come" for a further jobs plan in the near future, he says).  I found nothing that could be counted even controversial, unless you consider taking environmental agencies out of power to be controversial.  Governor Perry also wants to get rid of President Obama's Clean Air Act.  Unnecessary programs like that, that are costing millions if not billions of dollars, will be removed and that money will be used for drilling.  Governor Perry's plan is pure common sense.  Common sense solutions are something we need more of right now.  He says that it would not need Congressional approval to pass, making it realistically possible to begin drilling within the first 100 days of a Perry Administration.  This sets his plan apart from Mitt Romney's and Herman Cain's, both of which would need Congressional approval.  I have to admit that I have not read Governor Romney's plan, simply because I cannot find it.  Mr. Cain's plan, I have read, however when you read it, it just sounds "too good to be true," because it is.  When you look deeper, you can see the flaws, as aforesaid. 

I'm sure there will be flaws found in Governor Perry's plan, whether they be real or they come from those who oppose the governor.  Either way, I have read it through, and I believe it is an absolutely great idea that could create thousands of jobs instantly.  This is only the first phase of his plan, and I cannot wait to read the rest of it.  I encourage you, please, read Governor Perry's plan for yourself.  Do not rely on the national media to tell you about it.  Check it out for yourself and form your own opinion before you listen to the biased media.  Even this morning, Governor Perry went on five morning talk shows, where hosts were attempting to trip him up on questions.  The media has made it clear they oppose him.  Do not let those be the people who form your opinion on this plan for you.  Look at it for what it is; a good plan that could be exactly what we need right now.  This plan, even in its first stage, would erase dependency on foreign oil as well as create millions of jobs.

You can read the plan here:  http://www.rickperry.org/.

This video is not all about his jobs plan; the governor discusses a few different issues,

including Iran and securing the U.S.-Mexico border, along with his jobs plan..

Take out the attacks, and....

Challenge:  Look for videos of what each candidate says on their own in Presidential debates.  Take out all the attacks, all the rubbish that goes on in some of these debates, and it will amaze you how different some of these answers sound.  They can show you who really knows what they are talking about, and who is only focused on tearing their fellow competitors down.  Here's one example of a video like that.

GOP Debate Review 10/11/11

Tonight's debate in New Hampshire was very important for some of the candidates, for different reasons.  It was important for Governor Rick Perry, as this was probably his last chance to bring himself back up to frontrunner status.  It was important for Mitt Romney to keep his frontrunner status.  It was important for Herman Cain to prove that he has the intellect and knowledge to be able to govern a nation with no prior experience in governing anything.  For the rest of the candidates, well...I think this was truly their last chance at getting anywhere.  Some succeeded in that, and others did not.  Here is how I viewed each candidate's performance, going from who I believe did the best, and ending with who I believe did the poorest.

#1: Newt Gingrich.  Newt always comes out strong in these debates, and it is a shame he was never able to connect to the American people.  As a former Speaker of the House, he truly does have experience in dealing with people on both sides of the aisle.  As for tonight's performance, I definitely agreed with him that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has too much secret power, bailing out "one company but not another."  As always, the former Speaker took a jab at one of the moderators.  Instead of this becoming commonplace, I think it proves that Mr. Gingrich is not afraid to stand up to those who oppose him.  I love nearly all of his answers and I believe that, if given the chance to completely start his campaign over, he could have had a real chance.

#2: Rick Santorum.  His last answer in the debate put him in second place for me.  His answer about the reason for a struggling economy being a result of the family structure being destroyed was spot on, and I believe he deserves more credit for it than he will actually receive.  The truth, when you look at the numbers, is that families with two parents do better than families with one (in some cases, this is unpreventable.  What he meant was, marriage needs to once again become the definition of family).  Mr. Santorum did not receive much talking time prior to this answer in the debate.  As has been proven, though, one solid answer can be the difference between a mediocre debate performance and a stellar one.

#3: Rick Perry.  The Texas governor was in comfortable territory tonight:  Talking about economy and job creation.  Since Texas is number one in job creation, I believe Perry had a good chance of doing very well, and he did not disappoint.  He is not a "Mitt Romney debater", meaning that he does not come across right away as poised, polished, and sometimes, arrogant, but rather, he states what he means in a way that is easy to understand.  I do believe that the governor helped himself tonight; whether it was enough to bring him back into the lead is yet to be seen.  I do think, though, that he did do enough to at least regain co-frontrunner status with Mitt Romney.  Overall, I thought Gov. Perry improved immensely since the last debate and that he did a great job of reassuring the American people that he is very well qualified to be our next President.  My tip for the governor:  Go on every talk show you can.  Get yourself straight to the American people without seven other people, plus a couple moderators, just itching to make your words seem meaningless.  Talk straight to the people about what is of concern to them, and show them that you have a proven record of leading with successful results.

#4: Michele Bachmann.  I think the Congresswoman did very well tonight.  She answered her questions thoroughly and gave detailed answers, something that is not always easy to do.  There was nothing that really stood out about her performance, however.  I believe that, sadly, her campaign has gone downhill and cannot recover.  I did like how she went after Herman Cain's 9-9-9 tax plan, since there are flaws with it that no one had seemed to address until then.  Overall, nothing very spectacular about Congresswoman Bachmann's performance tonight.

#5: Mitt Romney.  This man is definitely a very well-poised and polished debater.  He knows what he is talking about and he knows how to say it.  However, in tonight's debate, he avoided quite a few of the questions directed his way.  When asked by Herman Cain, for example, if he could name all 59 points in his proposed jobs plan?  He did not answer, meaning no, but instead took the opportunity to talk about how great his plan is.  The problem is, by publishing a 59 point plan, a majority of people will not actually read the whole thing.  Mitt Romney is a very smart man, who I am sure has brilliant ideas for this country, but I believe he has too many flaws to actually be the president we need in 2012.  He is very moderate on many of his opinions, and his RomneyCare/ObamaCare issue continues to elevate.  Many times in the debate tonight, the former governor appeared very weak and afraid during his answers. 

#6: Herman Cain.  Honestly, some of the businessman's facts tonight were not straight.  How can he just, outright, say that the Washington Post Government findings are false?  He never looked at them.  Since they were negative toward the chances of his 9-9-9 plan succeeding, they were immediately false.  Also, he did say the federal reserve did not need to be audited, and tonight he claimed to have never said that.  His 9-9-9 tax plan does have flaws that need to be considered.  Every plan will, but when a plan is proposed by someone with a position such as Mr. Cain has right now, it should be looked into more thoroughly.  I believe that now that his 9-9-9 plan is receiving criticism, and people see that it may not work, he will begin to drop in the polls again.  He will remain a leader, but he will not be a frontrunner.  That is my personal opinion of what will happen.

#7: Ron Paul.  I think this is a first for me; not putting the Congressman in last place.  His debate performance can be summed up for me in one sentence:  get government out of everything.  Which really means:  everything would be even more chaotic than it is right now.

#8: Jon Huntsman.  Nothing I can even say about him.  I understood absolutely none of his answers, period.  I will not be a bit surprised when, in the coming weeks, he drops out and most likely endorses his cousin, Mitt Romney.

Rick Perry on Immigration

Texas Governor Rick Perry has been very criticized on many issues since announcing his Presidential campaign in August.  Some of that criticism has been understandable for those who did not previously know his record, and some of it has just been ridiculous.  Either way, I believe people should truly listen to his explanations, rather than listen to the media and those who want him to fail for the answer.  It is not fair that one candidate is so thoroughly vetted, while others are getting overlooked and nearly handed the nomination, all because the media has decided who they like best.

Illegal immigration and border security are two issues the governor has been criticized on the most harshly.  Most of the country had never heard of Rick Perry before he ran for president, nor did they know anything about his record.  Naturally, they would look to the media to tell them.  Since, from the start, the media has not been fond of Gov. Perry, they used this given opportunity to come down hard on him and sink his poll numbers.  They continue to lift up the candidates they like best, which will mean real trouble if people vote for them simply based on that.  That's another post, though.

When you look at Rick Perry's immigration stance on the surface, it does look weak.  He offered in-state tuition to children of illegals, and he does not support a border fence.  That is what the media will tell you.  They want you to believe every word they say.  When you really look deeper into his true record, though, you see that there are things the media is not telling you. 

When people say that the governor is opposed to a border fence, it sounds like he is for open borders.  Simply not supporting a border fence is not a border security position.  Being opposed to a border fence means that, since he is the only candidate with experience in dealing with the border firsthand, he believes a fence is not the only solution.  We need boots on the ground, something the federal government has repeatedly denied to give him more of.  What he really said was that a continual fence along the entire border was not the solution; he did not say he supports taking the current fence down.  Also, if you have ever been to the border, you would know that building a 1,200 mile fence along the entire thing would be horribly expensive, along with being bad for the environment, public and private.  He does support fences in strategically placed areas.  While you're thinking about weak stances on border security, why aren't the other candidates called weak on border security?  They could be, with good reason:  1) None of them have actual experience on the border; they just read about it and take opinions from that (I'm not saying that is their fault, but they do not have that experience), and 2) Every one of them believes a fence is the solution; and people actually do jump over that fence.  It could not possibly be the only solution.

People are overlooking the good things, which are clearly visible, that the governor has done on the border.  He opposes amnesty for illegals.  He signed a bill refusing them drivers' licenses.  He does not offer them Social Security or Medicare benefits.  That is only touching on what the governor has done on the border.

NumbersUSA gives every candidate a grade on issues they find important.  They have given the governor a D- on illegal immigration, the same grade given to Mitt Romney.  Michele Bachmann received a B-, the highest grade of the whole field.  This proves that their grades are not credible.  In fact, they state on their website, "These are not Report Cards on past actions, which matter but not as much as what these politicians now say in the news media or on official websites.  These grades and ratings are about what a Hopeful says a President should do about immigration.  We look at contradictions and changes in stances.  We generally give the most weight to the most recent statements and actions."  Based on that, they are not giving credible information.  Gov. Perry has never changed his stance on immigration.  Have any of the other candidates?  We do not know.  The only person whose position on immigration and border security matters, at least to the media, is Gov. Perry.  The rest of the candidates have coincidentally taken the same stanceo.  None of them "can" be attacked for it that way.  When the only candidate with real border experience has a different opinion than the people who have never governed that region, it ought to make people take a second look.

Sarah Palin Announcement

Sarah Palin announced through a statement, read by Mark Levin, this week that she will not be seeking the GOP nomination in 2012.  The reasons, she said, were family related, and she also believed that the title of president would somewhat "limit" her, and that she would somehow be prevented from being a "maverick."  This was a huge disappointment for many, many people, as huge numbers of them have been avid followers and fans of hers since she gave her RNC speech in 2008.  Governor Palin does have a patriot's heart, and it is obvious that she loves her country dearly.  I do believe she will one day be in a high office.  Perhaps not President, but a Cabinet position would not be at all surprising.

As much as I believe she would have made the race a bit more exciting, I think there are pros and cons as to her decision.  Cons, of course, are what I said above -- a true patriot who cares about fixing America's problems.  Pros could be, the fact that if she had announced her candidacy, nearly every media source would have hounded in directly on her.  It would have taken a huge amount of coverage from the rest of the candidates.  It also may have taken the spotlight from some of the very important issues being discussed within the race right now, since the media has shown repeatedly that they find Gov. Palin an open target (wrongly-- everyone should be vetted, but hers was just a bit much).

Sarah Palin fans everywhere are now deciding what to do next.  Many of them may wait to see if Gov. Palin endorses a current candidate.  If she does that, there is a very good chance that many of her supporters would turn to that candidate.  Some of them will turn toward other evangelical, grassroots Conservatives in the race, such as Governor Rick Perry or businessman Herman Cain.  Either way, those votes will now be divided up and could help choose the actual nominee.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie also announced that he is not running-- again.  He has said it repeatedly for the past year, but decided a few weeks ago to "reconsider" a run after being implored by so many.  Since he has kept the same decision for so long, I don't think anyone was really expecting him to change his mind in a week.  I personally do not see Gov. Christie the way most people do, in that they believe he would be the perfect candidate to come in and shake things up.  I believe that if he really did run for president, as he will probably do in the future, issues will come up regarding his past, just as they have for every other candidate.  No candidate will be perfect-- regarding their past, or in other areas such as speaking.  The longer someone has been in a high leadership position, such as governor, the more mistakes they will have in their resume.

Must we stoop to this level?

Another of the "Leftist" media's attempts to unravel Rick Perry's Presidential campaign.  Instead of focusing on the more important things, this is what a huge number of journalists and researchers were doing today:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/rick-perry-hunting-camp-controversy-what-you-need-to-know/2011/10/03/gIQANl3oIL_story.html.

Illegal Immigration

It's amazing how fast the national media seems to move from one topic to the next, never missing a beat.  They are completely focused on convincing the American public that this or that is the issue they need to be worried the most about today (or this week, whatever they feel like this time).

The big issue was Social Security; the need to "reform" it, and the comments some people were making about it.  Now, the big issue in the news is illegal immigration.

If you are even the slightest bit informed, you know that illegal immigration is a problem.  A study released by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) shows that illegal immigration costs federal and local taxpayers $100 billion a year.  No human mind can fully comprehend that.  Last year, there were approximately 11 million illegal immigrants, along with their U.S. born children, in the United States.  Even without doing the math, by looking at those two numbers side-by-side you can see how much this is costing us.  Per household, it does come out to roughly $1,000 a year.  Since illegal immigrants are not distributed evenly among the states, that rate is higher in states with higher illegal populations.  The prevention is not an easy job, but it is one that needs to start, beginning with the federal government doing their part to help.

The fence at the border between the United States and Mexico is the main thing being used to keep illegal immigrants out.  It is approximately 650 miles long, 21 feet high and 6 feet into the ground, cemented in a 3 foot wide trench.  It was made with 5,000 PSI concrete, making it a very strong fence.  Its physical strength, however, does not keep people who are determined to come in from coming.  They just jump over the fence, glad and at the same time, probably wondering how long it will take us to figure them out.

There are so many different opinions on how to secure the border, something that sorely needs to be done.  One was a bill proposed by Arizona governor Jan Brewer last year.  Immigration Law 1070 would require all immigrants to carry their registration or legal documents with them at all times and also gives police the right to question anyone who appears to be an illegal immigrant.  This sounds like a perfectly logical way to ensure your legal immigrants have the most opportunity to earn jobs, and also to ensure that dangerous illegals are not roaming the streets in your town.  This only presents a problem for those here illegally; if you are a legal immigrant, this will not affect you.

E-Verify screening is another option states can take advantage of to protect their population.  This national online database gives the immigration status of virtually everyone in the country.  Therefore, if your name is not on that list, you are not here legally.  This is a tremendous tool for employers to check someone's status before hiring them.  The Legal Workforce Act is currently pending in the House of Representatives, which would require all employers to use the E-Verify system before hiring an employee.  This would conflict with the bill that California governor Jerry Brown is getting ready to sign into law, which would not require employers to use E-Verify.

A fence on the border is one of the most debated issues right now.  Many are saying we need a better fence to keep illegals out.  However, statistics show that a fence will not keep them all out.  We have a fence right now, and people are still coming in.  That's not to say we should take the fence down.  What I'm saying is, we need additional assets to that fence in order for it to be as effective as possible.  Border agents are one of them.  We have thousands of border patrol agents on duty right now, standing guard at the border.  The sad thing is, many of these agents lose their lives protecting our border.  We need more help from our national government to further protect these agents.  Many of these agents are state-issued, meaning that the national government is not doing its part.

The use of more drones and "aviation assets" (to quote Texas Gov. Perry) are something we definitely need.  They will not completely take over border security, but rather add to what we have now.  More cameras to show us exactly where the "hot spots" for entering the U.S. are could also prove beneficial, for obvious reasons.

I'm not claiming to have all the answers on border security.  I don't think anyone does.  What I do know, though, is that we need all-hands-on-deck in order to get this under control.  The issue of illegal immigration is not something that will be solved overnight, nor will it be solved without the entire nation standing together to fix it.  We especially need our president to support drastic changes to immigration policy in general.  The border states are not the only ones to blame for immigration.  They should not be facing it on their own simply because they are the minority.  While it should be a state-issue (every state has its own specific needs), the rest of the country should be supportive of them and the federal government should be doing their part to aid them.

Immigration is a vital part of this nation, and is another side of what sets us apart..  Every other nation in the world has to have walls to keep people in; we have to have walls to keep people out!  Immigration is a great thing when done correctly.  We have a great system in place for obtaining legal citizenship, and it should remain that way.  We should be encouraging all those who come here to seek that citizenship the way thousands have for generations.  That system needs no change; what needs to be changed is how people are actually getting in, in the first place.

"One of the critical issues that we have to confront is illegal immigration, because this is a multi-headed Hydra that affects our economy, our health care, our education systems, our national security, and also our local criminality."  -Congressman Allen West.

Florida Straw Poll Results

Today was the Florida Straw Poll, following the GOP Presidential debate on Thursday night and CPAC FL conference yesterday.  The results of today's poll will come as a shock to many.  They definitely shocked me.

#1:  Herman Cain -- 37%
#2:  Rick Perry -- 15.4%
#3:  Mitt Romney -- 14%
#4:  Rick Santorum -- 11%
#5:  Ron Paul -- 10%
#6:  Newt Gingrich -- 9%
#7:  Jon Huntsman -- 2%
#8:  Michele Bachmann -- 1.5%

When I first saw the results, I could not believe that businessman Herman Cain won the straw poll!  He beat out both of the frontrunners to win it.  He really had a very strong showing at the debate on Thursday night, which I'm sure accounts for a huge amount of the votes he received.  This could really be the push that Mr. Cain needed.  After this, his campaign could take off.  While I do not think he is actually qualified to be president himself, I think he is more than able to lead in some way-- whether in a cabinet position or elsewhere.  This man is a true leader and deserves to be recognized.  America needs his experience and knowledge in business to fix this economy.  He would know what to do.  Not saying the other candidates do not, but it is certain that Mr. Cain would and does.

\The second thing that surprised me, and really, disappointed me, was Gov. Perry's "poor" performance in the straw poll.  He did come in second place, so not a disappointing outcome, so to speak.  The fact that second place was so far behind first just confirms that Thursday night was not Gov. Perry's strongest showing.  Nothing is over.  He has plenty of time to come back and prove to those who are doubting that he is the man for the job.  As someone said, if people want a smooth, eloquent speaker, they will re-elect President Obama.  We need someone with a true record.  The fact that Gov. Perry still came out ahead of Gov. Romney after all the attacks launched at him on Thursday night, assures Gov. Perry's supporters that he is still the "frontrunner." 

The last thing I was surprised by was Michele Bachmann.  Last place?!  After coming in first place in the Iowa Straw Poll, I was definitely expecting a strong finish from Rep. Bachmann.  Not so.  She finished last among the contenders, including behind Rep. Paul and former Gov. Huntsman, who I believe to be unable to win the nomination by any means.

An interesting statement came out from Gov. Perry's national press secretary, Mark Miner, who said, "Debates are part of the process but we are taking our message directly to the people. Mitt Romney has been doing debates and running for president for five and a half years and he comes in third. Must be a devastating loss for him and a morale buster for his campaign in a state like Florida after five and a half years."

Florida is set to be a huge battleground state and is on its way to being the clincher for the general election.  Since 1979, the person who has won the Florida Straw Poll has gone on to win the GOP nomination.  If that record holds true, we could have a real showdown come 2012.  People cannot tout the fact that Mr. Cain has no experience; then-Senator Obama had less than one year of Senate experience before he began his campaign for president.  He had no experience, business or political.  However, I do believe that Gov. Perry has the best chance against President Obama out of the current GOP field.  I think he has the best proven record of job creation.  He has more experience than almost all the other candidates combined.

You'll hear more from me about this showing in Florida.  My internet connection is not very good, but once I get it I will be voicing more of my opinions!

My thoughts-- GOP debate 9/22/11

This debate thought-sheet is going to be much shorter than my previous ones have been.  There were a few statements I thought were very, very good, or very, very bad.

"I will always err on the side of life."  This quote came from Gov. Rick Perry.  We have heard this before, but I believe it is something people need to pay a little more attention to.  Comparing this with former Gov. Romney's ever-changing stance on abortion, this is a strong statement to make.  It is very important for this country to "always err on the side of life."


"When countries vote against you consistently in the UN, you have to look at why are you really giving them money.  this world is in danger of becoming dramatically more dangerous in the near future."  Former Speaker Gingrich was talking about the possibility of a Palestinian state.  President Obama is actually supporting this.  It would make our world a much more dangerous place if this happened, and we need to stand with Israel and support them in their decisions regarding this.  Israel is, basically, our only true ally in the Middle East.


"92% of our people were insured before the healthcare mandate."  This comes from Gov. Romney.  I don't understand this.  If nearly all of your people were insured without a mandate, it required a state mandate in order to insure the other 8%?  Surely there must have been a different way.  It just really doesn't make sense to me.


"This economy is on life-support."  Another "I've heard it before", but this is a good one.  Herman Cain, though a businessman with no political experience, has been holding his own very well among the seasoned politicians. 

The quote of the night goes to former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson:  "My neighbor's two dogs have created more shovel ready jobs than Barack Obama."

The majority of the night went to Perry-Romney attacks, mostly on each other.  Obviously, since they are the two frontrunners at this point, they will be trying to out the other one and show that they are the better candidate.  I really do not think that they need to spend so much time on it.  They should be more focused on defeating President Obama than on attacking each other. 


The order I think the candidates placed in tonight: 
#1:  Newt Gingrich
#2:  Michele Bachmann
#3:  Rick Perry
#4:  Herman Cain
#5:  Mitt Romney
#6:  Rick Santorum
#7:  Jon Huntsman
#8:  Ron Paul
#9:  Gary Johnson

Honestly, Gov. Perry did not do as well as I would have hoped.  He stumbled on some of his answers, and he passed up some possible attacks on Gov. Romney.  On the flip side of that, this was Gov. Romney's worst debate performance so far, by avoiding many questions and not answering a question on whether he believed President Obama has very, very socialist views.  That makes Gov. Perry's performance even more disappointing.  He'll have to have a very strong showing at CPAC FL today in order to ensure he wins Florida.


Here are the answers on the last question, in case you missed it.


Who, out of the people on the stage with you, would you choose as your running mate?

Gary Johnson:  Ron Paul
Rick Santorum:  Newt Gingrich
Newt Gingrich:  "I have no idea"
Ron Paul:  "I have no idea" (copycat!)
Rick Perry:  Somewhere between Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich!
Mitt Romney:  Newt Gingrich
Michele Bachmann:  She avoided this question completely.
Herman Cain:  If Romney threw out his jobs plan and replaced it with his 9-9-9 program, he'd have a shot.  If not, Newt Gingrich.
Jon Huntsman:  Herman Cain.


Check back this weekend for another article on something that made me think tonight :)

The Leader We Need!