Tag: Perry

Why does PETA hate Katy Perry’s Breasts?

Donald Douglas has news of PETA’s savage attack on Katy Perry and her breasts. HATERS Gonna HATE!


At Variety:

Animal rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) recently slammed the use of animals in Perry’s video, which features the 28 year-old singer hanging out with monkeys, elephants and tigers.

“Animals used for entertainment endure horrific cruelty and suffer from extreme confinement and violent training methods,” a PETA spokesman said in a statement. “They often become stressed and anxious when hauled around and forced into unfamiliar or frightening situations.”

Oh goodness.

I’m sure Ms. Perry’s crew treated the animals well. Can’t folks have a little fun savagery these days?

Just PETA seeking some publicity, I just hope no Ms. Perry’s breasts are OK

Melissa Harris-Perry reaches a new level of stupidity

There are many stupid people wh often times just do not think. Then there the truly stupid people, who are not guilty of not thinking, they are just sincerely stupid. Then there is the Phil Donahue/Jimmy Carter Level of Stupidity. These two men, and others like them simply refuse to see thing that are glaringly obvious. 

So, like, um, well, ah, thinking makes my head hurts
So, like, um, well, ah, thinking makes my head hurt

Then there is Melissa Harris-Perry of MSNBS. She is so deep in the Pit of Eternal Liberal Stupidity that she might soon hit China, as The Lonely Conservative notes


Good grief, Melissa Harris-Perry weighed in on Detroit’s bankruptcy filing, and if this isn’t the dumbest piece of analysis of the problem offered to date I’ll eat my fork. She blamed it on small government. I kid you not, she told all three of her viewers that the reason Detroit is bankrupt is that the government is too small, and this is what Republicans want to do to all of our cities.

MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry went on to note that Detroit’s tax base, e.g. the city’s population, has declined dramatically in the last decade. Harris-Perry presents this fact as though former Detroit residents left – estimated in 2011 at one resident every 22 minutes — on a whim without making a cost/benefit calculation as to whether to continue to reside in a city with one of the highest violent crime rates in the nation with a poverty rate of a staggering 40 percent.

Furthermore, since Detroit’s population has fallen below 750,000, it was not legally allowed to collect income taxes from its residents until Gov. Rick Snyder and the state’ legislature reduced that threshold to 600,000 two years ago. The city’s population hovers today around 700,000 residents.

“But this lack of tax base is also exactly the thing that many Republicans would impose on us even when our cities have sufficient populations,” Harris-Perry added. “Even when our communities have sufficient populations.”

“This is what it looks like when government is small enough to drown if your bathtub and it is not a pretty picture,” she said.

Detroit is bankrupt and fading fast for one reason, Decades of policies set by people who think like Perry does. But even looking directly at the results of Liberal rule, Perry still blames Detroit’s woes on those that have NOT had their policies in effect. Of course she ignores WHY so many people left in the first place. LIBERAL GOVERNMENT!

Why can’t Democrats just compete?

Ed Morrissey points to whining from Democratic governors about the best damned governor in America luring companies to Texas

I assume this means that Governor Rick Perry’s poaching has been successful:

Gov. Rick Perry’s high-profile efforts to lure jobs to Texas from other states may be good business and smart politics back home, but they’re infuriating to prominent Democrats around the country.

And now at least one Republican business leader says Perry’s taking the Lone Star swagger a little too far.

Perry’s forceful recruitment campaigns, featuring radio and magazine ads as well as personal appearances, promise low-tax, pro-growth policies in Texas —and they also trash the business climate in places like California (“…I hear building a business in California is next to impossible”) and Illinois (“…an environment that, intentionally or not, is designed for you to fail.”)

Those attacks hit where it hurts and have touched off an angry political backlash against Perry outside the Texas borders, with Democrats mocking his attempts to steal jobs as clownish – and warning the Republican governor to keep his hands off. In a memorable put-down, Gov. Jerry Brown said Perry’s incursions into California were about as effective as breaking wind.

But other observers say Perry knows exactly what he’s doing.

“At the end of the day, no matter how any of the [states] respond, people are left with two distinct messages: That guy down in Texas has got big brass balls and he’s creating a lot of jobs,” Mark McKinnon, a political strategist with deep Texas ties, told POLITICO. “It’s brilliant marketing and very smart politics.”

My first thought is this. Why can’t these whiners learn from being beaten? Why can’t they look in the mirror and say I, and my state legislature have to do better. Why can’t they grasp that if their states were less hostile to businesses, those businesses would stay? Maybe whining is just ingrained in the DNA of Democrats.

Linked at Motor City Times Thanks

Best Damned Governor in America rips California rag that mocked deadly fertilizer plant explosion

First, here is the despicable cartoon


Now here is Governor Perrys response

On Friday, TheBlaze brought to your attention a “shocking” cartoon in the Sacramento Bee that politicized the recent Texas fertilizer plant explosion that killed 14 and injured many more.

The drawing depicts Texas Governor Rick Perry saying “Business is booming in Texas!” in front of a sign saying “Low Tax!” and “Low Regs!”.  To the right is a presumed depiction of the explosion, a flag reading “Low Regs” flying out of the chaos.

In a letter to the Bee’s editor, Perry said it “was with extreme disgust and disappointment I viewed your recent cartoon.”

“While I will always welcome healthy policy debate, I won’t stand for someone mocking the tragic deaths of my fellow Texans and our fellow Americans,” Perry wrote. “Additionally, publishing this on the very day our state and nation paused to honor and mourn those who died only compounds the pain and suffering of the many Texans who lost family and friends in this disaster.”

But the Bee’s editorial page editor, Stuart Leavenworth, stands by the decision of the artist, Jack Ohman.  He said the cartoonist “made a strong statement about Gov. Rick Perry’s disregard for worker safety, and his attempts to market Texas a place where industries can thrive with few regulations.”

Oh of course, BIG government could have prevented this tragedy. Big government is always the answer isn’t it?


Jim Hines-(Doofus) blasts Rick Perry for believing in self-defense

Rick Perry is as solid for gun rights as there is, so, of course, ultra Liberals are going to attack him for it. Jim Hines of Connecticut went well past simply disagreeing with the Texas governor however, saying that Perry has “blood on his hands”

The stats, of course, back Perry up and refute the whining Rep. Hines, who puts his faith in Liberal feelings based legislation rather than in the wisdom of the Founders. But, Hines’ remarks are typical of the hate-filled rhetoric we have been hearing from the Left the past week. They have taken their campaign of demonization to new lows. Sadly, Democrats use to at least attempt debate, now, though, it is vile personal attack and baseless allegations. Frankly, in their lust for political power, Liberals would rather smear their opponents, and ignore evidence that proves their fascination with gun control is an abject failure, than actually try to prevent future mass shootings.


What we would be hearing about school shootings if we had President Perry

We would not be hearing empty rhetoric about meaningful action. We would instead have a president with a grasp of reality

a president that might actually understand that security in our schools is the best answer, not more useless gun control laws

At a Tea Party event Monday, former Republican presidential candidate and Texas Governor Rick Perry became the highest-profile Republican politician to support arming teachers and administrators.

Perry argued that anyone with a concealed handgun license should be able to take guns on public property in Texas, including schools, and he urged legislators “to look at ways to improve safety at schools.”

“In the state of Texas, with our concealed handgun license, if you have been duly backgrounded and trained and you are a concealed-handgun-license-carrying individual, you should be able to carry your handgun anywhere in this state.” Teachers should have “access to weapons in their school,” Gov. Perry said, provided they have the proper training and license, and it should be left up to local school districts to determine their own policies in allowing firearms on their campuses. He later added that property owners had the right to prohibit guns on their own private property. Some school districts across Texas already allow school personnel to carry guns; when Perry referred to the one school district that allows teachers and administrators to carry weapons, he was interrupted by loud applause from the crowd.

Perry warned citizens of rash decisions from the federal government.“One of the things that I hope we don’t see from our federal government is this knee-jerk reaction from Washington, D.C., when there is an event that occurs, that they come in and they think they know the answer.”

In every one of the recent school shootings, the killer has stopped when? When he decide enough was enough? When a Liberal sang him a song of peace? No, when he was confronted with armed resistance! In Pearl Mississippi, that resistance came in the form of an assistant principal who ran to his car to retrieve his gun. The fact the Left is not willing to grasp is that sometimes evil is visited upon us, and we must fight back. Passing more laws that the next killer will ignore will do nothing.


The latest Liberal solution to all of our problems is……………….

Meatless Mondays? Good Freaking grief! The things that small minds come up with. Maggies Notebook is as amazed at the stupidity as I am

Yes ladies and gentlemen all you have to do is “Pledge” to give up eating meat on Mondays.  Right now it is voluntary but give these assholes enough time and it will be mandatory with stiff fines.

From the City Council that declared war on trans-fats and fast-food restaurants comes the latest way to make residents feel, well, guilty about what they eat.

The Los Angeles council, in a 14-0 vote on Friday, adopted a resolution urging residents to adopt a personal pledge to have a “meatless Monday.”

While it does not have the force of law and police will not be checking what you brought to work for lunch, city officials said they hope it will start a trend, make residents healthier and reduce the impact on the environment.

“This follows the `good food’ agenda we recently adopted supporting local, sustainable food choices,” said Councilwoman Jan Perry, who has called for a ban on new fast-food restaurants in South Los Angeles to fight obesity.

“We can reduce saturated fats and reduce the risk of heart disease by 19 percent,” Perry said. “While this is a symbolic gesture, it is asking people to think about the food choices they make. Eating less meat can reverse some of our nation’s most common illnesses.”

Councilman Ed Reyes, who joined with Perry in proposing the resolution, said one of his sons has been diagnosed with diabetes.

“The issue is how does a local municipality engage in this and how do we create change,” Reyes said. “If we do it one plate at time, one meal, one day, we are ratcheting down the impact on our environment. We start with one day a week and then, who knows, maybe we can change our habits for a lifetime.”

The proposal was developed by the Food Policy Council, which has a goal of “creating more and better food jobs” and encouraging food companies and small food enterprises as part of a bigger agenda to encourage healthy foods in the city.




Unspeakable horror in Atlanta! Tyler Perry victimized by RAAAAACIST Racial Profiling Cops!

Good Freaking Grief, someone get poor, poor Tyler a box of Kotex please. 

Tyler Perry mixes it up with the media on the ...
Tyler Perry mixes it up with the media on the red carpet at the 82nd Academy Awards. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Tyler Perry was pulled over by two white Atlanta Police Officers, because he made a left turn from the right lane.

His security guys taught him this maneuver as a way to know if anyone (Paparazzi? Fans?) is tailing him.

Good advice.

The two cops did not know who he was, and wondered incredulously, “Who would be following you?”

And then they asked him about his tinted windows.

A black cop then showed up and informed the two white cops of who Tyler Perry was. At which point, the one of the white cops came to him and was “very apologetic.”

Tyler Perry calls this Racial Profiling. 

RAAAAACISM! Or maybe just reality? See the reality is this Tyler. You were pulled over for driving like a jackassSeriously, why would anyone be shocked that any police officer, anywhere, would pull over anyone who turned LEFT from the RIGHT lane? I would bet that the officers did not note Perry’s color when they hit their siren either. I would wager that they saw someone pull a dangerous stunt, one that endangers other drivers, and simply did their job. And, frankly, if anyone was acting in a prejudicial fashion, well, that would be Tyler Perry in my view.

The worst thing in America right now, at least according to the perpetual whiners on the Left is “racial profiling”. And they have pushed that issue to such absurd lengths that some Black Americans seem to think that they are above the law. Tyler Perry seems to have taken that attitude on this occasion. His reaction was not ” damn, I did something stupid, now I am getting a ticket”. Oh no! His first thought was, apparently “don’t these damned racist White cops know who I am?” Pathetic! Grow up Tyler

Again, someone expresses my feelings before I can

And this time it is Chris at Wyblog, who says what I was thinking when I read this from Stacy McCain

Just ask yourselves, Perrybots, what might have been possible if some other candidate — any other candidate, perhaps one who could remember how to count to three — had an extra $20 million to spend here in Florida. But no, you spent months telling the rest of us that Rick Perry was The Only Conservative Who Could Beat Romney, an argument you didn’t hesitate to repeat as late as December, long after it was apparent that he wasn’t ready for prime time. And you still refuse to admit that you were misled, and helped mislead others, into jumping aboard that hopeless Bandwagon to Loserville.

Given that I am, at times, a guy who can give in to anger, I will just allow Chris to speak for me, and then I will print out this post about “Perrybots” a few hundred times and spread it own my lawn this Spring.

Hey, Stacy McCain is a kick-ass gonzo journalist and all. He Knows Things. I’m just a random Polack from New Jersey. But it occurs to me that Rick Perry, a guy who’s actually won elections and governed from conservative principles, might have gotten more traction if a certain gonzo journalist hadn’t taken a flyer on the likes of Herman Cain, and in the process misled a whole lotta other folks into buying a one-way ticket on the 9-9-9 Restraining Order Express. Cain wanted to be president alright, just not President of the United States. More like president of Hooters, if you get my drift. Certainly beats that web site idea, right?

All I can add is that if supporting a very good man with great character, a damned good conservative record, and who certainly does not deserve to have his intellect, or that of his supporters maligned, is wrong, then I will GLADLY be wrong! At least I will have my principles.

One final thing, that whole Perrybot BS is, frankly, insulting. The reasons I did support Perry, after initially supporting Cain, before it became clear that Cain had the foreign policy chops of the average three-year old, were simple. His record, his principles, his character, and yes, his ideas for shrinking Washington and getting the economy going made him EASILY the best guy for the job. I will always support substance, over style, because when push comes to shove, style is absolutely meaningless without substance!

UPDATE!! Lance Burri does a great job of refuting Stacy McCain’s logical fallacy

McCain writes:

Just ask yourselves, Perrybots, what might have been possible if some other candidate — any other candidate, perhaps one who could remember how to count to three – had an extra $20 million to spend here in Florida.

I may or may not meet his standard for a “Perrybot.” I was on the Perry bandwagon. Then I got off. Then I ran alongside it, ready to grab hold and swing back aboard. I never quite gave up on him until he officially dropped out.

So regardless of his definition, I think I qualify, and will therefore respond.

One need not be a “Perrybot” to see the logical fallacy McCain is making. To wit: “if Rick Perry hadn’t entered the race, somebody else would have gotten that $20 million.”

I dunno what’s in that pile, but it smells.

Short answer: no, neither Rick Santorum, nor Herman Cain, nor Michelle Bachmann, nor Thaddeus McCotter would have received that $20 million. A small proportion of it, perhaps. I’m speculating, but it seems likely that other candidates would also have received some of it. Therefore whatever financial impact this fictional Perrylessness might have had would be distributive in nature, and thus zero.

No impact.

But even so, those sans-Perry contributions wouldn’t have added up to $20 million. Much of it was contributed only because Perry was the candidate. For McCain to speculate that this $20 million existed and was in play regardless of Perry’s candidacy, and that this $20 million would have made Rick Santorum competitive pre-Florida (or, perhaps, kept Herman Cain competitive post-scandal) is ridiculous.

Bravo! Be sure to read the rest and check out what Pat Austin has to say!

Jill has done it again

Jill, like me, is a tad disappointed with the Tea Party

For the record, I’m finding very little to like in this weird nomination process, including:

The fools in charge of the failed Iowa caucus
Newt, Marianne, and Callista
RINO Mitt Romney
The tabloid-esque ‘lame-stream media’
Slimy George Stephanopoulos
et cetera

I’m disappointed in the Tea Party movement’s failure to rally behind a genuine conservative candidate, but I’m hoping it will be more effective in influencing state and local elections. That will need to be the focus.

We really need to change the way we choose our nominee folks. We start with three primaries, OK Iowa is a caucus, but you get the point, that allow anyone to vote, That helps the more “moderate” candidates to shine. Then the media jumps all over themselves anointing these early winners as inevitable. And we, the people, keep falling for this game. So, if this process is ever to change, it is up to us.

Take Rick Perry this year. Yes, the “experts” will blame his campaign strategy, but why did he fail? The media built him up, then immediately began tearing him down. Yes he was not great in the first two debates, but, he got better and better. Yet the media yes, including Fox, rarely reported anything but his “gaffes” which were seriously overblown. And to be honest a candidates gaffes are not all that important. Everyone misspeaks, or has a memory lapse. We need to get over falling for the “experts” over-analization of these debates. Face it the debates are about ratings, period! The GOP needs to have REAL debates on issues. These dog and pony shows are “won” by candidates who play it safe, or have catchy lines. Enough of that we need to focus on substance.

Think of this. What if everyone in the GOP had focused strictly on two things. A candidates ideas, and their records? I heard person after person say Perry had the most substance, te best ideas, AND a tremendous record. Yet they focused on “electability” or his “poor debates” which were really on the first couple or three debates. Got that? We focused not on records, accomplishments, or ideals, but on style. Sorry my fellow Conservatives, but at a certain point, WE get the nominee we deserve. And if we continue to use stupid criteria to find our nominees, well, we deserve no better than Mitt or Newt.

There is one last thing we need to remember. The Democrats tell us, in every election who they fear, and who they do not fear. But we have to pay attention and think about how the Democrats do this. Look at this year, EVERY Democrat has said that they fear Romney. Why would they say that? To fool us into believing that. They have not attacked Mitt yet. Why not? Because they WANT MITT to be the GOP nominee.

The Democrats also let us know, if we pay attention who the fear. As I noted they have not attacked Mitt. Yet, they have attacked Newt, and Santorum, and they did a number on Cain. They FEAR those candidates. Now, think about Perry they SAVAGED him. From the start they went after him like a pack of wolves. They feared him the most. Yet, we ignored this. Now, I am not saying Perry ran the best campaign, but if we had focused on the important things like his record and his long held ideals, it might be very different right now.

My fellow Republicans Conservatives, we must stop beating ourselves.

So, what now?

Perry is out, which means that 2012 turned out as well for my candidate as 2008 did. Chris, and I are now 0 for our last two UGH!  So, what now. Well I am not going to get into obnoxious post-mortem. It will do no one any damned good, and I will only come off as bitter and pissed off, which right now, I am. So let other bloggers tackle that task I have no patience for that right now.

The key question now is what, or to say it better who is next? In 2008, after Fred Thompson, like Perry the best candidate for the job bowed out, I decided that Mitt was the next best thing. Huckabee was, well, a used car salesman in a better suit, Giuliani, was, well, a LIBERAL, and McCain was, well, too Mavericky!

So, now in 2012, I am left with Paul, who is a nutcase on too many issues, or Mitt, who is, to me a WEAK, beatable candidate. Then there is Newt, who has such good Conservative ideals at times, but has more baggage that he is more likely to self-destruct, maybe tonight in fact. We will see how the open marriage accusation plays out. That charge IS a he said she said, and both the he and she are cheaters, so, basically how can you really believe either of them?

Then there is Chevy Chase, I mean Rick Santorum, and his obnoxiously Metrosexual sweater vest. He likely is the guy I ought to back. Better character than Newt, of course that does not take a lot, although I find Santorum a decent and good man.

But, Santorum has some areas, ideologically speaking, that trouble me. A bit of a Nanny Stater on what goes in in our bedrooms. A bit of a social engineer with his idea of taxing some businesses more than others. And I have serious issues with his two tax brackets. Ten percent, I like! But, the other rate is 28% WOW~!  So at what amount will Santorum want Americans to be kicked in the nuts exactly?

See there is my issue, it really comes down to two guys, Newt or the Nanny Stater. The serial adulterer or Clark W Griswald. Good GRIEF how did we end up with this field?

Oh, I forgot, too many Conservative voters were too consumed with style to note the guy with substance, JUST LIKE 2008! Maybe we do deserve to lose on 2012. But, re-electing the worst president in this republic’s history is simply unthinkable. So, with a firm resolve to beat Obama, and a very large clothes pin on my nose, I say, Go Newt! I think I just threw up in my mouth a little.

Last night’s debate

The highlights for me were Perry and Newt making a pinata out of Juan Williams, good grief does Williams not possess the ability to ask any serious questions? Perry was VERY GOOD but, apparently the talking heads only noticed Newt. Yep, Newt was very good, but so was Perry! I saw a comment today on one blog. The commentor said that if Perry could only articulate his views better, like Newt, he would win in a landslide. Sorry, I do not see a damned thing wrong with Rick Perry delivering his message. I wonder how many people think that is the case because the “analysts” ignore Perry too often, or put such a negative spin on Perry.

I think everyone agrees, well, everyone except Ann Coulter and the establishment types, that Romney looked bad, unpresidential, pathetic last night.

Ron Paul, oh who cares about him.

Santorum looked OK, maybe a tad petulant at times. I did not like his answer about why he wishes to tax some businesses at higher rates than others though. That is nothing but big government playing favorites. His defense of his vote AGAINST right to work was gutless frankly. Just what I would expect from a guy wearing a sweater vest.

For more great analysis that you will NEVER get from the “political experts” head over to Jill’s place!

Also look over at Wyblog, Chris raises some great thoughts

Professor Jacobsonsums up my impression of the trainwreck that is Mitt Romney’s impending nomination.

We are on a path to nominate someone who campaigned against Reagan, campaigned against the Contract with America, campaigned against those who are pro-Life, campaigned against 2d Amendment rights, campaigned against conservatism, and designed and enacted the precursor to Obamacare from which he will not back away.

Meanwhile the only guy who’s never actually lost an election on the merits can’t get any traction, because ostensible “conservatives” are enamored by Rick Santorum’s sweater vests and Newt Gingrich’s adverbial allegories.

Again, I am as amazed as Chris. Perry has a record the others cannot touch, yet too many of us are obsessing over a big government guy, in a sweater vest no less, who wants the government in our bedrooms, has issues with “unrestrained individualism”  and wants to use the tax code to favor some businesses over others? Good freaking grief!

Electability you say?

Jill takes a look at Mitt’s “electability, and Santorum’s and apparently is not all that impressed. Neither am I frankly. Jill also notes Perry’s response to Urine Gate and links to some videos of Perry at the presidential forum last night.

Gov. Rick Perry was asked by Candy Crowley to comment on the Marine urination scandal. I liked his response:

“Well, obviously, 18, 19-year-old kids make stupid mistakes all too often, and that’s what’s occurred here.” Perry said, reminding viewers that General Patton did “basically the same thing” at the Rhein [sic] river and that Churchhill [sic] did the same thing on the Siegfried Line.

“What’s really disturbing to me is this kind of over the top rhetoric from this administration and their disdain for the military, it appears.” Perry said, “Whether it’s the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Defense.

“These kids made a mistake. There’s not any doubt about it, they shouldn’t have done it it. It’s bad.” Perry said, arguing that people upload all types of videos online. “But to call it a criminal act, I think, is over the top.”Video here. More video here from last night’s “Huckabee Forum.” Perry starts taking questions at the 58 minute mark. His limited-government message, with his impressive record as Texas governor to back it up, should appeal to conservatives who understand the terrible mess we’re in.

Too bad Perry’s been branded by the pundit-sphere as a dummy/loser and therefore unelectable“:

I might smack the next idiot that calls Perry stupid. Sorry, but I am past fed up with these geeks who want to eliminate candidates based on gaffes, some of which are severely overblown. These are folks who watch debates, looking for a mistake, or misstep, so that they can then announce that candidate “unelectable”. I am also VERY tired of these same people ignoring substantive things like a candidate’s RECORD, and their ideals and plans. Frankly, give me a candidate with a great record, and keep the “style points”. Frankly, if we continue to elect presidents based on this criteria, we are screwed and will never recover as a nation.

Bain, Bain, Bain!

OK, here you go, I would not have encouraged Rick Perry, or Newt to pursue the Bain line of attacks on Romney. There are lots of other areas to attack Romney on. But, before we start labeling what Newt or Perry are saying as “attacking Capitalism” we ought to find out if the charges they make are CORRECT shouldn’t we?

Anyone who is thinking straight KNOWS, without a doubt, that Perry and Newt are definitely NOT anti-Capitalism. So, when anyone starts blasting Perry or Newt for engaging in class warfare, they are making asses of themselves. Sean Hannity acts like someone pissed in his Cheerios over this. Funny, I do not remember Hannity getting upset over Mitt LYING about Perry wanting to end Social Security. I do not recall Hannity crying over Michel Bachmann’s absurdly false claims about Perry and Gardasil. Or her idiot attacks on Newt. A bit of Selective Outrage Syndrome seems to be afflicting Hannity. Jill links to a couple of videos of Hannity interviewing Palin, who defends Perry, and notes that Perry knows about creating jobs.

Also check out Jill’s post on Mitt and his, say it with me, “electability”

Peter Ferrara on why RINO Romney is the least electable:

Romney the Republican establishment businessman is telling us with his limited, crabbed policy kowtowing to Obama’s class warfare rhetoric that he feels, like Bush I and Republican RINO moderates generally, that he cannot explain and defend good supply-side policy to the public. Given his background and who he is as a rich Wall Street takeover artist, he personally may be right about that. Who is going to take seriously a Wall Street millionaire calling for tax cuts for millionaires? That is why he personally is not a good vessel for carrying the Republican standard this year. He is actually a perfect caricature for the neo-Marxist class warfare arguments of Obama and the Occupy Wall Street rabble. That is one reason why Romney, in fact, is the least electable.

Or as Dan Riehl put it earlier today:

He feeds right into the concept of a 1%. What a freaking nightmare.

Also, maybe Romney has flip-flopped on this issue too?

Ace tries to put some sanity back into this and has the interview Laura Ingraham did with Perry earlier today

Two quick notes about that interview, at one point, Ingraham asks if Perry is worried the Dems might use this against Mitt if he is the eventual nominee. Good grief, I think the Dems likely are going to use that even if no Republican mentioned it. secondly, I do not know what Herman Cain’s issue with Perry is, but, frankly, he looks childish attacking Perry, come on Mr. Cain, aren’t you better than that?

Breaking: Court To Decide If Gingrich, Huntsman, Santorum, Perry Will Be On Virginia’s Primary Ballot

Breaking: Court To Decide If Gingrich, Huntsman, Santorum, Perry Will Be On Virginia’s Primary Ballot – The Foundry

A very big development in the ballot access lawsuit filed in federal court in Virginia by Texas Governor Rick Perry and joined by Newt Gingrich, Rich Santorum, and Jon Huntsman. Judge John Gibney just filed a five-page order in which he states that…

…there is a strong likelihood that the Court will find the residency requirement for petition circulators to be unconstitutional. The authorities make clear that circulating petitions for candidates is a form of protected speech, and that the Commonwealth has a heavy burden to justify the restriction on speech by showing not only that the limitation achieves a valid state interest but also that the limitation is no broader in scope than necessary to achieve that purpose. As in all strict scrutiny cases, the state has a difficult task to demonstrate the propriety of its limitation on protected speech. For this reason, the Court believes that the plaintiffs have a substantial likelihood of succeeding on the merits, at least on the issue of the validity of the residency requirement.

Yesterday, Judge Gibney ordered the Virginia State Board of Elections to notify all local county electoral boards that they are barred “from ordering any ballots” or “from mailing out any absentee ballots” until after the judge holds a hearing on the case on January 13. The judge says in the order that he will make a decision on the merits of the temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction being sought by the candidates on the 13th.

Additionally, the ACLU of Virginia filed an amicus brief today on the side of the Republican presidential candidates, arguing that Virginia’s 10,000-signature requirement for a presidential candidate to appear on the ballot “reduces the quantity of [political] speech available in Virginia, and directly infringes on the First Amendment rights of candidates, voters, petition circulators, and political parties.”

The ACLU also argues that Virginia’s residency requirement for petition circulators is not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling government interest. In fact, the ACLU says that Virginia has “fail[ed] even to articulate a compelling interest.” It asks the court to grant the plaintiffs’ request for a TRO and a preliminary injunction. Looks like the judge agrees with the ACLU.

So we should know by the end of the day on Friday whether Perry, Gingrich, Huntsman and/or Santorum will be added to the ballot or if the only choices for Virginia voters will be Mitt Romney and Ron Paul in the Republican primary on March 6. With this latest order from the judge, it is highly likely that there will be additional candidates on the ballot.

Click HERE For Rest Of Story

Rick Perry jokes about remembering cuts | The Right Scoop

Good answer, I sure hope some people start paying attention to what Perry’s record is.  In the clip from Rush I posted last night, he said Perry has a reputation for being less than intelligent. Sorry, but anyone saying that is NOT paying attention, or is not that sharp themselves. Lord knows we keep voting for the guy that is “a good debater” rather than the candidate with a solid message and record. Yes, I know, Romney is “electable” Well perhaps, but it ought to occur to voters, at some point, that the ONLY thing anyone supporting Romney ever says is that he is, “electable”! Sadly, it looks more and more like we will get another nominee with a weak Conservative record.

Yep, Santorum is”surging” and will flame out soon enough. But look at his record on spending, the guy loves earmarks people. Isn’t that what we are so fed up with? Political porkers? I mean yes, you have to love Santorum’s passionate defense of life, and you have to say he is a good man. But he also favors giving preferential tax rates to manufacturing companies. I though we were against government picking winners and losers.

Newt, oh how “smart” he is. And no doubt that he is. But the guy has more baggage than Samsonite, and has serious character flaws. And do not forget, Newt has oft flirted  with climate change nuttery, and never forget his endorsement of Scozzafava in NY 23.

COME ON FOLKS! We can do better! There is one candidate who walks the walk, one! The record is there.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Are there really “fake” Catholics?

Apparently some folks are questioning the authenticity of Rick Santorum’s Catholicism, Adrienne has the scoop Jill has even more

As for me, I do not believe in questioning someone else’s faith. Believe me, I have trouble enough with my own. But seriously, I have serious reservations about Santorum. He strikes me, as I have said before as a bit too socially Conservative. Not that I think he is a bad guy. I am not going to take the low road just because I prefer Perry to Santorum. Yes, I will question ideals, principles, and the records of the candidates. But, as for making half-assed slurs? Nope! Let other bloggers post this type of crap

A story on Rick Perry’s decision to stay in the race (an updated and expanded version of this post by Josh Hafner), which mentions Joe Allbaugh and Dave Carney among the crew of idiotic “strategists” responsible for running the doomstruck farce that is the Perry campaign. Evidently, Allbaugh and Carney didn’t get enough humiliation in Iowa to suit them, and are determined to utterly destroy any future political prospects for their client, the once widely-respected governor of Texas whom they’ve turned into a national laughingstock.

All I can say is this, anyone who does not respect Perry has problems I cannot help them with. The man’s record is rock solid, far more than Santorum I would say. I can say that because I have never heard Perry whining that he love earmarks, but that they were “Constitutional” so therefore the were OK. As to the national laughingstock crack, well we will soon see how Santorum fares won’t we? Likely he will be the 2008 version of Mike Huckabee, ensuring that once again we get an establishment nominee in 2012. Of course, that would not make him a laughingstock, not at all. Santorum is a good man, although he is not as Conservative as we are led to believe by his fans. Santorum hates big government, unless it is doing what he thinks is best. Santorum would be far preferable to President Empty Suit, or Mittens that is true, but I fear he is more Huckabee than Reagan.

Rick Perry on the Glenn Beck Show | The Right Scoop

Having trouble embedding this but The Right Scoop has it

Perry sounds good, and trust me, this is who he is. He is for small government, and deeply respects the Constitution. Again, I know, he has been my governor for a decade now. If you truly want a politician who will walk the walk, and not just talk, Perry is the guy you ought to be supporting.

The EPA is out of control, and Perry has fought them before as governor. Again, he did not talk about it, he has DONE IT! Perry talks about that in this interview, and also the Department of Education, which he wants to eliminate.

Forget the hourly polls, forget the rhetoric of the GOP establishment, forget those who tell us that ONLY Romney can win. Listen to the interview, check out the numerous video clips of Perry on this blog, check out his website. Rick Perry has a record, and that record TELLS YOU what he will do as president.

There are reasons that Texas has created over 1 million jobs while the country lost over 2 million jobs. The reasons are simple, low taxes, low regulations, and fewer government hoops to jump through. I have heard that Newt and Romney are the “smart” candidates. That they are “great debaters”. Yet their records indicate that they are not honest. We know that Romney is for the mandate in Obamacare, we know Newt praised that before. Perry has been very consistently against Obamcare. With Newt, or Mitt, you have to worry if they mean what they say. With Perry, you need not worry, he is who he is.

Sure, there are many who say, Perry cannot debate Obama, or that his campaign, according to Left-leaning Politico, is a mess. These folks point to Perry’s gaffes, while ignoring all the solid debates and great speeches Perry has had.

Frankly, I could not care less about polls, or what the political talking heads say. I know a leader when I see one, all I need do is examine the record of Rick Perry to know what he has done and WILL do if elected. I have heard Conservatives cry out for a no-nonsense president. I have heard them say, we are sick of DC insiders, tired of pork barrel spending, tired of politicians who say one thing then do another.

If you are serious about that, then Perry is your candidate. No, he is not your overly rehearsed slick talker, he is honest, and sincere. No, he does not stick his finger in the wind to decide how to answer questions. He is, in the end exactly the kind of Conservative we all have been calling for.

Perfect? No. Principled? Yes!

I must really suck

I mean look, Pat Austin just endorsed Rick Perry, and listed all the bloggers that have also endorsed Perry. Well not quite all, you see, I get left out, the guy who endorsed Perry long before all the rest of these guys, and gals.

Which means that I must suck at endorsements, or that Pat secretly hates me, even though I am pulling for LSU to whip Bama!

The best endorsement for Rick Perry I have yet seen or read

From Ace, who lays out solid reasons for supporting Rick Perry for president. It is long, but worth the time invested. I have tried my best to lay out my reasons for supporting Perry, and Ace touches many of the same reasons. Go read it all.

As an aside, some other blogger, whom I respect immensely is endorsing Santorum, who would be my second choice. Santorum is a good guy, and solid as a Conservative, but he is not as qualified as Perry is. I, unlike this Other blogger will not go negative or say ugly things about his candidate, and I will never use Michele Bachmann’s fallacious attacks either. Lord knows what Bachmann would say about Santorum if he ever gets to leading the polls. Likely that he eats kittens or something.

So when I lashed out at Ace for his endorsement of Rick Perry, you’ve got to view this as an emotional reaction to campaign-induced stress. And also because anybody who endorses Perry is either dishonest or naive, or quite possibly retarded by the Gardasil vaccine.

See, I understand that RS McCain, blogging genius, is joking. Or maybe he is just worried about Bama losing to LSU. I know that he will be on Team Perry when Perry is nominated, and he will enjoy the way Perry turns America around.