Posts Tagged ‘Rick Perry’

Isn’t It Amazing How Hypocrite Democrats Indict Rick Perry For ‘Abusing Power’ While Demonizing Republicans If They Dare To Impeach Obama?

August 21, 2014

This is the “face of integrity” – at least to a Demonic Bureaucrat (i.e., a Democrat):

Face of Integrity_Spit Guard

Rosemary Lehmberg has more “public integrity” than any other Democrat, apparently, which is why she couldn’t lose her position as head of the “Public Integrity Unit” that was created to politically persecute Republicans.  the above photo is of “Ms. Integrity” being arrested for having a blood alcohol level three times the legal limit.  She is wearing a spit mask and wearing restraints because, yep, she’s spitting, snarling, clawing, obnoxious drunk.

Consider the following video:

The Democrat District Attorney for THE most liberal county in Texas and in fact one of the most rabidly liberal counties in the entire nation had to be restrained after trying to scratch an officer.  She had to be placed in a spit mask.

Her name is Rosemary Lehmberg.  And she had a blood alcohol limit three times the legal limit.  The full video – taken because she was so uncooperative – shows her kicking the door of her holding room and screaming.  She had to be strapped down and wheeled to where they drew her blood for the test.  At one point, she mocks shooting a gun at a jailer.  That’s a violent threat, I believe.

Ms. Integrity says this to the officers:

“I am not doing this. If you want to take me to jail, take me to jail, okay. And you’re going to ruin my career, and that’s fine,” she laughs sardonically. “But I’m not drunk. … I don’t think you smell alcohol and, um, I haven’t erratically drive sic.”

“I’m not drunk,” Ms. Integrity says.  “I don’t [HIC] think you [HIC] smell alcohol,” says Ms. Integrity who later tested with her BAC three times the legal limit.  “I haven’t erratically drive,” Ms. Integrity says after endangering the lives of God knows how many innocent people on the damn road.

If you’re a Democrat, THAT is actually “public integrity” to you.

You demon-possessed bureaucrats – that’s what Democrats are – are amazing.

Cockroaches call one another “Democrat” as their lowest insult.  Because it truly is about as low as any species can get.

There was this exchange at one point:

Did you call Greg? (Sheriff)
I’m not drunk?
You’re treating me like a criminal.
I had two glasses of wine.
I wasn’t driving erratically.
Do you know who I am?
You’re ruining my career.
Officer: Have you been diagnosed with bi-polar?

The above link has most of the comments being provided well before the current shenanigan to indict Perry.  Comment after comment expresses amazement that she hasn’t resigned yet.  Many of them were dated “2009.”  And she STILL hasn’t resigned.

She is on video trying to use her position to intimidate the police into releasing her (“Do you know who I am?”).  And they’re indicting Governor Perry for abusing HIS power???

One of the things I find most amazing is that this DRUNK and OUT-OF-CONTROL woman is actually more sober than the Democrat Party.  She KNEW her career should have been OVER even when she was crap-faced drunk; not so the Democrat Party – which is owned lock stock and barrel by Satan and knows nothing that the devil doesn’t WANT them to know.

Travis County is the county that rabidly and criminally used the legal system to destroy the career of Tom DeLay.  He was ultimately cleared of ALL wrongdoing.  Not that that matters to the rabid left.  They were hoping for the same thing here as they tried to take down a leading GOP candidate for the 2016 presidential nomination.

Barack Obama has literally stated that he is above the law on mulitiple occasions.  As to the Defense of Marriage Act, which was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton, Obama declared that he was above that law and would not follow it.  Just as he has done on multiple occasions with illegal immigration.

Obama HIMSELF has admitted that what he has done since is lawless and unconstitutional and frankly fascist:

        Now, I swore an oath to uphold the laws on the books, but that doesn’t mean I don’t know very well the real pain and heartbreak that deportations cause.  I share your concerns and I understand them.  And I promise you, we are responding to your concerns and working every day to make sure we are enforcing flawed laws in the most humane and best possible way.

Now, I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own.  (Applause.)  And believe me, right now dealing with Congress —

AUDIENCE:  Yes, you can!  Yes, you can!  Yes, you can!  Yes, you can!  Yes, you can!

THE PRESIDENT:  Believe me — believe me, the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting.  (Laughter.)  I promise you. Not just on immigration reform.  (Laughter.)  But that’s not how — that’s not how our system works.

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Change it!

THE PRESIDENT:  That’s not how our democracy functions.  That’s not how our Constitution is written.

Here’s another example:

 MR. RAMOS: Mr. President, my question will be as follows: With an executive order, could you be able to stop deportations of the students? And if that’s so, that links to another of the questions that we have received through univision.com. We have received hundreds, thousand, all related to immigration and the students. Kay Tomar (ph) through univision.com told us — I’m reading — “What if at least you grant temporary protective status, TPS, to undocumented students? If the answer is yes, when? And if no, why not?”

THE PRESIDENT: Well, first of all, temporary protective status historically has been used for special circumstances where you have immigrants to this country who are fleeing persecution in their countries, or there is some emergency situation in their native land that required them to come to the United States. So it would not be appropriate to use that just for a particular group that came here primarily, for example, because they were looking for economic opportunity.

With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed — and I know that everybody here at Bell is studying hard so you know that we’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws.

There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President.

In the same town hall Obama had previously stated:

America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the President, am obligated to enforce the law. I don’t have a choice about that.

But then Obama proceeded to ultimately decide that he DID have a choice, that he WASN’T obligated to enforce the law.

One of Obama’s MANY criminal violations of the law was his imposition by executive order of the DREAM Act that even his own Democrat-controlled SENATE didn’t pass.  He just imposed it by dictate.  Barack Obama is an unconstitutional, lawless, fascist thug BY HIS OWN WORDS.

Charles Krauthammer in the pages of the Washington Post rightly called what Obama did AFTER those words “naked lawlessness.”

The law is crystal clear.  Obama’s violation of the law is crystal clear (see also here).

Obama is a criminally lawless thug who has RELEASED 68,000 criminally convicted illegal immigrants to prey on American society again and again.

Democrats accuse Republicans of being “obstructionists,” utterly and rabidly ignoring the 357 bills that the GOP House passed that are all sitting on Harry Reid’s desk.

Barack Obama and Democrats are liars without shame.

The people who support this fascist monster Obama’s myriad abuses of power had the chutzpah-hypocrisy to indict the governor of Texas.

Rick Perry had absolutely every right in the world to do what he did.  Unlike our Fascist-in-Chief.  The law is clearly on Governor Perry’s side.   He clearly has the right to use his veto power.  The only issue is that the demon-possessed Democrats in Travis County don’t like it.  They claim he’s using “political coercion.”  And they’re using WHAT exactly????

Democrats snarl that Rick Perry was being somehow partisan when he insisted that a public official in charge of a “public integrity unit” ought to at least HAVE some “public integrity.”

Republicans should cite this as a classic example of how impeaching Obama is no more “partisan” or “political” than what the Democrats do fifty times every day by breakfast time.

 

As Hysterical Democrats Attack Rick Perry On Poverty And Education, Hit Them In The Mouth With Bill Clinton’s Arkansas Record

August 19, 2011

Governor Rick Perry has created 43% OF ALL THE JOBS IN AMERICA and Democrats won’t give him any credit whatsoever.  Because there is simply something morally and intellectually wrong with them.

To put it slightly differently, RICK PERRY CREATED 43% OF ALL THE JOBS THAT BARACK OBAMA HAS BEEN CLAIMING CREDIT FOR, but when the governor whose state created all those jobs enters the race, those wonderful jobs suddenly became terrible jobs.  Again, because there’s something morally and intellectually wrong with Democrats.

You have to laugh when shrill and frightened Democrats attribute the oil and gas industry for all the jobs that Perry created.  WHY DON’T THEY CONSIDER THE FACT THAT OBAMA HAS DONE EVERYTHING HE COULD TO DESTROY THOSE JOBS AND THAT INDUSTRY???  I mean, consider what Obama is trying to do to the oil industry as we speak.  It amounts to the insane argument that Rick Perry only created all those jobs because he’s not trying to destroy jobs the way Obama has.

Further, Democrats seriously need to get their lies straight.  One Democrat says Perry got all his job creation from the few oil jobs Obama couldn’t destroy.  Another Democrat says Perry got all his job creation from California’s liberal purge on businesses which then relocated to Texas to have a chance at success.  At some point Democrats are going to have to get together and decide which massive Democrat failure to blame on Perry’s huge success.

What might be most fascinating of all is how Democrats are rabidly refusing to give Governor Rick Perry any credit whatsoever for CREATING 51.5 PERCENT OF THE NET JOB GROWTH IN AMERICA while simultaneously blaming him completely for absolutely every single problem Texas has.  The same Rick Perry who deserves no credit whatsoever for all the good things that he “stumbled onto” should be blamed for every structural problem that Texas has dating back to 1846.

The big two attacks from the left against Perry center on Texas’ poverty and its ranking on education.

Take a look at this interactive map on poverty in the United States.  Texas ranks 9th in poverty.  But look at the states all around Texas: Louisiana ranks THIRD in poverty; New Mexico ranks fourth; Arkansas ranks fifth; Mississippi ranks first. Poverty and education are longstanding regional problems in the South Central United States that have existed for as long as America has been America.  They were problems when LBJ was in Texas; they were problems when Bill Clinton was in Arkansas.

In other words, unless Democrats are out lambasting Bill Clinton for his failed Arkansas policies, it is simply nothing short of hypocritical for them to go after Rick Perry for the same sort of “failures.”  Especially when they are at the same time hypocritically ignoring and trying to explain away Perry’s spectacular success at job-creation.

This is from the August 1, 1992 Los Angeles Times:

The Charge: The Bush campaign said on Friday that Gov. Bill Clinton “has made grand, false claims about the ineffective Arkansas welfare program he supervises. . . . After Clinton’s 12 years in office, Arkansas now suffers a state-welfare bureaucracy whose administrative costs have ballooned by 3,000% since 1983, and poverty that places the state at or near the bottom of the country in nearly every meaningful categoryA full 19.8% of all Arkansas residents live below the poverty line–up from 19% in 1980.”

The Response: The Clinton campaign contends that despite a slight increase in the poverty rate in Arkansas, the state compares favorably to surrounding states. “In the last decade, Texas had an increase (in poverty) of 12.2%, Oklahoma 13.3% and Louisiana 26.3%. The numbers are a testimony to our ability to hold the line on poverty,” the campaign said.

Okay.  So let’s praise Bill Clinton and revile Rick Perry.

And here’s a quote about Clinton’s educational “reforms”:

“In hindsight, however, just about all of those high-profile moves were cosmetic, superficial endeavors that didn’t begin to tackle the underlying problems and were quickly weakened or undone. For example, the state’s first set of statewide curricular standards – called course content guides – were developed in the 1980s but rapidly proved to be inadequate” (Education Reform In Arkansas: Past and Present, pg 35).

Democrats cheered wildly when Bill Clinton – who presided over an Arkansas that was the FOURTH poorest state in the nation and the FOURTH worst in the nation in terms of its hight school graduation rate – was elected president.  And that is simply dishonest of them.

Rick Perry is doing better in Texas than Bill Clinton did in Arkansas in terms of both poverty and education.  And then combine that with “the Texas miracle” of job creation, and Rick Perry sure looks a lot better than Democrats want to admit.

Rick Perry Has A ‘Big Black Cloud’ Of Biased Media Propaganda Hanging Over Him

August 18, 2011

Never forget, the mainstream media is biased and dishonest.  And they WILL NOT be fair or objective:

Ed Schultz: Rick Perry’s reference to a “big black cloud” was a racial crack at Obama, wasn’t it?
posted at 5:36 pm on August 16, 2011 by Allahpundit

Via Larry O’Connor at Breitbart TV. As shameless as this is, it’s not the worst example of MSNBC playing games with video to support a favored racial narrative. Remember this classic of the genre? And it’s not just MSNBC in this case who took Perry out of context either. ABC’s account of what he said is even less fair than Schultz’s:

“Mr. President, you need to free up the employers of this country to create jobs.” Perry called on Obama to “free up this country” from “stifling regulation.”

“I’m a pro-business governor, I don’t make any apologies about it and I will be a pro-business president.”

Perry warned that a “big black cloud” hangs over the country.

“I think you want a president who is passionate about America — that’s in love with America.”

Sounds like he’s talking about Obama, right? Not so. Watch the clip, which includes extra footage added by O’Connor, and you’ll see that he was talking about the debt. In fact, that’s obvious to me even from the footage Schultz did air, which conveniently excludes the final part where Perry emphasizes that the “cloud” he’s referring to is our debt crisis. They might as well have left it in there, frankly: The beauty of the “dog whistle” accusation Schultz is making is that there’s no way to disprove it, even in full context. It’s a claim about what a speaker means, not what he actually says, so the fact that Perry’s clearly talking about the debt is no impediment. Schultz and his viewers know that Perry’s a secret racist and that he’s using code words to communicate subtextually with his racist audience, so all they have to do is look for words like “black” or “dark” and connect the dots, irrespective of what the speech is about. Short of figuring out a way to let the left read his mind, there’s no way Perry can prove that his intentions were innocent, which of course is precisely why they love love love this specie of demagoguery. We have 14 more months of this ahead of us. And trust me, Captain Civility will be very coy indeed about reining in his side when they start in with it full-bore.

Update: Can we at least set some ground rules about this before the campaign? I know that would defeat the left’s purpose of being able to declare any innocent turn of phrase racist and disqualifying as political circumstances require, but let’s see if we can pin them down. How about if they gave us a list of words that Perry shouldn’t use, ever, in any context? And if he stays away from those, no “dog whistle” accusations. Deal?

As rabid of a leftwing ideologue partisan as Ed Schultz is, ABC DEMONSTRATES THAT IT IS EVEN MORE RABIDLY BIASED.

Mediaite reported:

Rick Perry ‘Big Black Cloud’ Quote Edited Out Of Context By MSNBC And ABC News

GOP hopeful Gov. Rick Perry drew fire from some quarters earlier over a remark, reported by ABC News’ The Note blog, that “a ‘big black cloud’hangs over the country.”

As it turns out, Perry’s remark was much more specific. While he did use the phrase “big black cloud,” he was referring explicitly to the debt, as the full video of Perry’s remark reveals.

BreitbartTV’s Larry O’Connor tracked down the full video of Perry’s remarks (which Mediaite also requested of ABC News prior to our post on the subject), and compared it with an edited version that aired on Monday night’s The Ed Show.

[The videos appear here for comparison]

Now, Schultz could have aired the entire clip, and still tried to make the case that Perry’s remark was poorly chosen. Chopping the clip the way he did was dishonest and, at best, an oversell by a zealous partisan commentator.

But there is no excuse for ABC News’ reporters abridging Perry’s remark in that fashion. It was their reporting upon which April Ryan, and others, relied in forming their strong reactions to the quote, and not Schultz’s edited clip. It was the truncated, oddly-paraphrased fashion in which ABC reported his remark (“Perry warned that a ‘big black cloud’ hangs over the country”) which made me contact them (and Perry’s campaign) to check on the quote in the first place.

We also performed several searches for video of Perry’s remarks before publication, but found nothing.

Whatever your opinion of Governor Perry, politically or otherwise, he deserves to be quoted as fairly and completely as any other figure. Not to do so is inexcusable.

MSNBC “journalist” Chris Matthews shrilly says in his rabid fear that news organizations will turn over every imaginable stone to dig up dirt on Rick Perry.  Even if they have to invent stuff, apparently.  Some journalist researched Michelle Bachmann’s family tree back to the 19th century just to try to show that her ancestors settled “near Iowa” (rather than in Iowa).  And the sheer unadulterated outrage and frothing anger over these insignificant findings is really quite amazing.  Considering that these same “journalists” never bothered to look into Obama’s secrets – many of which are STILL hidden in the dark (etc. etc.)while the media steadfastly go through the trash of every Republican who might threaten their messiah.

Don’t ever forget that the mainstream media is thoroughly dishonest.

Liberals are dishonest hypocrites.  Both character deficiencies quintessentially define them.

P.S.  Don’t forget that the mainstream media is literally invested in Barack Obama.

Things To Consider As Obama’s Propagandists Attack Rick Perry For His Remark About Bernanke

August 17, 2011

The mainstream media and the Obama administration are trying to make the most of Rick Perry’s remark:

“If this guy prints more money between now and the election, I don’t know what you all would do to him in Iowa, but we would treat him pretty ugly down in Texas,” Perry said. “Printing more money to play politics at this particular time in American history is almost … treasonous in my opinion.”

Charles Krauthammer said that it was somewhat tactless for Rick Perry to use the “t” word to describe what he and almost every other conservatives agrees is fiscally despicable behavior on the part of Obama’s Federal Reserve Chairman and the Obama Fed.  And then Krauthammer turned the shining white-hot lens back at Obama and pointed out that Obama is engaging in this very same conduct every time he demonizes Republicans as the political equivalent of terrorists, and that he is basically too cunning (I would have chosen the word ‘weaselly’) to use the “t” word when his rhetoric clearly matches it.

Recently, Obama claimed that Republicans basically wanted to turn America into a banana republic.

As one example, Obama said this:

BARACK OBAMA, (D) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: “The only thing that is holding us back is our politics. The only thing that prevents us from passing the bills I just mentioned is the refusal of a faction in Congress to put country ahead of party. And that has to stop. I need your help sending a message to Congress that it’s time to put politics aside and get something done.”

Geez, I wonder what “faction” of which “party” that eagerly puts party ahead of country, and seeks to hurt the country for political gain.  Because, I mean, that would be practically, well, treasonous.

And then Obama said this:

Some in Congress would rather see their opponents lose than America win … we can’t have patience with that kind of behavior anymore,” Obama told a crowd.

Which prompted this dose of rational commentary on Obama’s transparent tactic:

He’s accusing his opponents of being unpatriotic, and at some point the next step is [accusing them of] being traitorous,” Michael Franc, vice president for government studies at the Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Caller Monday afternoon. “If Michele Bachmann had said ‘If you disagree with me, you’re unpatriotic,’ [Democrats] would be calling it a loyalty oath or a religious test,” Franc said.

And of course it would – and the media would be all over Obama for his vicious demoagic tactics – if they were even remotely honest.

What Michael Franc said is obviously true.  But the media simply won’t report Obama’s words.  I had a very easy time finding Perry’s rhetoric and a very difficult time finding Obama’s.  But Obama is doing the very same thing that everybody and their dog is accusing Perry of doing.

Krauthammer responds to Obama’s tactics:

KRAUTHAMMER:When the president accuses the Republicans of putting party over country and another stop he said they want America to fail so they will succeed politically, that is a sophisticated way of essentially accusing the Republicans of near treasonous behavior. He is sophisticated and practiced and articulate so he won’t use the word the way Perry did. But it’s the same idea.

BAIER: Are you suggesting that Texas Governor Perry is not articulate?

KRAUTHAMMER: I’m saying the way he articulated attack on Bernanke was a demonstration that he does not have the art and the artful way of presenting it that Obama does.

It’s an essentially an equivalent claim. These people care nothing about country, only about self-interest and politics and reelection. So “A,” it demonstrates that the president is practiced at this. Perry could use practice. But it’s essentially the same unhealthy kind of attack. It’s really something neither party ought to do.

And the president combines it with a pretense that he stands above all of this. But look at this scene. He is on a political trip, which he pretends is not. Therefore our tax money is paying for this trip under the pretense that he is explaining his policies. It’s clearly a campaign trip. It’s all a stump speech.

So he is on political trip in which he accuses his opponents of playing politics when he himself is engaged of politics at the same time and pretending only he speaks in the name of the national interest. He does it over and over again. I know it’s going to be a theme of his campaign. If you call out Perry on his use of that, I’d call out the president on that as well.

OBAMA has been putting his narrow partisan political interests ahead of the well-being of the United States and America and the American people ever since the day he came to office.  His boondoggle stimulus that cost the American people $3.27 TRILLION and pissed away our resources – and went overwhelmingly to Democrat districts.  His unconstitutional ObamaCare that he rammed down America’s throat along with its more than 160 death panels. His hostile takeover of the financial industry a.k.a. the Dodd-Frank act.  His being in the pocket of labor unions on issue after issue.  And he’s the guy who is lecturing us about putting country ahead of party and partisan interest?!?!?

Hey, Obama, how about if you pay for your damn bus tour instead of making the American people pay for it since it is obviously a campaign tour?!?!  I mean, given that you alone are above politics and all…

But, of course, the mainstream media would report on any of the above (other than the stuff that makes Rick Perrylook bad), because that would be fair and objective and honest.  And today’s media is none of those things.

I actually believe Perry’s taking on Fed policies – which are impoverishing grandmas and grandpas to enrich The State, and which have destroyed 3.5 million jobs – is a dang good idea.

Ron Paul rightly compares this policy of artificially creating money out of thin air with counterfeiting. The federal government is counterfeiting its own money, with the same exact motive that all other counterfeiters have.

The White House jumped all over this, self-righteously proclaiming, “We take the independence of the Federal Reserve quite seriously and certainly think threatening the Fed chairman is probably not a good idea.”  But other than the fact that just who in their right mind actually believes Rick Perry physically threatened Bernanke with literal violence?!?!?  I would point out that shouldn’t Obama therefore take the independence of the Supreme Court quite seriously, too?  And yet Obama has REPEATEDLY belittled their rulings.  In one speech Obama deceitfully demonized the court for exercising it’s “independence,” prompting Samuel Alito to mouth the words “That’s not true” to Obama’s demagogic attack.  And it was just today that Obama essentially said that either the Supreme Court would rule the way he wanted them to rule on ObamaCare, or they would be making up the law like some sort of kangaroo court:

“If the Supreme Court follows existing precedent, existing law, it should be upheld without a problem,” Obama said. “If the Supreme Court does not follow existing law and precedent, then, you know, we’ll have to manage that when it happens.”

But hey, refusing to honor the independence of one of the three branches of our government (the executive, the legislature and THE JUDICIARY) established by our Constitution is nothing.  Refusing to honor a Federal Reserve Entity having nothing whatsoever to do with our Constitution and in fact flying in the very face of it is quite another, indeed.

If Rick Perry used a word that cunning, weaselly political strategists say is ill-advised to describe his personal and political disgust and contempt for a disgusting and contemptible fiscal and political policy by an out-of-control Federal Reserve system, I can live with that.  In fact, I’m just glad that somebody is out there on my side who is willing to get in somebody’s face over the crap that is imploding our country.

Conservatives are beyond furious. They want a candidate who will punch Barack Obama right in the mouth and then keep punching until he is politically down on his back and able to get up. The last thing we want to see is another wimpy establishment candidate refuse to go after Obama as a guy who spent 23 years in a racist, Marxist, anti-American “God damn America!” church.

Racist, because imagine the Republican candidate having spent 23 years in a church with a WHITE values system and a commitment to the WHITE family. Because Obama’s “church” continued to spout racism while Obama was there and after he finally left it to cover his political backside. Because imagine the Republican candidate being so inspired of the equivalent of “White folk’s greed runs a world in need” – maybe “Black folk’s crime runs a world of slime” – and being so inspired he writes a book bearing the same title as that sermon.

Marxist because the “liberation theology” that Trinity United preached every single day was Marxist to its core, deriving from Marxist priests who were aiding the Marxist Sandinistas in Nicaragua. Because then Cardinal Ratziger (Now Pope Benedict) officially pronounced liberation theology as coming “from radically marxist positions”. Because the Obama Party is the Party of self-avowed communist Van Jones. Because the “reverend” who was Obama’s “spiritual mentor” is an open Marxist and socialist. Because the Communist Party USA backed Obama in the last election and is backing him in this one, too. And because just what the hell is the difference between Obama’s redistribution of wealth agenda and Karl Marx’s redistribution of wealth agenda?

Anti-American because Obama’s church and Obama’s presidency is “GOD DAMN AMERICA!” Because this is the Cloward and Piven presidency to implode America so it would be forced to embrace communism. Because it continues to the Cloward and Piven administration that is looking to achieve communism in America. Because we have continued to see that this is the Cloward and Piven ideology unfolding in hopes of imploding America.

Conservatives are looking for a guy who will tear into Barack Obama like a junkyard dog going after a thief who’s trying to rob its master. Only in this case the thief was a cynical liar who illegitimately seized the White House in 2008 with a fraudulent campaign of lies, and the “master” is the American people who need someone to fight for them.

You’ve got to be smart and polished, Governor Perry.  Because the same dishonest mainstream media that overlooks Obama’s and Democrats’ constant vile rhetoric will eagerly report every single thing you say that either crosses the line or that they can make appear to have crossed the line.

It’s up to Governor Perry to do a better job walking through the long field of land mines the media will place in his path.  And it is up to every single Republican and conservative and tea party member to keep a documented record of everything that Obama and the Democrats say so we can play the game of finger-pointing that is the quintessential tactic of liberals.

Rick Perry Surges To Huge Lead After TWO DAYS As A Candidate

August 16, 2011

From Rasmussen:

GOP Primary: Perry 29%, Romney 18%, Bachmann 13%
Tuesday, August 16, 2011

Texas Governor Rick Perry, the new face in the race for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, has jumped to a double-digit lead over Mitt Romney and Michele Bachmann with the other announced candidates trailing even further behind.
 
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Republican Primary voters, taken Monday night, finds Perry with 29% support. Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who ran unsuccessfully for the GOP presidential nomination in 2008, earns 18% of the vote, while Bachmann, the Minnesota congresswoman who won the high-profile Ames Straw Poll in Iowa on Saturday, picks up 13%.

Rick Perry announced his candidacy on Saturday.

I wrote about my own personal support for him that same day (with that article coming out early Sunday morning).

Two days, and he’s already got the lead in the primaries.

I was hoping Perry would quickly move ahead of Mitt Romney, but who could have dreamed it would happen this quickly?

Rick Perry can unite the conservative-Tea Party-Republican base like no one else in the field.  And Democrats who think they can ignore Perry’s record of creating nearly half the jobs IN ALL AMERICA by trying to morph Perry into George Bush merely because both men happen to be from Texas, they are on the verge of a massive defeat.

I’m Backing Governor Rick Perry For President

August 14, 2011

Many (myself included) have thought that Rick Perry would run for president.

Today he made it official.  The governor from Texas is running for president.  And I believe he will be the next president of the United States.

Here’s Rick Perry’s website.  It’s pretty nice.

Here’s an article on Rick Perry that I hope will make you support him, also.  Among a lot of other facts, it contains this chart:

And here’s an article on his announcement:

Texas Governor Rick Perry launches presidential bid
By Harriet McLeod | Reuters – August 13, 2011

CHARLESTON, South Carolina (Reuters) – Republican Rick Perry, the conservative governor of Texas, on Saturday declared himself a candidate for president with a blistering attack on Democratic President Barack Obama.
 
“I realize that the United States of America really is the last great hope of mankind,” Perry said, as he accused Obama of imperiling America’s standing in the world with “disastrous economic policies” and the “incoherent muddle that they call foreign policy.”
 
Delivering a speech to about 700 conservative activists in South Carolina, Perry, 61, touted his job creation record in Texas and promised to reduce taxes, business regulations and the overall role of government in people’s lives. He said leaders in Washington have lacked courage and Obama’s policies have “prolonged our national misery, not alleviated it.”
 
“Mr. President, let us tell you something. You cannot win the future by selling America off to foreign creditors. We cannot afford four more years of this rudderless leadership,” Perry said.
 
Perry’s entry shakes up the race for the Republican nomination to face Obama in the November 2012 general election. Opinion polls indicate Perry already is close on the heels of former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, the early Republican front-runner.
 
Perry, who caused a stir in 2009 when he openly pondered his state’s secession from the United States, was sharply critical of what he called an overbearing federal government.
 
“As Americans we realize that there is no taxpayer money that wasn’t first earned by the sweat and toil of one of our citizens,” said Perry, drawing a loud round of cheers and applause from the hundreds of people who packed into a Charleston hotel to hear him speak.
 
“That’s why we reject this president’s unbridled fixation on taking more money out of wallets and pocketbooks of American families and employers and giving it to a central government,” he said.
 
“Spreading the wealth punishes success while setting America on course for greater dependency on government.”
 
Perry’s candidacy could steal support from fellow conservative Tea Party favorite Michele Bachmann, replacing her as Romney’s top rival and potentially bridging the gap between the party’s establishment center and right-wing activists.
 
The three-term Texas governor is an opponent of abortion rights and gay marriage. He is considered a strong fund-raiser.
 
‘DOWNGRADING OUR STANDING’
 
Perry seized on the fact that the U.S. credit rating was downgraded this month by a leading rating agency following the contentious deal to raise the U.S. debt ceiling this month.
 
“The fact is for nearly three years President Obama has been downgrading American jobs, he’s been downgrading our standing in the world, he’s been downgrading our financial stability, he’s been downgrading our confidence and downgrading the hope for a better future for our children,” Perry said.
 
He also blasted Obama’s foreign policy.
 
“Our president has insulted our friends and he’s encouraged our enemies, thumbing his nose at traditional allies like Israel,” Perry said.
 
“It’s pretty simple. We’re going to stand with those who stand with us. And we will vigorously defend our interest. And those who threaten our interest, harm of citizens, we will simply not be scolding you. We will defeat you,” he said.
 
The announcement by Perry, who has made his deep Christian faith a big part of his public image, came one week after he led a seven-hour religious rally in Houston to pray for America, a nation he described as “in crisis.”
 
He put his religious faith on display on Saturday. He asked his audience to remember the U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan last week when their helicopter was shot down by militants. “Just take a moment to say, ‘Thank you Lord that we have those kind of selfless, sacrificial men and women,'” Perry said.
 
Perry said his state has “the strongest economy in the nation” and that since June 2009 Texas, home to less than 10 percent of the U.S. population, has been responsible for more than 40 percent of all of the new jobs created in America.
 
“He’s telling us what we see as the lost promise of America,” said Richard Atwater, 67 and retired, who lives in Tupelo, Mississippi, following Perry’s speech.
 
“He’s a true conservative,” added Paul Holmes of Grand Prairie, Texas.
 
Perry could draw comparisons to George W. Bush, the last Texas governor in the White House, raising the possibility of “Texas fatigue” among voters.
 
Raised on a west Texas farm, Perry has never lost an election. After a stint in the Air Force, he rose through the ranks of Texas politics from the House of Representatives to agriculture commissioner, lieutenant governor and then governor in 2000 when Bush left for the White House.
 
(Editing by Will Dunham and Tom Brown)

Here are the articles I’ve written which ought to help explain why he’s my guy in chronological order:

Proof That Republican Economic Policies Work Just FINE: Conservative-Friendly Texas Created 38% Of ALL U.S. Jobs In 2010

Hey, ‘Republicans Drove Us Into A Ditch’ Liberals, Put THIS Into Your Pipe and Smoke It: Conservative Economic Principles RULE In Texas

Want To Know How To Balance The Budget And Have Full Employment? Ask Republicans Who Are DOING It

Basically, Rick Perry knows how to run a successful economy.  And you can know that because as the longest-serving governor of one of the largest states in the nation – the state that has created FAR more jobs than any other state – Rick Perry has PROVEN that he knows how to run a successful economy in a way that no one else in America (and certainly not Barack Obama!) can claim.

Someone put it this way, and I completely agree with it:

Mitt Romney is an establishment candidate that many believe can win, but who carries a lot of baggage for flip-flopping; Michelle Bachmann is the true conservative, but one whom many don’t believe can win because she is such a lightening rod.  Rick Perry is an establishment candidate who can get huge fundraising because he is the governor of the most successful economy in the nation.  And he is a true conservative.

Rick Perry is the one man who can truly unite both disparate wings of the GOP.

He’s not “perfect.”  for example, some of his positions on illegal immigration leave me a little uncomfortable.  I keep in mind, however, that he’s been the governor of a border state with a LOT of Hispanics in the voting population; I keep in mind that as a governor – unlike Michelle Bachmann, or Rick Santorum – he’s actually had to govern which made it a lot harder for him to live by talking points; and I keep in mind that he’s a Republican who can actually WIN.

George Bush made substantial gains in the Hispanic vote.  And when you combine that with the fact that Obama has had substantial losses among Hispanics, and bottom line Rick Perry has a real shot at the Hispanic vote.

I say that as someone who believes that if Barack Obama is re-elected, the United States of America is doomed, finished, dead.  It’s not just looking back at the way he’s broken the nation thus far; it’s knowing that he would be vastly worse in a second term he will know that he will never have to face the American people ever again.

While my endorsement doesn’t exactly mean a whole heckuva lot, I am endorsing Gov. Rick Perry for president.  And I hope to do my part to help him win in 2012.

I hope you join me in beginning to pray for this man every single day between now and November 2012.

Here is a transcript of Rick Perry’s words at the August 6 prayer rally in Houston Texas.  They prayed for rain, and praise God they got rain on just a week later on August 13!

Here is a transcript of his announcement speech in South Carolina.  This was the first time any politician reminded me of Reagan since Reagan.  And here is the Youtube video:

Here are some of his words when he went to New Hampshire later on August 13.

 By the way, here’s another article that belongs in here, as we are going to now begin to see the heavily-liberal mainstream media try to morph Rick Perry into a George Bush clone:

Remember This When Democrats Try To Morph Gov. Rick Perry Into A Clone Of George W. Bush

Want To Know How To Balance The Budget And Have Full Employment? Ask Republicans Who Are DOING It

July 18, 2011

Nebraska, a state governed by Republican conservative Dave Heineman.

First there’s the unemployment rate of 4.1%.  Second lowest in the entire nation (behind fellow Republican state North Dakota, for what that’s worth):

LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — Authorities say Nebraska’s unemployment rate dropped to 4.1 percent in May, a drop of a tenth of a point from April’s 4.2 percent.

Then there’s the fact that this Republican state has a balanced budget.  And how did it balance the budget and get low unemployment?

[M]aybe there is something Washington can learn from Nebraska. How did Nebraska, with an estimated budget shortfall of almost $1 billion November 2010, get to a unanimous decision May 2011 and approve a balanced biennial budget of $6.9 billion?  A balanced budget that does not raise taxes and leaves nearly $300 million in the state’s cash reserves.

Some might presume that life is difficult for Nebraskans, what with their state government required to balance the budget and not allowed to borrow.  Actually Nebraska  is ranked #10 by Lifestyle Statistics, it was 3rd in top jobs behind North Dakota and Texas, and to top it off, the unemployment rate for Nebraska is 4.1%.

How did it happen? Strong leadership. A state constitution that requires a balanced budget and doesn’t allow for borrowing. Tough decisions made during tough times, not delayed.  Priorities identified. Discussions. Debates. Negotiations…and the use of a red line.

An interesting quote from Gov. Dave Heineman occurs midway through this snippet from an article entitled, “Caterpillar Threatens To Leave Illinois Over Taxes“:

“If Illinois doesn’t want your business, Texas does,” wrote Rick Perry, the governor of that state.

The governor of Nebraska, Dave Heineman, wrote: “In Nebraska, we balance our budget by controlling spending, not by raising taxes.”

An official in the South Dakota governor’s office chimed in: “In South Dakota, you make a profit, and you keep your profit.”

The Illinois tax increase will cost Caterpillar’s 23,000 employees in the state about $40 million this year, said Jim Dugan, the company’s chief spokesman. Higher taxes make it harder for Caterpillar to attract and retain engineers, accountants and other employees, Dugan said. He added that Caterpillar’s corporate taxes in the state also will increase but provided no estimate on the added cost.

“The state unfortunately continues to put off the tough decisions” about potential reductions in government spending and pension costs, Dugan said. He said Caterpillar was offering to advise the governor on cost-cutting based on the company’s own experience chopping pay and laying off workers during the 2008-09 recession

First, liberal Democrat Illinois is a hellhole.  And that’s because Democrats own that state.  Some interesting figures: 4 out of the last 7 governors of Illinois are convicted felons.  It’s government union pension program is the biggest disaster in the nation.  It’s major city Chicago is so filled with gang violence that even Democrats have been pleading for the National Guard to come in.  And, if that isn’t bad enough, Democrats are so dishonest that they just altered their congressional map to undo the clear will of the people.  That’s what Democrats bring.

All over the nation we’ve got cities that have voted Democrat for a hundred years.  And they are all hell holes.  While a jackass is in many ways an accurate symbol of what it means to be a Democrat, it would really be far more fitting if the symbol of the Democrat Party was a black hole surrounded by the white-hot fires of hell.  Because “Democrat” is really a portmanteau for “Demonic Bureaucrat.”  And hell is what demonic bureaucrats invariably bring.  Along with socialism and totalitarian control.

And with that said, did someone say Texas?  Did someone say Rick Perry?  Oh, that’s right, I haven’t talked about Texas and Republican Rick Perry yet.

From a liberal writing in the Los Angeles Times:

For the last few weeks, I’ve been unable to get a startling statistic out of my head: Since the recession officially ended, Texas has created more than 4 of every 10 new jobs in America.

That’s right, Texas: the reddest of red states, home to gun lovers and school textbooks that openly question whether the Founding Fathers intended for the separation of church and state. I am no ideologue. Still, whenever I get political, I tend to tilt reflexively to the left, making the jobs figure a bit disconcerting at first.

But there’s no escaping it. The number is real. Which means that if you care about putting people back to work at a time when nearly 14 million in this country are unemployed, maybe Texas has something to teach us.

[…]

According to the Dallas Fed, Texas generated 43% of the net new jobs in the U.S. from June 2009 through May 2011 — an enormous share when you consider that the Lone Star State accounts for about 8% of the nation’s economy.

So let’s see.  Nebraksa is flyover country as far as liberals are concerned; they prefer their completely failed major metropolitan areas that their completely failed polices have turned into complete failures for a good solid century.  But Nebraska – with it’s 4.1% unemployment rate (second only to ANOTHER state governed by Republicans) and it’s balanced budget – has the last laugh.  It’s kind of like that “Annoy a Liberal – Work hard and be happy” bumper sticker – only with a whole entire STATE.  If you want to try to weasel your way out of contemplating Nebraska’s success by arguing that it’s a small state and it’s low tax, spend-on-a-budget ways wouldn’t translate to a large state, let’s consider Texas and the 43% of ALL U.S. JOBS it has created, instead.

Basically no matter how you slice it, conservatives rule and liberals drool.

We’re coming upon a major decision: do we want four more years of the hellhole of God damn America, or do we want to pursue the economic policies that actually have the advantage of WORKING???

[Update:] Oh, my goodness, I forgot to point out that – after all the unhinged rabid liberal HATE that came out in Wisconsin – Governor Scott Walker was able to sign a balanced budget with no business-hostile tax increases.

Remember This When Democrats Try To Morph Gov. Rick Perry Into A Clone Of George W. Bush

July 1, 2011

The Wall Street Journal has already reported that their inside sources say that Governor Rick Perry of Texas will run for president this year.  And I hope he does.  His record of having created 38% of all the jobs in the entire NATION since Obama’s “recovery” began will make this proven leader a very compelling candidate.

He will immediately head to the top of my list if he runs.  And nothing would make me more exited than to see him select Michelle Bachmann for his VP.

That said, I’ve already heard how the Democrat Party and the mainstream media intend to attack Perry and Bachmann.  In both cases, they will do everything they can to link these two candidates to other favorite liberal bogeymen.

For Michelle Bachmann, why, she’s just like Sarah Palin.  They’ve already tried to use the EXACT same narrative to demean her.  Like Palin, Bachmann is “Barbie with fangs.”

For Rick Perry, why, he’s from Texas.  And isn’t that the same state that George W. Bush came from?  And therefore isn’t Rick Perry just another George Bush?  And of course the American people are tired of having their presidents come from Texas.

As ridiculous and factually wrong as this line of “reasoning” is, it appears to be the Democrats’ primary campaign against Perry.

I said “factually wrong” because it is just plain factually wrong.  Not that that ever stopped Democrats before.

The LA Times sub-title says, “despite obvious similararities”  in its comparison of Perry and Bush.  Let’s look at how much they manage to back up these “similarities.”  In the entire half page article, this was the sum total of “differences”: “The two share some characteristics, sometimes unnervingly so. They have similar accents, the same cowboy gait and many of the same mannerisms.”  AND THAT’S IT.  Read it for yourself if you don’t believe me.

The rest of the article is ALL difference, and it’s what makes all the difference.  So with that said, see what completely different men these two truly are:

Rick Perry has a history of acrimony with George W. Bush
As he considers a presidential run, some have tried to tie the Texas governor to his predecessor. Despite obvious similarities, their considerable differences have left a lingering hostility between the two men.
By Mark Z. Barabak, Los Angeles Times
June 30, 2011

Reporting from Austin, Texas— Rick Perry was in Iowa three years ago, talking up a favored candidate, when the subject turned to George W. Bush, the president and a fellow Republican who preceded Perry as Texas governor.

Bush, or “George,” as Perry called him, was no fiscal conservative — “never was” — and his work on tort reform, a subject dear to Republican hearts, paled next to Perry’s achievements, the governor said.

“I mean, ’95, ’97, ’99,” Perry went on, elaborately ticking the years off on his fingers, “George Bush was spending money!”

Those are fighting words among Republicans — especially Texas Republicans, who pride themselves on their stinginess — and even more so to Bush loyalists who, years later, still simmer over Perry’s off-the-cuff remarks. (How dare he slap the president like that, the Bush faithful fume, and refer to the leader of the free world as George!)

If Perry runs for president, his critics hope to tie him to Bush and those who delivered the self-assured Texan from Austin to the Oval Office.

“Is America ready for a president who was George W. Bush’s lieutenant governor, who was George W. Bush’s successor as governor … and who, like George W. Bush, was also a Karl Rove puppet?” taunts Garry South, a Democratic consultant, referring to Bush’s strategist.

But that jibe ignores what has been, at best, a cool relationship between Bush and Perry, and a lingering hostility between their top political advisors.

The two share some characteristics, sometimes unnervingly so. They have similar accents, the same cowboy gait and many of the same mannerisms. But the two come from starkly different backgrounds, approach politics in utterly different fashions and even draw their support from different parts of the GOP. It is the difference, said a campaign consultant who has worked with both, between Yale and Texas A&M, between Phillips Academy Andover and Paint Creek High School.

To a certain upper crust of Republican, “Perry is the low-rent country cousin” who lacks Bush’s prep-school polish, said R.G. Ratcliffe, a longtime student of Texas politics who is writing a book about Perry. “They see him as a hick and are embarrassed having someone like that as governor.”

Privately, the former president has spoken of his successor as a political lightweight and someone not all that bright. Perry scoffs behind closed doors at Bush’s privileged background and popularity among country-club Republicans, suggesting the New England native is a faux Texan.

Perry’s story is the kind of up-by-his-bootstraps saga that Bush might have scripted for himself, had he been able.

He grew up in West Texas, in a farm town so small it literally was not on the state map until Perry, as governor, put it there. Life was austere; Perry was 6 before the family had indoor plumbing. His mother sewed his clothes, including the underwear Perry wore to college.

He graduated from Texas A&M with a degree in animal science, joined the Air Force, then returned to farming. On a whim he ran for state Legislature in 1984, as a Democrat, and won.

In 1990, under Rove’s tutelage, Perry switched parties and was elected agriculture commissioner. Eight years later, Perry ran for lieutenant governor. By then, Rove was working for Bush; the conflict between their political camps grew out of that year’s races.

Bush had been elected governor in 1994, and was already eyeing a run for president. Facing a weak opponent, he wanted to win reelection overwhelmingly and lift his numbers among blacks and Latinos to show crossover appeal. Perry faced the state’s popular Democratic controller, John Sharp, and had a much tougher time. The Bush and Perry teams squabbled over polling, voter targeting and the hard-edged tone of Perry’s campaign.

In the end, Bush won by 1.4 million votes. Perry scratched out victory by fewer than 70,000. Afterward, there were harsh words; today Rove and Dave Carney, a top Perry strategist, are bitter foes.

Perry took over as governor when Bush resigned to become president. (He did nothing to improve relations by hastening the Bush family’s exit from their living quarters.)

Both men hewed to the tenets of Texas Republicanism: low taxes, small government and limited regulation. But Bush prided himself on his ability to work with Democrats, while Perry took a much more partisan approach.

Bush also showed a greater willingness to spend on programs, especially education, with potential long-term benefits. Perry, by contrast, has cut billions from public education to help balance the state budget.

The governor has little use for the philosophy Bush dubbed “compassionate conservatism.” At a recent foray to the Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans, he told a cheering crowd that conservatives should “stand up” and “stop apologizing” for their beliefs.

Perry has long been a favorite of Christian conservatives, embracing their issues with a zeal Bush lacked. He also has strong support in the “tea party” movement; Perry was at a local rally in 2009 when he broached the prospect of his state seceding from the union, a statement he later disavowed.

More recently, Perry used an emergency session of the Legislature to push for tighter restrictions on abortion and legislation to criminalize aggressive airport searches. The pat-down bill died Wednesday.

To supporters, Perry’s move demonstrated a fealty to fundamental principles, not least reining in what they consider the overly obtrusive federal government. To critics, including some in the Bush camp, it was another case of showmanship triumphing over substance.

For all of that, however, Carney said accounts of a Bush-Perry spat are overblown.

“They’re different people, bringing different experiences and philosophies to the process,” Carney said. “But they’re not at odds. That’s a silly, overblown urban myth that’s developed a life of its own.”

But last year’s gubernatorial contest was telling. Perry was bidding for an unprecedented third term. His opponent, in an unusual primary challenge, was U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. Rove served as a Hutchison advisor, along with other Bush loyalists. Bush’s father, former President George H.W. Bush, endorsed Hutchison. (George W. Bush stayed neutral.) Even so, Perry came from far behind and not only beat Hutchison, but did so overwhelmingly.

Carney insists there are no hard feelings. If Perry decides to run for president, he said, he will not focus on his Republican rivals or the governor he followed in office.

“[President] Obama is the person we’re trying to defeat,” Carney said. “That’s what Republicans are looking for.”

Since I believe that Gov. Perry WILL run, and since I believe we’ve already seen the “Bush III” attack that will be used against him, it seemed to me that this article would be worth preserving.  I have learned from hard experience that liberal newspapers have a bizarre tendency to conveniently purge their archives of stories like this one.

Perry and Bush not only have gigantic differences between them, not only do they come from completely different set of key supporters, not only do they have vastly different visions of what it means to be “conservative,” but Perry’s clear disdain for many of Bush’s policies would make a comparison of the two completely off limits if either the Democrat Party or the mainstream media that serve as the propagandists for the Democrat Party were honest.  Only, of course, they aren’t honest, are they?

If Perry enters the race, you can bet that we’ll start seeing him “morphed” into George W. Bush.  Becuase George W. Bush is the “Emmanuel Goldstein” of the Democrat Party.  Democrats keep saying that George Bush was the one who drove the economy into a ditch.  And so, if Rick Perry is George Bush, he’ll do the same thing.  The fact that that is completely wrong, and the fact that Rick Perry has created 40% of the ENTIRE NATION’S new jobs, won’t matter to these lying demagogues.

Just remember they will be abject liars when they do it.  And that even the liberal Los Angeles Times recognized that it would be a lie in the body of its story about the so-called “similarities.”

One of the things that I’ve found about mainstream media is that they often WILL report a story that favors a conservative.  The major difference is that, when it favors the conservaitve, they will cover it once and drop it.  And that story just goes away.  But if if HURTS conservatives or favors liberals, they will run such stories again and again and again.

Don’t forget what the Los Angeles Times said about Rick Perry being a completely different candidate than George W. Bush.

Proof That Republican Economic Policies Work Just FINE: Conservative-Friendly Texas Created 38% Of ALL U.S. Jobs In 2010

June 10, 2011

How’s THIS for a record to run for president on?

CNBC EXCERPTS: RICHARD FISHER, FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS PRESIDENT AND CEO ON CNBC’S “SQUAWK BOX” TODAY
Published: Tuesday, 7 Jun 2011 | 10:51 AM ET Text Size By: Jennifer Dauble

[….]

FISHER ON CREATING RULES:

“WE’VE GOT TO CREATE RULES AND REGULATIONS HERE THAT ATTRACT CAPITAL AS WELL AS DEAL WITH OUR UNFUNDED LIABILITIES OUR DEFICIT PROBLEMS AND SO ON, JUST AS TEXAS HAS MANAGED TO DO SO RELATIVE TO OTHER STATES IN THE UNITED STATES.”

[…]

FISHER ON TEXAS JOBS:

“SINCE THE RECOVERY BEGAN, 38 PERCENT OF ALL JOBS CREATED IN AMERICA HAVE BEEN CREATED IN TEXAS, AND TEXAS IS BACK UP, IN FACT MY 11TH FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT OF TEXAS, PARTS OF LOUISIANA, PARTS OF NEW MEXICO; OBVIOUSLY 96 PERCENT OF THAT PRODUCTION AND THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE ARE IN TEXAS OF MY DISTRICT- HAS MORE EMPLOYMENT NOW THAN IT HAD WHEN THE CRISIS BEGAN.”

Obama and the Democrats have relied on a demagogic narrative that Republican policies failed and Democrats offer “hopey changey” for the last three years of what is now an increasingly obviously failed presidency.  The fact that it couldn’t be more false doesn’t stop them from telling and retelling the liberal fairy tale over and over and over again to a wide-eyed mainstream media and anyone else fool enough to believe them.

The difference between California (liberal Democrat) and Texas (conservative Republican) are the difference between long dark hopeless night and bright sunny optimistic morning.  Take for example restaurant chain Carl’s Junior:

Carl’s Jr. chief downplays Texas talk
Written by Henry Dubroff
Wednesday, 02 February 2011

CKE Restaurants CEO Andy Puzder sees advantages in moving the company’s headquarters from Carpinteria to Texas, but a move is not imminent, he told The Business Times.

In a Feb. 2 telephone interview from Houston, where he is looking at the  company’s fast-growing Carl’s Jr. operation, Puzder said he paid a  visit to Texas Gov. Rick Perry earlier in the week and discussed the  company’s growth in the Lone Star State.

But he said that CKE, the parent company of Carl’s Jr. and Hardees,  won’t break its lease in Carpinteria or abandon the headquarters in the  near term. “We love California and we’d love to stay,” said Puzder. “Our  heart and soul is in California.”

But Puzder said that long delays in opening stores, California’s  byzantine rules on overtime pay and high personal income taxes could  make a move inevitable. “We feel more like we’re being pushed out,” he  said, adding that “economics may compel us to do so.”

CKE has been growing rapidly in Texas, where it now has 40 restaurants  and expects to have 300 by the end of the decade; in comparison, it has  700 stores in California. “The growth of this company is in Texas, and  the real big question for this company is, where are your restaurants  and where is the growth?” Puzder said.

Puzder also said that Californians leaving the state for jobs and  entrepreneurial opportunities in Texas are part of the reason for its  fast growth in that state. Carl’s Jr.’s brand familiarity is so high in  Texas that the two most recent store openings in the state, including a  unit in Houston, set records for revenue. “Jobs and consumers are in  Texas,” Puzder said. “Our customers beat us here.”

And, yes, CKE moved its operations to Texas.

And yes, a LOT of Californians have beaten them to the Lone Star State.  I showed previously the difference in cost between renting a truck to move from California to Texas versus moving from Texas to California.  At that time, it cost $900 to move from Texas to California, versus $3,000 to go the other way, because all the moving trucks were already in Texas.  That’s a 233 percent difference.

Which matches a national trend, as people are forced to move out of failed blue states to successful red states.

Thanks to the failure of liberalism.

Here’s some of the specific reasons why liberalism fails at job creation from another article:

Carl’s Jr. chewed up by California, Moving Corp HQ to Texas

[…]

Indeed, CKE Restaurants, parent of Carl’s Jr., is likely to move its headquarters from Carpinteria, near Ventura, to Texas and is undergoing a rapid expansion of restaurants in the Lone Star State. Right before the budget circus got going Wednesday, CKE CEO Andrew Puzder spoke at the California Chamber of Commerce, blocks from the Capitol dome. Like most of us, Puzder loves California and has no interest in leaving it, but he told harrowing tales about doing business in a state that has gone from an entrepreneurial heaven to a bureaucratic nightmare.

“It costs us $250,000 more to build one California restaurant than in Texas,” he said. “And once it is opened, we’re not allowed to run it.” This explains why Carl’s is opening 300 restaurants in Texas and only maintaining its presence in California. Texas has lower taxes than California, but the reason for the shift has more to do with regulation and with the attitude of the respective governments.

Puzder complained about the permitting process here, where it takes eight months to two years to open a new restaurant compared to an average of 1 1/2 months in Texas. In California, restaurants have to provide new curb cuts, new traffic lights, you name it. The company must endure so many requirements and must submit to so many inspections that it becomes excessively costly – and the bureaucrats are in charge of the project.

Once the restaurant is open, Puzder said, the store’s general managers are not allowed to run the business as if they own it. That’s the key to the company’s customer service approach – allowing general managers to do whatever it takes to make customers happy. But California’s inflexible, union-designed work rules, for instance, classify general managers as regular employees. They must be paid overtime for any work beyond an eight-hour day. They must take mandated breaks at specified times.

If a busload of customers comes to a store, these general managers must sit back and do nothing if they are on a break period. Most states have 40-hour workweek rules, meaning employees are paid overtime after exceeding 40 hours of work in a single week. In California it is based on the day, which limits the ability of managers to work, say, six hours one day and 10 hours the next day. Puzder complains about these industrial-era requirements that impede flexibility and harm customer service.

And California law encourages “private attorney general” lawsuits against private businesses over overtime and other regulatory rules, which has created a huge financial incentive for attorneys to file questionable legal actions against restaurants.

“It’s not like we have kids working in coal mines or women working in sweatshops,” Puzder said. It’s not as if his workers in other states, where these regulatory rules don’t exist, are oppressed, he added. “How does this help us instill entrepreneurial values?” He wonders how all these nonsensical rules teach people about being independent from the government rather than dependent on it.

I’d argue that the rules are designed specifically to impede private enterprise and to hobble entrepreneurship. After all, the unions, trial attorneys and liberal legislators writing these rules believe that government is the answer to most problems and that private industry is a cancer.

“People are just dying to get out there and make money,” Puzder said. “But California is setting a bar here. You can’t work smarter, harder, longer or better.” His company has had to fire hardworking store managers who insist on working longer hours than the state allows. He wants to tell these people, “Come to Texas, and we will hire you.”

The big debate at the Capitol has been whether to pass a budget with tax extensions. Gov. Jerry Brown and Democratic legislators believe the only thing wrong with California is that people here don’t give the state enough of their paychecks. They believe this state has too-few government workers and too little oversight of business.

Democrats offer us a government of the Weiners, by the Weiners and for the Weiners.  They want the Anthony Weiners of the world to have control over your health care, over your pension, over your life.  They want government’s finger in every pie.  They want more taxes, taking a bigger and bigger share of earnings, savings and profits.  They want more regulations.  They want to be able to say who receives and who pays, who wins and who loses, even who lives and who dies.

The Democrat Party and Barack Obama are failing America – to the extent they even want “America” at all.

When you think Democrat policies versus Republican policies, don’t consider Obama’s way overused and frankly demagogic “Republicans drove us into a ditch” analogy; just consider Republican states like Texas and Democrat states like California.  The conclusion couldn’t be more clear.

Obama Continues To Reveal He Is The Lowest Form Of Demagogue

April 20, 2011

CBS News had the story:

President Obama invoked the 2007 collapse of the Interstate 35-W bridge in Minneapolis while criticizing cuts to infrastructure in the Republican budget plan at a town hall meeting on Tuesday.

“According to the Republican budget that was passed, for example, we would have to eliminate transportation funding by a third,” he said. “…You remember when that bridge in Minnesota collapsed with all those people on it and there was a big hue and cry, how could this happen in America?”

Obama pointed at the Republican agenda to reign in the utterly out-of-control federal spending that will be absolutely 100% guaranteed to implode America’s economy unless that spending is reigned in, and then demonized the Republicans for a previous bridge collapse.

But as happens far too often in the mainstream media propaganda that often gets to pass for “news,” CBS didn’t fully report the facts.

You see, Obama lied.  Because that’s what he does.  And that collapsed bridge he demagogues to demonize Republicans for – claiming that their budget cuts would eliminate maintenance – didn’t actually have anything whatsoever to do with maintenance:

NTSB: Design errors caused Minn. bridge collapse

WASHINGTON (AP) — The deadly collapse of a Minneapolis bridge last year began at steel plates in a main truss, attributable to a design flaw and not corrosion, federal safety investigators said Thursday.

National Transportation Safety Board investigators said the bridge collapse was unavoidable once U-10 steel gusset plates failed at the U-10 connection, near the center of the bridge. Investigators also ruled out any pre-existing cracking as a factor in the accident.

A hearing into the collapse quickly focused on the U-10 gusset plates on the Interstate 35W bridge. The safety board as far back as January had identified design flaws in the plates as a critical factor in the collapse.

CNS actually does a little investigation and reports the facts in an article entitled, “Obama Misstates Cause of Minn. Bridge Collapse–Falsely Blames Insufficient Federal Spending“:

Contrary to Obama’s townhall speeech, the bridge did not collapse because of “deteriorating” infrastructure. According to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), the collapse was due to a design flaw, not to a lack of maintenance.

“The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the collapse of the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis, Minnesota, was the inadequate load capacity, due to a design error,” the NTSB states in its 2008 report on the incident.

In fact, the NTSB reported that on the day of the collapse, the bridge was in the process of being refurbished, further contradicting Obama’s claim that the collapse was evidence of a lack of infrastructure spending.

“On the day of the collapse, roadway work was underway on the I35W bridge, and four of the eight travel lanes (two outside lanes northbound and two inside lanes southbound) were closed to traffic,” reads the NTSB report.

If Obama were a halfway honest man, he would apologize for his vicious demonization that is entirely based on a lie.  But he’s not a halfway honest man.  And so he will count on the fact that the mainstream media will report his lies and not bother to correct them.  Because they are leftwing ideologue propagandists, and that’s how they roll.

You want to know something else I don’t understand?  It’s why we still need so much money for mainstenance projects.  Remember Obams’s so-called “stimulus” and how it was all going to go to such “shovel-ready projects”?  According to the CBO, Obama’s stimulus will cost $3.27 TRILLION.

Where did that money go, Barry Hussein?  Why is it that if Republicans cut so much as a dime, bridges across America will collapse?

Then there’s Obama’s demagogic remarks about border security and immigration:

“The question is going to be, are we going to be able to find some Republicans who can partner with me and others to get this done once and for all instead of
using it as a political football?”

But Obama had total Democrat control of Congress for TWO YEARS.  And he utterly failed to make any kind of serious bipartisan overture whatsoever on immigration reform during a period when Republicans had little chance of stopping much of anything.  He is simply lying and blaming Republicans for his own failure.  Which is to say, the only one using this issue as a “political football” is the guy demonizing others for doing what he himself is clearly doing.

You can again see just how utterly and vindictively partisan and demagogic Obama is in this exchange over the fact that Obama had a major meeting on immigration reform, and refused to invite so much as a single governor from one of the border states:

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: Did you hear what is  going on in Washington? President Obama is talking about immigration reform. The president held a meeting  today at the White House to discuss the broken immigration system. He met with a  bipartisan group. Guess what, he didn’t invite any governors from border states.  Why not?

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer joins us live from  Phoenix. Governor, did you miss your invitation? Did you decline your  invitation? Why weren’t you here at the White House to talk about immigration  reform?

GOV. JAN BREWER, R-ARIZ.: I wish I would have been  invited. No, I do not — I did not get an invite. You would have thought one of  the governors would have been invited since we are on the frontlines fighting  for security there. It was a little bit of a snub, if you will. I think that on  behalf of myself, I think I could have added insight to the situation that  Arizona certainly is facing.

VAN SUSTEREN: I looked at the White House press release. Of  the people who were invited — the category of those — it says stakeholders  expected to attend. I looked up stakeholders to see whether you might be a  stakeholder or Governor Rick Perry. It says a person or group that has  investment share or interest in something as in the business or industry. I  guess it is someone who has a strong interest in the topic. He must think you  don’t have any interest in the issue or you would have been invited.

BREWER: That is very unfortunate if that’s what he believes.  I feel Arizona, I believe I and Rick Perry and certainly the governors on the  border have been leading the fight. We’ve been bringing the message to America.  And I think that we should have been afforded that opportunity to be at the  table to help him understand the situation that we want straightened out.

VAN SUSTEREN: Let me tell you who he did think was a  stakeholder and has a huge interest in this partial list — Mayor Bloomberg, who  of course is the mayor who sent investigators down to Arizona to investigate you  about guns, your state, the former police chief of New York Bill Brown,  Secretary Michael Chertoff, former secretary of Homeland Security.

Then he invited Senator Mel Martinez, former United States senator. Here’s  another interesting one, Greg Page chairman and CEO of Cargill. I thought that’s  an odd one. I understand why, because Cargill was raided in 2007 by immigration  and ice for violations having to do with immigration. They probably have the  inside scoop on that one.

Al Sharpton was invited. The CEO of Facebook, another one. Arnold  Schwarzenegger, the former governor of California not the current governor, and  Richard Trumka, who is AFL-CIO union leader. Those are some of the people that  the president thinks has a greater interest than you do.

BREWER: That’s an unfortunate list as far as I’m concerned.  I didn’t know he had extended the invitation that this meeting was going to take  place.

But it seems by the list and what has been reported back to me this afternoon,  it is people that looking at that wonderful word “comprehensive immigration  reform.” It has nothing to do with what we really need to have done, and that is  to get our borders secured.

I think they are looking to try to talk about amnesty and all these other  issues and the dream act. None of these things in my opinion are going to take  place until we get our borders secured. I don’t think the American people want  to address anything until we feel secure. Our citizens need to feel secure in  their homes. It just continues to grow with the issue of people coming across  our borders illegal, the drug cartels.

VAN SUSTEREN: I may disagree with you a little bit. I would  like a solution that is complete and which protects our borders, protects  Americans and handles all the issues. I would like to see it put behind us. I to  the president’s speech at American university last summer to hear it. I did want  to hear what he said he was going to do.

We haven’t heard anything. He a Democratic house and Senate we don’t hear  anything until now as he gets ready to launch his campaign. And now things have  changed. Now we are hearing it again. I’m deeply disturbed. I think this is  talk. I think his guest list supports that because this is not bringing people  to the table who have real interests in this.

BREWER: I absolutely agree with you. The bottom line is that  he has a different agenda than what the American people have. Unfortunately, we  keep talking and we keep contacting him with our concerns, really no response,  no concern. Of course now we are in the election period so we now he’s going to  be standing up and talking about he’s going to do this and that. He’s had two  years to deliver what he promised two years ago and hasn’t delivered.

So we want our borders secured. I truly believe that the majority of us are  not going to discuss anything else in regards to what his agenda is, until we  get satisfaction with security at our borders.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/transcript/border-governors-not-invited-white-house-meeting-immigration-reform#ixzz1K3EvMeaH

This is beyond ridiculous.  If you have any intention whatsoever of coming to some kind of agreement, you invite the major decision makers.  But Obama doesn’t want solutions; he wants to prevent solutions and then blame Republicans for the well that Obama personally poisoned.

Last week Obama gave a hateful speech in which he blasted Republicans as the party that wanted to kill old people and children with autism.  During a point in the health care debate, when Obama needed to appear bi-partisan, Obama said:

We’re not going to be able to do anything about any of these entitlements if what we do is characterize whatever proposals are put out there as, ‘Well, you know, that’s — the other party’s being irresponsible. The other party is trying to hurt our senior citizens. That the other party is doing X, Y, Z.”

And then he proceeded to do the very thing that he himself had said would undermine and poison the process.  Rep. Paul Ryan said correctly:

“What we got yesterday was the opposite of what he said is necessary to fix this problem.”

And, again, Obama doesn’t WANT to fix problems.  Obama wants to demonize and demagogue and lie and accuse and blame.

We can and should go back to 2006 remarks made by Obama when he personally demonized George Bush for raising the debt celing.  Obama demagogued:

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”

Now the same weaselly demagogue is saying that anyone who acted like Obama himself acted would be an un-American traitor.

It just never ends with this guy.