Having earlier stated that he was fine with New York’s decision to end marriage discrimination against gay couples, and having stated that he thought the definition of marriage should be a states issue, Gov. Rick Perry has back-pedaled on the issue in response to an attack from Rick Santorum, who compared legal gay marriage to legal polygamy or illegal heterosexual marriage. Perry now says he supports a federal amendment to the Constitution as well as amendments to state constitutions, defining marriage as strictly one-man, one-woman.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:50 am
Anyone going to get upset at this election-year conversion, which is born totally out of political convenience?
Anyone?
Flip-flop?
July 29th, 2011 at 9:53 am
But, but, but, I thought Perry was the man of steel. I thought he had a spine.
Technically, this doesn’t contradict what he said earlier, but it sure has a different spin to it.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:55 am
Rob,
How doesn’t it contradict what he said earlier? First he said marriage should be a state issue, then he says that the federal government should decide the matter for the states in the form of a Constitutional amendment. Perry’s position is basically “Marriage should be a state issue…until the federal government can get its hands on it.”
July 29th, 2011 at 9:57 am
Is it really a retreat or flip flop? I see those as consistent. You can respect states rights while supporting state amendments to the constitution and even a federal amendment. technically a federal amendment would have to be approved by the states before it becomes an amendment. I don’t see it as a flip flop.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:59 am
This reminds me when Perry ran Al Gore’s campaign as a True-Blue Democrat in the Spring of 1988, only to end up voting for George HW Bush in the Fall as a dyed-in-the-wool Republican.
Rick Perry’s got to be on the winning team no matter what I guess.
July 29th, 2011 at 9:59 am
He has not even announced and he is already showing a lack of conviction! Flip-flopper!
July 29th, 2011 at 10:03 am
“end marriage discrimination”
bull****. Only heterosexual marriages and relationships are capable of producing the return benefit to society through the birth and raising of children.
The fact that this is the only form of Marriage society elects to promote and incentivise is hardly descrimination.
To allow gay marriage is to center our laws and policies more around what makes a fractional minority happy about their own lives than about what provides a benefit and advantage to the country.
You explain to me how we are still able to promote traditional families, traditional marriages, and procreation if we are saying that the antithesis of all of those things is equally fine, acceptable, and worthy of promotion.
You cannot promote the lifestyles that make our country strong if you’re also telling people its perfectly well if they don’t do those things, but instead chase whatever other lifestyle they please.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:03 am
What surprises me is that Perry, this tough 10th Amendment conservative, would feel the need to respond to Santorum who’s not exactly polling well. I suspect that what really happened is that Perry was taken to the woodshed by the Clerics (Hagee, Perkins, Land, Barton, et.al.) who were reportedly urging him to run and promising to deliver their followers to his campaign.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:04 am
From the Atlantic:
“Perry has shown himself to be a 10th Amendment hypocrite whose credibility on any issue related to federalism should never again be trusted. As noted in that earlier post, “It’s easy for governors to advocate for states’ rights: Doing so effectively maximizes the power they wield. Once a candidate makes it to the Oval Office, however, his or her power is diminished by permitting states to go their own ways. Presidents, being power hungry, are unreliable defenders of what Perry is espousing.” In this case, Perry hasn’t even declared in the primaries yet — mere yearning for the White House was enough to cause him to embrace expediency over principle.”
July 29th, 2011 at 10:07 am
This isn’t a contradiction, technically. I’m no Perry fan (if you didn’t notice), but it isn’t really a contradiction to say it is a states right issue unless there is a federal constitutional amendment.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:08 am
OK, I’m waiting for the “Flip-flopper for poltical convenience” choir to sound off.
Don’t disappoint me guys.
If all I hear is crickets, then you will be proving my suspicions…
July 29th, 2011 at 10:08 am
I do have to say that it is at least as much if a flip flop as the crap that gets held against Romney though (which doesn’t say much about the meaning of flip-flop in today’s politics).
July 29th, 2011 at 10:11 am
11 – Yeah, where is Adam X accusing Perry of having no principals?
July 29th, 2011 at 10:12 am
Oops … I mean “principles”
July 29th, 2011 at 10:14 am
Oh, his ‘apostles’ got to him.
I can spell it, even if they cannot.
F l i p f l o p.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:15 am
10
No, it’s a pretty big flip-flop actually. If Rick Perry wants to *subvert* the right for a State to decide whether or not it wants to legalize Gay Marriage, it is NOT respecting *that* State’s rights.
A Constitutional Amendment is most certainly Constitutional, however, that still means that he is taking the side AGAINST the 10th Amendment. Get it? In other words, he’s deciding that States do not have RIGHTS in this circumstance to decide for themselves.
So yes, still a flip-flop no matter how you spin it.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:16 am
So, which is his true belief and which is a political calculation?
July 29th, 2011 at 10:16 am
MassCon,
Yeah, he’s a flipflopper.
I expect “clarification” later as well on his contention that the 10th Amendment is more precious than life itself.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:17 am
Just in — this is BIGGGGGG – Cong. Pence on Laura Ingraham just said Boehner plan NOW TO INCLUDE BALANACE BUDGET AMENDMENT CONNECT!!!
Congrats to Palin & Co.!!!
This is BIG!
July 29th, 2011 at 10:17 am
Jerald,
I ripped Perry a new one a few threads down. Give me chance to make my rounds……
July 29th, 2011 at 10:18 am
Although Perry is still respecting the Constitution to make the change, he is picking and choosing which PART of the Constitution he will respect. The part that he is attempting to subvert, is the 10th Amendment. He has flip-flopped from supporting the 10th Amendment, to supporting an Amendment to subvert the 10th.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:18 am
Jack, Your quitter queen did nada in WDC.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:22 am
16 – Nope. He is arguing that the federal government has no right to stop gay marriage if the states want it, unless there is a constitutional amendment creating that right. There isn’t any inconsistency there.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:24 am
His understanding of the 10th amendment is extreme, but not to the point where he thinks it can’t be overcome by a constitutional amendment. That would just be insane.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:24 am
19 – It always did. Welcome to the real world.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:26 am
23
Uh…no. Try reading it again.
Rick Perry WANTS a Constitutional Amendment to subvert the 10th Amendment in regards to Gay Marriage. Prior to this, he said he wanted to keep the 10th Amendment INTACT for Gay Marriage laws.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:27 am
Flip Flopper! Wow, didn’t take long for this….is this a shadow of things to come?
July 29th, 2011 at 10:30 am
Jax,
Perry’s prior statement:
July 29th, 2011 at 10:31 am
Last two paragraphs of #28 should not be part of blockquote.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:33 am
28
For the first time in my life (and probably the last) I agree with MWS.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:34 am
28 – If you put it that way, I agree with you. It isn’t inconsistent to say you think the 10th amendment supports the rights of states to decide the issue unless there is a constitutional amendment though.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:35 am
Perry gaining on Romney in the “Art of the Flip Flop” coming soon to cities and towns all around you.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:35 am
It’s pretty simple folks.
First, Perry said states should decide whether to allow gay marriage.
Second, Perry said the federal Constitution should ban gay marriage.
If you don’t count that as a flip-flop, you are clueless.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:35 am
wow. this is a pretty big change for rick perry. I wonder what he will change next
July 29th, 2011 at 10:37 am
Jax,
” It isn’t inconsistent to say you think the 10th amendment supports the rights of states to decide the issue unless there is a constitutional amendment though.”
Right, but as you now see in the quote above, he went beyond that in his original statement.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:43 am
Welcome to the big leagues, Rick.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:44 am
#8 Chris,
Spot on, IMO. Sad thing here is that Perry had not thought this through and formed a cogent, consistent response BEFORE shooting off his mouth. Now it looks like, as you said, that his contributors are wagging the dog. Not good, especially since he seems to be running (assuming he is) on the 10th Amendment and Social Conservatism, two mutually exclusive principles in many ways.
Social conservatisim, which demands we maintain traditional marriage laws and demands that abortion be illegal on a national basis run counter to libertarians and 10 amendment advocates. Don’t know how you reconcile the two.
States rights advocates have be OK with states who legally perform same sex marriages, polgyamist marriages and by logical extention lesbian polygamist marriages, should consenting adults desire them.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:45 am
Josiah, I was just looking at it through a constitutional law approach. You can say that states have the right to decide on the issue of gay marriage, because right now, they do. However, you can still support an amendment to the federal constitution.
It certainly is a contradiction in terms of what he claims to support, and I should have worded that better. Matt at 28 sums it up pretty well.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:52 am
More bad news today that our economy is faltering. I think we’re in a double-dip.
That Rick Perry is even making this Social stuff a focal point at the current time is a complete joke. IT’S THE ECONOMY, STUPID!!!
Even without the flip-flops, people are looking for a leader who can balance the budget and get Americans back to work. Nobody gives a damn right now about New York’s Gay Marriage laws, or Abortion issues.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:52 am
@fearandvoting
Fear and Voting REPORT: Boehner Gives Up, Adds Balanced Budget Amendment To Plan http://bit.ly/pTb2op [ThinkProgress]
July 29th, 2011 at 10:53 am
If Rick Perry had any Political sense at all, he would be focusing on his job record as Governor. Now he’s defining himself as the Social Issues candidate before he even gets started. Bad, bad move.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:54 am
This exchange makes it appear that Perry is not a very sharp thinker.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:54 am
the tea party is going to get the republicans into big trouble here
July 29th, 2011 at 10:56 am
perry stole jobs from other states more so that he created them busta 25,000,000,000 dollar debt in texas
July 29th, 2011 at 10:57 am
44
You’re right. I guess Perry really has nowhere else to go, but the Social Issues. His record is pretty much terrible across the board on every issue.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:57 am
“Fine with him” for now.
Obama loves how we do his bidding and destroy our own.
July 29th, 2011 at 10:59 am
Y’all got NOTHING on Perry’s economic record. Just because the left and the media and the crypto-left within the party are trying to force him to expound on his social stances. Frankly, Governor Perry IS correct: this is CURRENTLY a states’ rights issue. However, should a Federal Amendment come to the fore, he would sign it.
Mountains out of mole hills. You Romney people are rich (not HIS kinda rich…) That you are trying to turn this into a flip-flop is just good ole fashioned hypocritical fun! Especially you, Mass Conservative… I mean, really? How’s your health care workin’ up there?
July 29th, 2011 at 10:59 am
Race42012 has got to be Obama and the DNC’s favorite site.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:05 am
Brutus, you threw any potential credibility you had out the window by starting your comment with the pseudo-word “y’all.”
Next, you don’t know anything about Perry’s record. His economic record is not good, no matter how you spin it. Sure, jobs were created in Texas. But they were crappy jobs with low wages and no health insurance.
The uninsured rate in Texas is TWENTY-FIVE PERCENT (25%)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WOW!!!!
————————————————————————————
As for the marriage thing. He didn’t just say it IS a state’s issue. He said it SHOULD BE a states issue.
—————————————————————————————
As for my health care, it’s great. I have a low deductible, low co-pays, and my local hospital is one of the best in the country. My waiting periods for urgent care are 1 day.
Setting up a physical takes about 4 days.
And of course the ER is for emergencies.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:09 am
Craig,
“Obama loves how we do his bidding and destroy our own.”
Surely you’re not suddenly squeemish about vetting candidates?
July 29th, 2011 at 11:13 am
mAss Conservative: typical supercilious yank.
His economic record is leaving everyone else in the dust, and continues to do so. Look it up, it isn’t (aint) hard.
BTHO mitt romney.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:20 am
Rick Perry is not going to talk up his jobs record because he actively went and recruited companies from other states to come to Texas for a sweetheart deal that ultimately helped created the $25 million debt problem the state now has. Texas was not creating new jobs that added to the overall national economy; it was stealing jobs from other states, and those other states are all too happy to tell the story when given the chance. Voters in the U.S. despise the fact that our jobs are going to Southeast Asia, and it would be pretty easy to paint a picture where Texas stole jobs from other states in sweetheart deals that just further burdened the state. It was really a situation where Perry took the stance that it was Texas against the rest of the states. Instead of trying to do do business with other states in the nation, Perry tried to screw them and went international in search of cooperating capital because other states wanted nothing to do with Texas.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:21 am
52. $25 billion, not million
July 29th, 2011 at 11:24 am
It’s true, Greg. That’s why Perry was trying to give the toll road business to Spain without a competitive bidding process because he didn’t want any other states, or companies in other states, to have a place in Texas. He has pissed off a lot of other states, and they have stories to tell…
July 29th, 2011 at 11:24 am
Brutus, I hope you know foreigners call all of us “yanks,” including southerners.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:26 am
Brutus, if you mean having the largest state debt per person in the United States because of outpaced spending, then yes, Perry is leaving everyone in the dust. Perry’s record is abysmal.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:31 am
There’s vetting then there’s nitpicking.
The over/under for Perry flip flop threads the rest of this month is 9 1/2.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:33 am
MC,
If we make fun of folks who say y’all (which is about 70% of our party), we sound like liberals.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:34 am
Mass Conservative: but not all of us “supercilious.”
Reginald: Rick Perry is not the governor of any other state but Texas, so he doesn’t, nor do I, give much of a damn about other states crying because Texas had been ‘stealing’ their jobs. I read where people have their criticisms to mount with regard to the jobs being “short term” or “governmental.” That wouldn’t necessarily account for the Texas gross state product groing from 94.5% over 10 years, not to mention the Center for Global Markets and Freedom writes: “From January 2000 to June 2010 [Perry's tenure], Texas had a net increase of nearly 1.1 million jobs—more than any other state by far. In fact, Texas’ outsized gains eclipsed the total of the next five job-creating states: Florida, Arizona, Virginia, Utah and Washington.”
10 years is a long time to sustain something a lot of people are whining is unsustainable. Or his creating over HALF of the new jobs in the United States in 2009, a recession year.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:34 am
Should we start making fun of “park the car”?
July 29th, 2011 at 11:38 am
Craig,
I don’t think the need to trust a candidate on social issues is “nitpicking.”
July 29th, 2011 at 11:39 am
59
Yeah, creating hundreds of thousands of shitty jobs without health insurance, that’s really something!
Did you know Rick Perry has never run a business?
Did you know Mitt created more jobs at Bain than Perry did running a whole state?
July 29th, 2011 at 11:42 am
Net Tax supported debt as a % of personal income remains under 1.5 in Texas throughout Gov. Perry’s tenure (http://www.vermonttreasurer.gov/sites/treasurer/files/pdf/bonds/2010StateDebtMediansReportMay2010.pdf)
Which is pretty good, considering the rest of the states.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:45 am
The governor’s job is to create jobs WITH health insurance or to provide it?! Well now, I think we are getting closer to your political ideology, MassCon. Soon we’ll be more accurate and change the latter word in your name… you can choose what to; but I have a few ideas.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:45 am
Perry Is Jobs will be his mantra if he enters the race. No doubt about it. And it is impressive and unprecendented in scope relative to the other states.
And it scares my other favorites and their supporters to *death. I get it.
Perry solidifies my strong number THREE choice. Number ONE if Huck doesn’t change his mind. And if we’re just not ready for a woman nominee at this early part of the century as we were not the last one (and the one before that and so on.)
*Politically nomination-wise.
July 29th, 2011 at 11:47 am
Door knocking in boots is gonna suck…
July 29th, 2011 at 11:49 am
Question: How many jobs did Romney and Bain terminate or send overseas?
And to be fair, I know he did create enormous opportunities for pizza drivers across America
(Politics, baseball, and apple pie, Gotta love it!)
July 29th, 2011 at 12:04 pm
30 Reasons To Not Vote For Rick Perry
#1 Rick Perry is a “big government” politician. When Rick Perry became the governor of Texas in 2000, the total spending by the Texas state government was approximately $49 billion. Ten years later it was approximately $90 billion. That is not exactly reducing the size of government.
#2 The debt of the state of Texas is out of control. According to usdebtclock.org, the debt to GDP ratio in Texas is 22.9% and the debt per citizen is $10,645. In California (a total financial basket case), the debt to GDP ratio is just 18.7% and the debt per citizen is only $9932. If Rick Perry runs for president these are numbers he will want to keep well hidden.
#3 The total debt of the Texas government has more than doubled since Rick Perry became governor. So what would the U.S. national debt look like after four (or eight) years of Rick Perry?
#4 Rick Perry has spearheaded the effort to lease roads in Texas to foreign companies, to turn roads that are already free to drive on into toll roads, and to develop the Trans-Texas Corridor which would be part of the planned NAFTA superhighway system. If you really do deep research on this whole Trans-Texas Corridor nonsense you will see why no American should ever cast a single vote for Rick Perry.
#5 Rick Perry claims that he has a “track record” of not raising taxes. That is a false claim. Rick Perry has repeatedly raised taxes and fees while he has been governor. Today, Texans are faced with significantly higher taxes and fees than they were before Rick Perry was elected.
#6 Even with the oil boom in Texas, 23 states have a lower unemployment rate than Texas does.
#7 In 1984, Perry was elected to the Texas House of Representatives as a Democrat from a district (64) that included his home county of Haskell.
#8 Back in 1988, Rick Perry supported Al Gore for president. In fact, Rick Perry actually served as Al Gore’s campaign chairman in the state of Texas that year.
#9 Between December 2007 and April 2011, weekly wages in the U.S. increased by about 5 percent. In the state of Texas they increased by just 0.6% over that same time period.
#10 Texas now has one of the worst education systems in the nation. The following is from an opinion piece that was actually authored by Barbara Bush earlier this year….
*36th in the nation in high school graduation rates. An estimated 3.8 million Texans do not have a high school diploma.
*49th in verbal SAT scores, 47th in literacy and 46th in average math SAT scores.
*33rd in the nation on teacher salaries.
#11 Rick Perry attended the Bilderberg Group meetings in 2007. Associating himself with that organization should be a red flag for all American voters.
#12 Texas has the highest percentage of workers making minimum wage out of all 50 states.
#13 Rick Perry often gives speeches about illegal immigration, but when you look at the facts, he has been incredibly soft on the issue. If Rick Perry does not plan to secure the border, then he should not be president because illegal immigration is absolutely devastating many areas of the southwest United States.
#14 In 2007, 221,000 residents of Texas were making minimum wage or less. By 2010, that number had risen to 550,000.
#15 Rick Perry actually issued an executive order in 2007 that would have forced almost every single girl in the state of Texas to receive the Gardasil vaccine before entering the sixth grade. Perry would have put parents in a position where they would have had to fill out an application and beg the government not to inject their child with a highly controversial vaccine. Since then, very serious safety issues regarding this vaccine have come to light. Fortunately, lawmakers in Texas blocked what Perry was trying to do. According to Wikipedia, many were troubled when “apparent financial connections between Merck and Perry were reported by news outlets, such as a $6,000 campaign contribution and Merck’s hiring of former Perry Chief of Staff Mike Toomey to handle its Texas lobbying work.”
#16 In 2008, Rick Perry stood beside Child Protective Services in Constitutional violation during the invasion and mass kidnapping of 464 FLDS children from their community in Eldorado, Texas. Perry spokeswoman Krista Piferrer said the governor retained full confidence in the agency, noting that “The governor is very proud of the work being done by CPS…CPS has handled a very complex situation both professionally and compassionately.” The 3rd Court of Appeals in Austin ruled that Texas child welfare authorities acted improperly and the children were returned to their parents. The governor ended up squandering 12.4 million of public money on the operation.
#17 Perry supported and still supports Open Borders with Mexico
#18 In 2001 Rick Perry signed the Dream Act into law allowing illegal immigrants in-state tuition. This is the blueprint for Obama’s own similar Federal Dream Act.
#19 In 2004, Perry allowed the execution of an innocent man, Cameron Willingham, and then impeded an investigation into the whole matter, including firing and replacing three members of the Texas Forensic Science Commission.
#20 Perry has called the 16th and 17th Amendments to the Constitution ” mistaken “. The 16th Amendment is the income tax amendment accounting for 45 % of all tax receipts. The 17th Amendment allows for direct election of U.S Senators, taking that right away from government.
#21 Texas is the leading polluter among states in the union, leading the nation on carbon dioxide emissions, but when the state was sued by the EPA for not meeting clean air standards, Perry sued the federal government. He also is a global warming critic who called the 2010 BP oil spill an ” act of God .”
#22 One in four children in Texas live below the poverty line. Perry cut $ 10 billion out of child support services even though Texas has a $ 8.2 Billion rainy day fund.
#23 Perry said that Texas might have to secede from the Union.
#24 Perry has called himself a “Prophet” and has said that he has been literally “called by God” to run for President. Matthew 7:15: “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.”
#25 Rick Perry has had a questionable past when it comes to Social Issues. Recently in 2008, he endorsed Rudy Giuliani for President, causing Mike Huckabee to respond with the following in an email on 7-21-11: “For all his new found commitment to hyper-conservatism, he’ll get to explain why he supported pro-abortion, pro-same sex marriage Rudy Guiliani last time.”
#26 Rick Perry recently stated that he supported New York’s Gay Marriage law by stating, “That’s New York, and that’s their business, and that’s fine with me”.
#27 Less than a week later on 7-28-11, Perry flip-flopped his support for New York’s Gay Marriage law and the 10th Amendment by stating, “Indeed, to not pass the Federal Marriage Amendment would impinge on Texas’ and other states’ right not to have marriage forced upon them by these activist judges and these special interest groups.” Who is the real Rick Perry?
#28 Perry also stated that Abortion is a states issue, but in this case didn’t flip-flop on it. “You can’t believe in the 10th Amendment for a few issues and then [for] something that doesn’t suit you say, ‘We’d rather not have states decide that.’”
#28 Rick Perry took office in 2000 with 4.4% unemployment and ballooned it a whopping 4% to 8.2%.
#29 Texas manufacturing payroll is 46 out of 50 in the U.S and the San Antonio Metro is 50 / 50 in big cities. Even though Texas has had better job numbers than the national average during the Obama Recession, jobs created there account for the lowest wages in the nation.
#30 Texas has the nation’s worst uninsured health rate. More than 25 % of Texans lack health care coverage when the national average is 15 %. There are more uninsured residents in Texas than there are people in 33 states with an extraordinarily high level of uninsured children. Yet, Perry has been critical of Massachusetts health care program, even though Massachusetts is number one in the nation with the lowest uninsured healthcare rate around 2%.
———————
Anyone proud of that record is one sick puppy.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:05 pm
To the average Texan, life is getting up early, working at McDonalds for minimum wage because you don’t know how to read, having asthma from the terrible pollution, but not having any insurance to see a Doctor.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:07 pm
Brutus, you are an idiot. I am now totally convinced.
My point in saying the jobs don’t have health insurance is that they’re shitty jobs. Burger King. Motel 6. McDonalds. Truckers.
The jobs created under Perry are in large part based on shipping and international trade with Mexico and Canada. Industries like fast food, motels, and trucking are supported by Texas’ location on the border of Mexico and on the way to Canada.
Jobs in engineering, law, and health care (like the ones we have in MA) are good jobs that can support a family.
Texas? Not so much.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:08 pm
MITT’s contribution to JOBS:
Bain & Company – 5,000 jobs
Bain Capital – 400 jobs
Staples Office Supply – 90,000 jobs
Accuride – 3,000 jobs
Brookstone – 2,000 jobs
Domino’s Pizza – 145,000 jobs
Sealy Mattress – 5,000 jobs
Sports Authority – 15,000 jobs
Artisan Entertainment (now LionsGate Ent.) – 500 jobs
AmPad – 4,100 jobs
Burger King Corp. – 40,000 jobs
Bombadier (Ski-doo, Sea Doo, Can-Am) – 6,000 jobs
Warner Music Group – 4,000 jobs
Dollarama – 12,000 jobs
Burlington Coat Factory – 28,000 jobs
Royal Phillips Electronics (now NXP SemiConductor) – 28,000 jobs
Bavaria Yachtbau – 1,000 jobs
Home Depot Supply (now HDSupply) – 10,000 jobs
Guitar Center – 10,000 jobs
Clear Channel Radio – 18,000 jobs
Gome Electrical Appliances, China (16% stake) – 49,000 jobs
Styron (formerly a div. of Dow Chem) – 2,000 jobs
Gymboree – 10,000 jobs
That’s 488,000 more jobs than what Obama has created.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:09 pm
10% of kids in Texas do not have health insurance. That is a disgrace. Those are innocent human beings who cannot fend for themselves.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:15 pm
CF, not only did those jobs get created directly, but those jobs SUPPORT OTHER JOBS.
Look at Domino’s for instance.
Yeah, being a pizza delivery boy is a bad job. But it’s mostly occupied by kids between age 16 and 24. They need the experience before they can get a better job.
BUT… Where does Domino’s get its ovens from? Its food ingredients? Its computers? Its microwaves?
Domino’s purchase of these items creates jobs in tech sectors, where the real money is, where people like myself support our families.
As an electrical engineer, I have worked in teams in the past to develop systems for networking data and payment info for large retail companies and yes, Domino’s.
I have also designed computers, many of which are sold at Staples, along with other tech and office supply stores.
So my point is… Mitt has created over 488,000 jobs, but has contributed to multi-billion dollar sectors of the economy indirectly. Those companies listed in #71 support millions upon millions of jobs.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:16 pm
Rick Perry took office in 2000 with 4.4% unemployment and ballooned it a whopping 4% to 8.2%.
Mitt Romney took office in 2003 with 5.8% unemployment. When Romney left office, unemployment was 4.5%.
http://www.bls.gov/lau/
Who has the better job creation record in public office? Perry’s 8.2% or Romney’s 4.5%? Nuff said.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:19 pm
67 – A lot fewer than he created. Are you a socialist? Do you believe it is morally wrong for companies who are on the verge of bankruptcy to downsize?
July 29th, 2011 at 12:22 pm
75
Exactly. I find it funny how many so-called “Conservatives” bash Romney for making tough choices and trimming the fat at companies to make them profitable in the long run.
Wasn’t that Obama’s exact line when he pushed for bailouts for all of the failing auto companies and banks? Isn’t that the playbook the left uses to attack us Conservatives? “You rich evil CEO’s killing jobs!”
It’s funny how quickly these people will abandon Conservative principles to attack Mitt.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:27 pm
76 – And the other thing is that we are going to have to make big public employment cuts if we really want to get Washington under control. The idea that we should oppose someone that knows how to cut jobs when it is necessary is laughable.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:30 pm
74. That’s correct. Romney’s unemployment rate increase was about twice that of the national avaerage. How can Perry tout jobs when his unemployment rate nearly doubled under his watch? Heck, the annual wage increase under Perry’s watch was a small fraction of the national average and did not keep pace with inflation, meaning workers in Texas had a decreasing quality of life as a result.
I know. I am from Texas, and I have watched Perry spend, spend, sped his way to a $25 billion deficit. The largest per capita deficit in the United States.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:31 pm
comparing stats for governorships is stupid. it is all relative. A lot of fators need to be taken into account before you draw conclusions.
with romney you can see he was competent and was a good leader. that is why i picked him, competence and leadership. that and i believe he has a conservative world view.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:32 pm
77
True.
Here’s the biggest irony of all: It’s the same people disgusted with Boehner’s plan because it doesn’t go far enough to make cuts, who bash Mitt Romney for making cuts to save businesses.
WTF!!??
July 29th, 2011 at 12:32 pm
There are a few versions of marriage ammendments out there. The most popular one is one where the Federal Government recognize the marriage as between man and woman at that level. It does not impact the states’ preferences. Think about this – the military, the federal workers, the federal programs, and most important, the federal courts. These judges won’t be ale to decide whatever the state can have a state ammendment (Think California’s Prop 8 which was overturn by a federal judge). This approach reserves the rights to the states. Why is Perry flipflopping if he acknowledged that the states should have their own ammendments in additional to the one at the federal level? No, this is not so. Re-read his remarks with this in mind.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:33 pm
Reginald is very liberal when it comes to spending, both in his personal life and with state funds. He would never be a good shepherd of the ecnonomy. Listen, I am an original tea partier, but I will not blindly follow a governor that has such a terrible record.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:34 pm
Reginald Says:
July 29th, 2011 at 12:33 pm
Reginald is very liberal
Sorry to hear that man.
lol, kidding
July 29th, 2011 at 12:38 pm
83. Well, I really don’t have a lot of extra funds with which to be a liberal spender. My bad.
July 29th, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Then why doesn’t Romney (who is all in the race for 2012) sell his jobs record in Iowa. They have Dominos Pizza, Burger Kings, ans such that Romney has “Saved” and the kids that work there, Staples, etc etc etc, have parents who vote.
Huck used that line in Iowa. That is, jobs are going down while Wall Street is going UP. Iowans listened and applauded while the establishment chuckled at Huck.
Bottom Lines: Bachmann (unless Governor “Jobs Perry” shows up in time) will be landslidin’ Iowa by EXACTLY the same margin as the Huckaboom did over Romney.
(Ok, sorry to interrupt. Please go back to your daily Perry diss and Mitt lovefest.)
Mitt knows it and therefore is AWOL, baby
July 29th, 2011 at 12:54 pm
Bottom line, compare and contrast the courageous leadership of Palin vis a vis BBA and Boehner VS. the “out of sight” Mitt!
Nothing more need be said.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:00 pm
85 – You are insane. What has Bachmann done to create jobs?
July 29th, 2011 at 1:00 pm
Craig, I think you know why Mitt is AWOL in Iowa. It’s not because of jobs, and yhou know it. Romney has web ads about jobs every weeks these days, and I am sure they are just as available in Iowa as anywhere else. Iowa is not very representative of the rest of the country, and Romney is focusing on states that are more representative of the rest of the country. Iowa is an oddball state. It is very different from the states that border it. I
I don’t know if Governor “lower quality of life Perry” will show up or not. Word in Texas is that he, with the support of his backers, is trying to reach some settlements and agreements with individuals that could be detrimental to his potential campaign.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:01 pm
86 – Nothing more needs to be said to you, because you too are insane. Threatening Congress to pressure them to send us into default is crazy, not courageous. Not that you would know the difference.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:02 pm
86. And you said that with a straight face? The courageous leader who quit on her state to pursue money-making opportunites? That’s one of the best lines ever on this board.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:09 pm
Iowa is first because they are representative of the Heartland of America.
Sorry, if Mitt doesn’t get that.
But he will loud and clear unless he wakes up and competes. This hiding out stuff won’t work, imho.
Bedides, we sure could use Iowa in the general versus Obama. I’ll go out on a limb here and say..
Republicans win IA, Obama is then toast in Indiana, North Carolina, Florida, and OHIO!
WE coattail off that and take back the Senate by a shocking amount. House gains HUGE also.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:11 pm
#71 – To have an accurate count (assuming you buy the idea that investing in a company “creates” jobs), you would need to subtract jobs cut by businesses Romney caused to go bankrupt or otherwise close.
But I am not sold on the idea that an investor in a company gets credit for creating jobs. If that were the case, I should get credit because of the stocks I hold and every banker who lends money to a company gets credit. The truth is, the people who actually do the hiring are the ones who create jobs. The investor just counts money.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
86. I am not sure how well versed you are about this, but Mitt Romney is not an ELECTED MEMBER OF CONGRESS. And FYI, Palin, the quitter queen, is not either.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
Jax,
Your debating style clearly needs work. You can’t just keep calling someone “insane” or daily derogatory names who simply and honestly disagrees with your adoration of Mitt. (Which we all find charming.;) Hey, seriously.. What would Race be without Romfan speech?)
In other words, don’t be a TEX.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
#91 – I think the debt ceiling debacle is enough to convince swing voters in the burbs that one party rule is too scary to consider. Obama, with the assistance of House republicans, has positioned himself to say, “look what they want to do. The only thing saving social security and medicare is my veto.” In other words, house republicans have shown their hand. Indeed, as they are fond of saying, they have put forth three different plans, each one more radical than the public wants.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:31 pm
michele bachmanns husband is gayer than hell
July 29th, 2011 at 1:31 pm
95.
Pablo,
You could be right, my friend. But I’m under the impression because of the Tea Party platform and Obama’s complete failure (or Harvard trained wisdom) coupled with the worst economy of most folks lifetime, that REPUBLICANS will be granted ONE more chance to control all three houses of government a month from November.
If we Repubs fail again, you will see a third party in 2016 when we will be toasted by the Heartland.
Last chance for Republican romance: 2012-2016
July 29th, 2011 at 1:32 pm
#7 – “Only heterosexual marriages and relationships are capable of producing the return benefit to society through the birth and raising of children.”
Really?? So are we going to ban impotent couples from getting married? I mean, THEY aren’t capable of producing the return benefit to society therough the birth and raising of children either.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:32 pm
jjj,
Get lost, Ayers.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:34 pm
PabloZed, Romney’s company didn’t just buy stock, they reorganized companies that were on the brink of closing their doors. In most cases, these companies had run out of options and were so far in the red that they were going to be gone forever. To belittle these accomplishments in such a way speaks volumes. Most of America disagrees with your assessment of Romney’s record of job creation.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:34 pm
*a YEAR from
July 29th, 2011 at 1:37 pm
Btw, Huck wants to say, “Thanks for saving the Olympics and Guitar Center!”
July 29th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
..that’s where he buys his picks.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:39 pm
The country is 25% registered independent already, and 34% is republican. All that has to happen is for a 5% share to leave the republican party and join the independents, and suddenly it is the bigger party. That’s not so far from the truth. If the party cannot coalesce, then it will be on the outs. I do not ewant this to happen by any stretch, but there are factors as work that make make it happen.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:40 pm
Your welcome, Huck. Looking forward to a new release from you.
July 29th, 2011 at 1:53 pm
I think this thread is dead.
WHERE’S THE BEEF! (May I have another poll or three?
)
July 29th, 2011 at 1:58 pm
Greg,
Here’s his newest project and of course, his passion..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nwd98vL1GQ
July 29th, 2011 at 4:19 pm
“Really?? So are we going to ban impotent couples from getting married? I mean, THEY aren’t capable of producing the return benefit to society therough the birth and raising of children either.”
Very few couples are impotent, and allowing them to marry still promotes heterosexual marraige. AND IN THE VAST MAJORITY OF CASES, HETEROSEXUAL MARRIAGE LEADS TO CHILDREN.
Conversely, if we permit homosexual marriage, then that institution becomes about one thing: two adults being happy living together. It doesn’t take a genius to see how that line of thinking could direct many, particularly younger people, to think “well then why bother with the paperwork? I’m already happy living with my girlfriend/boyfriend”
Homosexual marriage completely redefines the institution and removes one of society’s last available methods to promote a particular, beneficial lifestyle over others.
All so that a fractional minority can present themself as married, even to people who completely disagree with their lifestyle.
July 29th, 2011 at 5:25 pm
So gay couples lifestyle isn’t “beneficial”? Well, maybe not to you, but I’m sure it is to their partner and loved ones. And what about all the foster kids that they adopt (until that gets taken away from them too)? Are they beneficial to them? Whether you like it or not, they promote love and family (different than ‘traditional’ family, yes, but family none-the-less) just like heterosexual families do.
It just seems to me (in my apparent lack of knowledge) that by denying them the privilege of marrying the person that they love, that we are denying them the full right to pursue their happiness.
Can they only pursue it to a certain point, and then it’s done? We ALL are granted the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as long as we don’t infringe on anyone else’s right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
How on earth do 2 men/women down the street who want to dedicate their lives to one another affect your life? It shouldn’t affect it at all.
July 29th, 2011 at 6:10 pm
94 – Yes I can, and I did. Your arguments don’t make any sense.
July 29th, 2011 at 6:12 pm
“So gay couples lifestyle isn’t “beneficial”? Well, maybe not to you, but I’m sure it is to their partner and loved ones”
But to the country as a whole, that is being asked to condone, promote, and even subsidize their relationship by granting them the rights and benefits of state-sanctioned marriage?
No.
If you want society to promote something, recognize something, endorse something, even provide a financial incentive for something, PARTICULARLY when that thing runs counter to the religious faith of the majority of America, then you sure as hell better have a reason for doing so.
And making two people feel better about living together isn’t good enough…
July 29th, 2011 at 6:20 pm
109 – It isn’t beneficial to society, which is why society shouldn’t be subsidizing it by giving them marriage benefits. If two gay people want to live together in a monogamous relationship for the rest of their lives, they are absolutely free to do so. If they want to adopt, they can. If they want to leave their estate to their life partner there is nothing stopping them. They can execute a durable power of attorney to give their partner hospital rights should one of them be incapacitated. The only thing missing right now is the state’s endorsement and tax benefits. I don’t think there is any reason to extend that to a relationship that has never been traditionally called marriage and gives no appreciable benefit to society.
July 29th, 2011 at 6:32 pm
And he just lost my vote.
July 29th, 2011 at 8:28 pm
FLIP-FLOPPER!
Perry is a terrible candidate. I still think he may well win, but he shouldn’t. I’d vote for Jon Jnr over him.
July 29th, 2011 at 8:30 pm
80 – well said!
July 29th, 2011 at 10:14 pm
For you people that believe the lie that Mitt bought companies and destroyed them here are a couple of links for you to look at: http://americaneedsmitt.com/blog/2011/07/12/romney-lay-thousands-ship-jobs-overseas/
http://americaneedsmitt.com/blog/2011/07/01/bain-capital-has-touched-many-lives/
Learn the truth and be free.