This website is a member of Liberty Alliance, which has been named as an company.

Is Rick Perry The Only True Conservative In The Race?

Written on Thursday, October 20, 2011 by

rick perry

So far in the early going to secure the right nominee to go against President Barrack Obama next November, those who follow the campaigns have been exposed to much information and, unfortunately, much misinformation about the candidates. Obviously, anyone who has read my previous articles is aware I support Governor Rick Perry and have drawn some conclusions about those who oppose him.

Mitt Romney: The former Governor of Massachusetts has, in the past, and currently still believes in global warming. He would favor raising energy taxes and adding a national sales tax to the present income tax. He has no qualms about supporting gay marriage and probably cannot be trusted when he says he is pro-life because his public utterances have always been dependent on which way the political winds are blowing. Why would we want to trust him now?

Herman Cain: Mr. Cain is obsessed with his 9-9-9 plan which would make everything we buy more expensive. It’s a clever way to reach deeper into our pockets. To me, in Mr. Cain’s own words, “This Dog Won’t Hunt.” He would win more points with me if he was promoting a flat tax alone. Maybe a double nine plan. A nine per cent flat income tax and a nine per cent corporate tax. Another point, I know there are a lot of cruel people in the world, but we would do better not to have an electric fence to electrocute people sneaking into the country. I do not support illegal immigration but neither would I make it an offense punishable by death. But maybe I just can’t take a joke.

Michelle Bachmann: Ms. Bachmann is a big disappointment to me because I used to support her until I discovered she’s a hypocrite. She continues to rail against Governor Perry over the near unanimous passage of a law by the solidly Republican Texas Legislature in 2001 that allows in-state tuition for some of the children of illegals. Yet, in 2005, while serving in the Minnesota State Senate, she voted in favor of in-state tuition for illegals in her home state. I wonder what her response would be if someone called her out on it publicly?

Ron Paul: I like Ron Paul because I share much of what he believes about thrift and other domestic issues. What I disagree with is his belief the United States brought the 9-11 Terrorist Attack on itself.  It’s one thing to be an isolationist, but first we have to defeat our enemies with such fury they will never do it again. His candidacy would have been better served in the late 18th or early 19th Century before we became too involved in many foreign entanglements.

Rick Santorum: As near as I can tell, Mr. Santorum is a good, conservative, family man and one who would deserve support in some areas. But he’s not a state’s rights 10th Amendment supporter to the point necessary to keep the Federal Government from imposing its will on the states. He has said as much several times during the debates. The Federal Government was never intended to rule over the states by our Founders. I know all about the argument that the issue was settled by the Civil War. But, in our modern age, anyone unhappy with life in Pennsylvania or Massachusetts can always move to another state.

Newt Gingrich: Mr. Gingrich is a brilliant individual and can devastate anyone in a debate which proves being a good debater doesn’t necessarily make someone an attractive candidate.  If he won the nomination, I would most certainly vote for him which is more than I can say about some of the others who, if nominated, might not be able to turn out the conservative vote in sufficient numbers to unseat Mr. Obama.

John Huntsman: Mr. Huntsman, the left’s favorite Republican, condemns people who believe in the Bible as being simpletons for clinging to our belief that God created the world instead of being products of evolution. This is not someone we can trust to be a true conservative.

Rick Perry: In the end we have only one candidate who has true grit and is not afraid to be a conservative. He’s not a great debater. So what! We’ve had enough of silver tongued orators by now. Governor Perry is pro-life, will not tolerate higher taxes, absolutely will protect the border despite false charges he will not and isn’t “wishy-washy” on the issues. Furthermore, he will bring an end to dependency on foreign oil, as evidenced by his recently announced economic plan which would curtail the EPA and open the nation to domestic energy production creating over a million and a half jobs in the process. America would be working and prosperous again and we would have a man of faith at the helm of our nation. True conservatives should be defending someone like Mr. Perry instead of allowing the news media, Republican establishment, and the rest of the “know nothings” out there from pillorying him.

None of those seeking high office has the record of positive performance that Governor Perry has brought to Texas nor will they be strong enough to improve the dismal outlook we are now facing.

Let me end by pointing out that conservative Republicans must be very careful not to act in such way as to lose Texas. By electing someone who would electrocute people seeking a better life or deprive children from receiving an education and allowing them to become solid citizens, we are leaving the door open to the left which eventually could seize Texas and with it never again would we have the opportunity to drive the socialistic Marxists and their ilk back into the holes they crawled out of.

Now, more than ever, we have to not only beat the left-leaning Democrats but we must also defeat the liberal Republican establishment who, like the Democrats, have little qualms about abortion and an ungodly lifestyle. The only candidate, with the track record, belief in God, and the grit to accomplish a victory for conservatives, is Governor Rick Perry.

Herman Cain would make a good vice president. Mitt Romney would be a good Secretary of Labor. Newt Gingrich would be a superb Secretary of State. Rudy Giuliani a great Attorney General. The best bet for the Presidency and the preservation of this nation as one nation under God remains Governor Rick Perry of Texas.


Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

  • Sheila

    A big AMEN – Perry 2012


      WRONG WRONG WRONG! Rick Perry is CFR! What does that mean? That means he is a globalist in favor of a one world government! How can his aims be acheived. Look at Obama: by destroying the Constitution, thats how. Perry is a wolf in sheeps clothing LIKE OBAMA. Once in office it will be more of the same: the gradual destruction of all Constitutional values in order to promote the New Age One World Illuminati-style government. A vote for Perry is a vote for the shadow government that is ruining America.
      “We the People” do not matter to the Rick perry’s of this world. He IS CFR…check it out.

    • LadyLiberty

      Perry is a bully, a smear artist, a con man, and a dirty fighter. As seen on the latest debate. No one likes a dirty fighter. He has amplified and compounded the damage he suffered over the illegal immigration issue with this personal attack; trying to make Romney weak. After Romney told him the truth and it was very clear he did not hire illegals. Perry attacked him again. What a jerk…he wanted payback for Romney’s immigration attacks on him in the last debate…but looked like a sore loser.

    • McClarinJ

      Yes Perry looked like a jerk but he succeeded in getting Romney to show anger. That’s how John McCain defeated Romney in 2008. Hopefully neither one wins the nomination. They’re both tools of the elite who are intent on subverting America to pave the way for their New World Order.

    • am2sweet

      You are correct SHAWN. I had at first thought Perry could be the answer to our prayers but then after checking it out found he’s being financed by members of the Bilderberg organization. They are only for one world government with them in charge and if they finance you then you owe them. They ‘own’ Obama and next they will ‘own’ Perry if he gets elected. Add in the fact that Gingrich is also a member of that organization I guess they figured getting Perry in their grip would give them a chance at having another puppet in office if Obama didn’t make it. I hope that we don’t end up with another Bilderberg puppet in office or we’ll turn into a ‘ruled’ nation.

    • Floyd

      List of Bilderberg participants .. And Rick Perry is a MEMBER..


      YOU ARE CORRECT…. The Bilderbergs are the less than 1% fat cats with all the money and power…seeking to rule the entire globe. Checkout the Georgia Guidestones. That is their manifesto: to reduce the population of this planet BY WHATEVER MEANS to no more than HALF A BILLION! You heard right: they want to decimate 85% of us into oblivion. Then they will return the planet to a NEO FEUDAL society of them… the super rich…and us…the serfs, whose only duty will be to haul and fetch for them. That is your Bilderberg/Illuminati?One World Global Government agenda… a return to slavery on a global scale. So foolow the money and steer clear of any candidate with ties to the Bilderbergs, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the Club of Rome, and the knights of Malta. They all drink from the same trough and all share that selfsame elitist agenda and goal. Now if 90% of us would just give up and die that would just help them so much to acheive their goals. Check it out: the Georgia Guidestones. very chilling and VERY REAL.


      BTW Ron Paul has no ties to ANY of these globalists. He is the ONLY CHOICE if you want a return to the Constitution of the Founding Fathers: all the rest are tainted. With an honest 35 year record of service to America and a true patriot’s love of the Constitution HE is the only contender worth voting for. And do not be fooled by the MEDIA who have totally ignored his huge grassroots following. They would have you believe that he has NO chance at all of becoming President. However they tremble at his support because HE WILL return the country to its 1776 ROOTS.
      HE IS America’s LAST BEST CHANCE for Liberty and Freedom and He does have a very good chance of becoming…with God’s help… the next Commander in Chief. God bless America and God bless Ron Paul.

  • JustMe

    Ha, I live in Texas and Rick Perry only plays conservative when he’s in campaign mode, sad to say. He could have been good.

    • Stephanie

      Funny, because I live in Texas and I say what you just said is BS. It’s important to actually know who you are talking about, before you talking about them like you know them.
      Texans keep re-electing Rick Perry for a reason. And the reason is they know his record, and if he was soooo bad then those who “don’t like him” would vote him out, obviously that is not the majority.

    • sallybe

      Sorry Stephanie. You’re wrong. We vote for him, because his crony capitalist buddies make him too difficult to run against. Check and see who his campaign contributors are. Construction (pro-illegal) and Nuclear Waste Dump are the two biggest.


    • David

      Perry is a RINO and a Globalist. The only reasons the illegal aliens keep voting for him is because he is providing them jobs (half of all new jobs), benefits (free education) and protection (he opposes the fence and Arizona type law).

    • Winghunter

      Rick Perry isn’t the perfect candidate the Republicans dreamed he was

      Rick Perry Caught on Tape Lying About TARP

      Rick Perry AGREES with Obama: Open Borders for America

      Rick Perry not a true conservative by Tancredo

      Rick Perry thanked by Vicente Fox for Illegals In-State Tuition (TX Dream Act)

      Does GOP want Perrys DREAM act too?

      Study: Most new Texas jobs went to immigrants:

    • tncdel

      Perry is great at pandering to the illegal aliens and the Latino’s who are citizens but whose loyalty is not to the U.S. but to Mexico.

    • sallybe

      It’s not “Just You.” Texas Tea Party was ignored by Perry, until we became a political force to deal with. Then he pretended to be on our side. We were crushed when he did the back room deals with liberal Republicans and Democrats in this last state legislature (which we took for Republicans by an overwhelming majority). He is another Obama – talks the talk but walks the RINO walk. Sorry to break it to you, Folks. TX. Tea Party had high hopes for him too. I’m going with the one who does what she says: BACHMANN. Gingrich for V.P. or Sec. of State, Paul – Treasury, Allen West – Defense.

      To author: You lost credibility by calling it cruel to deny benefits or defend our borders.

    • rder

      You are insane if you pick Bachmann for Pres. Newt yes, Marco Rubio Vice. YES YES YES

    • tncdel

      You need to stop projection by making insane comments like you just did.

    • Gene Vallorani

      Some of you say Mr. Perry was late to join the TEA Party but I remember him with Glenn Beck and at one of the first TEA Party rallies in front of the Alamo on April 15, 2009. He’s been with the TEA Party from the beginning and has the support of many folks who support the TEA Party.

    • misskitty

      the tea party was started in 2007 by ron paul supperters. why does everyone forget this fact?!

    • Hank is back

      The absolute truth. Just too hot for the GOP to handle. By 2009 they could no longer ignore it.

    • tncdel

      The Tea Party needs to be more selective about who they allow to join. A RINO like Rick Perry shouldn’t have been allowed to join the Tea Party.

    • truthnow

      Perry’s willingness to sell off parts of Texas for toll roads to foreign investors and using eminent domain against Texas ranchers to further the cause, labels him a scum bag.
      What would he due as president? Sell off America? It’s been said before, Perry is nothing more than a Bush clone. And Bush laid the ground work for obamanation! Lets get off the merry-go-round !!

  • amishmime

    Not electable IMO. We need someone who can defeat Obama and the Liberal Machine. Whether that’s Romney, Cain whomever. Anybody but Obama.

    • sid

      i favor some candidates, more then others, but in the end, i’ll vote for whoever runs against owebama!!! anyone who doesn’t back, the gop candidate, is voting for owebama!!!

    • Hank is back

      If you had your way, a gun would be held to our heads as we cast our ballots. My vote is for my candidate and no other. Send a message to the failed GOP that whichever squishy moderate sob they send us is not good enough and that if Obama wins, so be it. Vote your principles not your fear. Join the R3volution and make the Commies in the GOP and the Commies in the DP go screw eachother!

      Voting for no one, voting for Ron Paul, voting for Mickey Mouse, satying home, all these things are vastly more principled decisions than settling for second best and electing Romney or Perry!

      None of the mainstream candidates will uphold the Constitution, and without the Constitution Aerica is just not America and does not deserve to be saved from Obama. If we vote our fear, we deserve neither temporary security nor essential liberty!

    • Obamavitch

      You are so principled that you will gladly re-elect o-vomit? Man, I hope not very many Republicans are as stupid as you are.

      Someone needs to get inside your punkin head and explain to you that your “principles” won’t mean chit if a Republican is not our next president.

    • rder

      We don’t need the liberal progressive RINO Romney. Cain is at best second. Newt is the best choice.

    • Bev

      Many do not like the idea of Cain’s electric fence. It sounds pretty harsh. BUT with the constant flow of illegals daily, that we support with handouts, education, etc. control calls for desperate and maybe harsh measures. Nothing else is working and we’ve got to do something. They get deported and just come back.

    • Hank is back

      Why take harsh,expensive,drastic measures that were never needed before when all you have to do is end the incentives and enforce the law. Back when the border wassecure,it wasn’t because there was a fence, it was because lawbreakers didn’t get benefits, they got fined, imprisoned, reprimanded, or deported. And like Ron Paul said, would you trut your governmnet to use the fence just to keep out illegals? Who is to say that it wouldn’t keep out legitimate visitors? Who is to say that it wouldn’t be used to keep us in?

    • Dolores Tamoria

      I would love to see a Cain/Gingrich or Gingrich/Cain ticket. I’m sick to death of Romney and Perry. The RINO’s and the Media are puching them on us. We Tea Partiers must stay on top of the RNC so they listen to the will of their constiutuancy. When the election is over don’t think the Tea Parties will disappear. NO WAY! we will be very active in keeping the Republican Party on the straight and narrow.

    • sid

      i am the 53%!!!

    • Hank is back

      Yep. But in the end we allpay a huge hidden tax that only one man addresses. Inflation. Ron Paul.

      End the Fed.

    • tncdel

      If it comes down to the fact that we are stuck with a NWO puppet like Perry or Romney, that’s because we didn’t speak out against them NOW.

      The ONLY major GOP candidate who is a true Conservative is Michele Bachmann. I’m not thrilled with her, to be frank. But compared to the rest of the GOP candidates, she’s the best of the lot by far.

      Perry, Romney, Gingrich and Cain are all RINO puppets of the NWO. And Ron Paul is a RINO too, but at least not a NWO puppet like the other RINO’s.

    • Hank is back

      If by ‘Republican’, you mean Warmonger, Big Spender, and Legislates Morality, then yes, Ron Paul is a ‘RINO’.

      But if by Republican you mean Calvin Coolidge, Robert Taft, Dwight Eisenhower, Barry Goldwater, and Ronald Reagan before he got shot, then Ron Paul is the only one who isn’t a ‘RINO’.

      Ron Paul is one of the few up there who has been a lifelong Republican, and his roots in that party go back to the Eisenhower Era. When he ran for the LP ticket in 1988, he didn’t even bother to switch parties. Even on that ticket he was less of a RINO than Bush Senior.

      But you are right: he is not bought and paid for by the NWO establishment.

  • Joan Solms

    We don’t need a conservative president, that is what the Republican presidents were for the last 50 years.
    That is why I am supporting Ron Paul.
    The conservatives helped get us into the financial mess we are in right now.

    • IdontBrakeForDems

      Joan, I’m with you all the way with Ron Paul. You will not find a more dedicated constitutionalist than Paul. Rush endorsed Pauls economic plan a couple of days ago. The establishment doesn’t want him to win because he can’t be bought off like the rest of the RINO’s we have to choose from. BTW Michelle Bachman is a done deal. All she is running on is repeal obummercare, too bad there is much more at stake than that one issue. Paul isn’t an isolationist. Paul never said we caused 9-11 He said our actions in the middle east precipitated the attack. Our foreign policy sucks and has for a long time, Paul will change that for the betterment of the USA.

    • Dolores Tamoria

      It wasn’t the conservatives it was the Old Guard REPUBLICANS (in name only) that got us into this mess. We will get rid of the Old Guard and take back the Party of Lincoln all the way back to our Founding Fathers Constitution. You better believe that!

    • tncdel

      1.) We haven’t had a true Conservative president since Ike Eisenhower. Reagan was a neocon who gave amnesty to the illegals. Ike gave them “Oper.ation Wetb.ack.”

      2.) Ron Paul is a FRAUD. No one as piss-poor as he is on domestic National Defense can honestly claim to always uphold the Constitution.,, unless you think a “pick and choose constitutionalist” qualifies as a full-timer.

      See these on Ron Paul, then get back to us:


      Amen Joan…you have it exactly right. Paul IS the ONLY real choice and he has a huge bas on the Net: so can he win???? ABSOLUTELY YES!

  • Stan

    Ron Paul is the only real hope to get the country back on track.Ron Paul for President 2012

    • Independent

      Ron Pual would make a good Vice President, so he could not get involved in foreign policy.

      His willingness not to support Israel indicates his lack of understanding Biblical importance of Standing with Israel or against Israel.
      And I don’t think he understands that without reestablishing our covenant with the God of Jacob Our Republic doesn’t stand a chance.

    • tncdel

      Ron Paul would be fine as Treasury Secretary. But no one as piss-poor as he is on domestic National Defense belongs in the White House.

    • Hank is back

      America is not in my Bible and Israel is not in my Constitution.

      You are a heretic and a lawbreaker.

      Israel is a sovereign nation, and if God loves them, Israel sure as hell doesn’t need us.

      Ron Paul’s foreign policy is the only one consisttent with Christianity and our Republic. Everyone else is a violent, Constitution-violating warmonger and a corrupt bribetaker.

      It is your vote, not mine, so vote for a Communist (Obama), a liar (Perry), a knownothing (Cain), a Rockefeller (Romney), or America’s answer to Cicero (Ron Paul).

    • Anthony Holt

      Paul is the only choice we have. A vote for any of the others is like bending over and telling them….”you’ve not had enough yet”

    • tod

      You got that right Anthony Holt He’s Our Only chance against the New World Order and I’m voting for him even if I have to write his name in.I’m not voting for more of the same sh&t we have now,and that is exactly what the rest of the candidates are!

    • tncdel

      I’ll admit that Ron Paul is one of the few who is NOT a NWO puppet. But he is a RINO, nonetheless, who is piss-poor on domestic National Defense.


  • Tom

    Oh yes, Perry is a true conservative who believes in giving free college tuitions to
    Hispanics. That’s a Conservative view. Come on, get serious.

    • Gene Vallorani

      Hispanics don’t get free tuition. Whoever says that is uninformed.

  • Patti Patriot

    This author needs to take the blinders off. How can he say that giving tuition breaks to illegals is conservative?

    • Gene Vallorani

      Patti, The comment I responded to was “free” tuition for Hispanics.” Not all Hispanics are illegal. Neither does anyone get “free” tuition. Maybe someone on a scholarship does but the issue is “in state” tuition” which was a near unanimous act of the Texas Legislature back in 2001 when the issue wasn’t as contentious as today. Do you know Michelle Bachmann voted for in state tuition while serving in the Minnesota State Senate in 2005? It was beginning to become an issue then.

    • tncdel

      Whether someone is “Hispanic” or not is irrelevant. You equate that with including illegals too. Bachmann DIDN’T support tuition for illegals.

      My wife is a Hispanic immigrant. She complied with immigration law. But someone who sneaks into our country like Japanese ninja to pillage and plunder it is an INVADER, not an immigrant.

      If you call them immigrants, then so too were the Nazis who invaded France in WW II.

  • Ann Wilson Kingsley

    Rick Perry is a New World Order candidate: He supports the Tran-Texas corridor. He does not hang tough on illegal aliens. Perry wants to provide illegal aliens with instate tuition. We need a president who will end our illegal alien problem with Mexico once and for all, as well as stopping the New World Order Globalization schemes. NAFTA needs to be renegotiated, and if Mexico imposes tariffs then maybe we do not need as many Mexican goods after all.

    • Gene Vallorani

      It’s too bad we don’t have that Trans Texas Corridor. It might have helped traffic congestion through Houston and Dallas. Everytime I visit my grandchildren in San Antonio it takes longer and longer because of clogged traffic on I-10 and same when I visit my grandchildren in Dallas on I-45.

    • David

      Why should you pay for the Trans-Texas Corridor just so the Chinese can export more of their junk into the United States? I thought that we already had a serious trade deficit problem.


      Anne you are so right. Most people just DO NOT GET IT! If anybody has affiliation with the Council On Foreign Relations (CFR), the Trilateral Commission or even Skull and Bones (like
      Kerry and Bush) then you are automatically voting for the destruction of US NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY in favor of a globalist ONE WORLD ORDER. Dems or REPS doesn’t matter: these people are playing both sides against the middle. Ron Paul has no such affiliation. He is dedicated to upholding the Constitutional oath. Obama OTOH was lying thru his teeth when he repeated that sacred oath. Ron Paul may well be America’s LAST BEST HOPE. Perry is CFR…just like Hillary, her hubby and most of the other contenders.
      Time to wake-up America and realize just who these CFR and TLC people are: they HATE the US Constitution and are totally committed to ending the USA as a sovereign nation.

    • tncdel

      I accidentally raved you. I would have otherwise NOT raved you if I had seen that you support Ron Paul … who is EVEN WORSE THAN RICK PERRY WHEN IT COMES TO ILLEGAL ALIENS.

      See this please:

  • Robert L youngblood

    The only disagreement I have is your opinion of Cain. The 999 plan is based on removal of the 16th amendment. That would eliminate the current disaster of a tax code we face with the IRS. This would also remove the embedded taxes we never see. Over 100 taxes in a loaf of bread alone. Prices of goods and services would drastically fall. Cain/ Perry or Perry/ Cain, I would be perfectly happy with both. Both men have no problem talking about their relationship with Jesus Christ. The only problem is, the RINO’s will shove Romney down our throats. With that said Buggs Bunny would be better than the socialist we have there now.

    • rder

      You need to check with Congress and see if they or their replacements will go with Cain’s 9-9-9 plan – bet they won’t. Don’t pick a president that cannot work with Congress and if you don’t fix the Senate and get rid of the 17th amendment – your screwed in any case regardless of who is elected President. You better find someone who KNOWS government. I’ll take Newt.

    • tncdel

      I’n no Cain fan. But Newt is a RINO puppet of the NWO too.

  • Reg

    You need some education on Cain’s 999 plan. The 9% national sales tax would not cost any goods to go up in price. There are inbedded taxes in the goods we all purchase that would be eliminated by the decrease in corporate income taxes and the elimination of payroll taxes. The price of goods would go down. After adding the national sales tax to the price, the cost would be equal or less than what they currently are.

    • kyl

      The 999 plan may sound good in theory and look good on paper (I don’t think so), but when has any government idea, plan, or act worked the way they promised after it is implemented? The Fraud claims he has all the necessary economic ideas and plans to remedy the problem and look how that’s worked out.

      If Cain gets the nod and wins the White House, his 999 plan will be nothing like it is now after the house and senate get a hold of it and give it a good raping. It will first benefit the government before it helps any of us, if at all.

    • rder

      That is only true on American, made in USA goods. imports would see an increase in price. so now – tell me how many Made in USA products you find in Walmart or most any other department store. Actually, just make a list of made in USA items that Americans by regularly anywhere – or do you have to go from store to store to store to find one here and one there?

    • Dolores Tamoria

      Make every State a Right To Work State. Disolve the Unions that endeavor to run our American Businesses. The bring back our American Manufacturers to make American made goods made by American Employees.

  • kyl

    Perry is just another RINO and the author is of this article is just another idiot.

    Ron Paul 2012!

    • rder

      Y’all need to get over Ron Paul – he is NOT electable. the majority would go with Obama again.

    • Diana Hengerer

      wrong, wrong wrong!! he IS highly electable, you are just believing all the MSM propaganda.

      Great to see Ron Paul’s name on this website, because Newsmax is one of the guilty parties
      as far as the IGNORING RON PAUL goes.

      Please go to and donate to the
      Black THIS Out Money Bomb! Send a message to the media establishment that your mind cannot be so easily manipulated!!

    • Diana Hengerer

      correction: I was mistaken by thinking I was on Newsmax for that last comment…I don’t believe they EVER mention Ron Paul’s name or have a venue for comments…sorry for the mistake.

    • Dolores Tamoria

      All of those who have or are holding an elective office and are Legislators are in the perfect position to get something done. The President is the figurehead and does that which he is Constitutionally empowered to do.
      The Constitution limits the Presidents power and that is what the Tea Partiers are about. Basically, the President’s main job is to Protect and Defend our Nation which Obama has not done. If is wasn’t for our Military he would be a S…t Creek without a paddle.

    • Anthony Holt

      Diana I agree with you 100% But the problem is most of the people on the site are to stupid to know what you’re talking about!

    • tncdel

      When you mentioned supporting Ron Paul, all your credibility up to that point when out the window. No one as piss-poor as Paul is on domestic National Defense deserves to be in the White House.

      See this please:

  • Ferrarello

    He is no conservative. The “Heartless” remark proved just how liberal sounding he can be.

  • Bree

    This is another great article by Gene Vallorani and I think its time to be much more realistic about the candidates than we are willing to be. This is not American idol nor a popular vote contest but we are in serious times and America is on life support. This is one time we cannot afford to make any mistake in choosing a leader. For all the reasons stated, I believe there is every reason to consider Gov. Rick Perry. He is pro life,no higher taxes, end the dependacy on foreign oil, boarder protection, a man of deep faith and pro Israel. He’s a true conservative and all American. He has governed the great state of Texas,and is an experienced leader. Put any or all of that against Obama and theres no comparison. Gov. Perry is a winner hands down on all points and would make a great President.

  • mesaman

    If Rick Perry is your idea of a “true” conservative, then I guess I’m not a “True” conservative. I can’t buy into his juvenile behavior. his immigration stance, his bravado in defending his accomplishments, but mostly, that he served Al Gore, in any capacity. I guess I will wait for Cain, or Paul, even Romney. Romney, simply because he can skewer Perry so easily.

  • Emily

    Um, Eugene, the answer to your question is…NO, Perry is NOT the ONLY conservative –he’s not eve ONE of the conservatives. What a one-sided piece of garbage…

    • Bree

      Emily, you call yourself a Christian? Are you the one who puts up prayers on this site even? No true Christian condemns another Christian as Gov. Perry is with words like ” a piece of garbage”. You dear sister are nothing but a hate filled hypocrit.And that’s exactly what Jesus would call you. Shame on you, as well as the rest of you so called Christians here too. You are disgraceful with your hate, slander and condemnations. God will judge you according to your words and deeds.

    • tncdel

      Perry isn’t even a true Christian, let alone a true Conservative. He’s a fraud who would stoop to using religion, or anything else, to advance his political ambitions.

      “By their fruits shall ye know them!”

    • Bree

      And you tncdel are obviously no kind of fruit inspector, you don’t know him or what you’re talking about.

  • Emily

    The only TRUE CONSERVATIVES running are Cain, Paul, Bachman and to a lesser degree Gingrich. THAT’S IT!!!

    • rder

      Gingrich is NOT to a “lesser” degree. About the only “sin” he’s committed is getting a divorce (like most American married people) and getting remarried. HE hasn’t broken any laws, he knows and understands the Constitution, and he is the BEST choice of all those running for President. Bachmann is a good conservative – she simply doesn’t have the leadership experience or capability and she has a hard time doing her homework before opening her mouth. Cain has NO political savvy, and his 9-9-9 plan is someone elses that he bought into without even checking to see how it would affect anyone. I’m for killing the 16th and the 17th amendments. Cain also has no foreign policy experience and I’ve yet to hear him, not some speech writer or advisor, give his take on the US involvement around the world. Perhaps the ONLY thing I agree with Ron Paul about – is it’s time, if we are going to defend other countries freedom – they start paying for it.

    • Gene Vallorani

      Michelle Bachmann is a disappointment because she voted for in state tuition for illegals while serving in the Minnesota State Senate in 2005 and rails agains Mr. Perry for an Act of the Texas Legislature passed in 2001. Is she a hypocrite? Cain wants to increase sales taxes on anything new.If people can avoid a tax by buying only used products there will be nothing new made and if we need jobs we need people to make new things. Is adding a new sales tax worth the support of people who say they’re “Taxed Enough Already?” Newt Gingrich is acceptable but lost some of his pizzaz when he criticized Paul Ryan’s budget proposal at the outset of his campaign. Romney is not a true conservative. Ron Paul would cut off aid to Israel and a lot of Christians object to that because God told Abraham “those who bless Israel will be blessed and those who curse Israel will be cursed.” For those reasons, and others, is why I feel only Rick Perry remains the true conservative.

    • tncdel

      Nope. One out of those four is a true Conservative: Michele Bachmann.

      Cain’s a RINO, who recently flip-flopped saying now that he would have no problem appointing a Muslim who supports Sharia Law to a Cabinet post.

      Ron Paul’s a FRAUD. See:

      Newt too is a RINO.

  • bearlyme

    Conservative presidents did not get us where we are today. We’ve only had one conservative president in the last 60 years. Ronald Reagan. All the others were Progressive Republicans just like Rick Perry. He would be more of the same. Gingrich / Bachmann

    • David

      bearlyme, Reagan was not a conservative. He was all talk (written on his teleprompter) but a liberal in performance…He tripled the national debt with his deficit spending, he changed America from a trade surplus nation into a trade deficit nation with his Free Trade garbage, costing us tens of millions Middle Class jobs and trillions in trade debt, and he tore down our borders with his amnesty for illegals, bringing in an additional twenty to fifty million illegal aliens into our country and most of the problems we have today.

    • Dale on left coast

      David . . . your version of history . . . is just soooo CNN . . . lol

    • tod

      He also was a Union leader of the Actors Gill!

    • MrInterpid

      Yes Reagan was president of the Actors Guild. He was also a democrat at that time. It was partly due to the corruption and social idiocy that he saw as president of the SAG that he became a Republican. When the light turned on and he heard Mr. democrat himself, “Al Smith” say that the democrat party had gone the way of Lenin and Marx, Reagan became a staunch Republican.

    • tncdel

      Nope. The last true Conservative we have had in the White House was Ike. Reagan was a neocon who gave illegals amnesty and raised taxes several times while creating bigger government. Ike gave illegals “Operat.ion We.tback” and balanced the budget THREE times.

  • Patricia

    I had high hopes for Perry but have discovred he’s a little rooster. Crows loud but that’s all. He’s rude. He attacks and then talks over. You can’t learn if you don’t have the ability to listen. If one is truly impressive they don’t have to rooster around in an effort to show it.

    • BornintheUSA

      Hes arroragant,not Presidential. Herman Cain and Rick Santorium are the 2 real top picks. Palin for VP.

  • bearlyme

    i agree there are only four conservatives in this race. Cain, Bachmann, Gingrich and Santorum. Gingrich does have some “some big government” tendencies on occasion BUT if war were to break out in the Middle East, who would you want answering THAT 3am phone call? Bachmann? Santorum? Cain? Ron Paul, on the other had, is not conservative but libertarian. However, Ron Paul is the only candidate in the race who is advocating not just stopping the Obama Marxist/Progressive maching we’re now facing. He is the only one advocating dismantling it. That makes him a contender.

    • tncdel

      Nope. Only Bachmann is a true Conservative. Those others are RINIO’s to varying degrees.

  • J Hall

    I’m for Ron Paul, And I agree with you about Paul’s statement on the towers, he was wrong, the terrorist didn’t do it, it was a false flag just so the Bush administration could go to war. I’m sure he was just not in the loop, thus he uninformed statement. But, he is the only one that can get this country back on track after fifty years of a corrupt government.

    • Lostwages

      It’s my understanding that Ron Paul believes that 9-11 was a false flag event. From reading your comment I feel you believe the opposite? I back Ron Paul for 2012 as you do and either I’m mis-reading what you wrote or one of us is mistaken! Ron Paul for 2012!

  • Lostwages

    One fact being left out here is that Perry attended a Builderburg meeting along with all the other “New World Order” junkies! Perry has changed his mind on forced vaccines, the NAFTA highway, and the party he wants to say he’s part of! As for the rest, I still believe what I said before, If main stream media is promoting a candidate they are not going to be good for the country! You need to remember the media is controlled by the NWO! Why do you think Ron Paul gets little coverage, because they like him! Ron Paul is the only one being buried by the press! Ron Paul for 2012!

  • Mike

    If Rick Perry is the Republican on the ballot in 2012 I will be voting for the Constitution Party candidate. If you say I am just re-electing President Obama may answer is: “NO YOU ARE BY PUTTING RICK PERRY ON THE BALLOT”.

  • Buddy L.

    I am tired of the fact that all we can seem to nominate for office are professional politicians. There in lies the problem. We need to get rid of the professional politicians and get some people will not be influenced by union and corporate corruption. Yes, they do exist!!!!

    • rder

      Perhaps the only “non” professional politician this country has ever had was George Washington – the man who could have been KING if he’d wanted to. and remember – he was drafted to be President, he didn’t run nor did he spend a dime of his money on it. Our real problem is that we keep electing lawyers to the Congress – all they want to do is make laws rather than simply perform their constitutional duties.

    • tod

      That another reason to pick Dr. Ron Paul he’s not a lawyer!

    • tncdel

      Draft ALLEN WEST!

  • Ms. Washington, DC

    Don’t try to fool us again with one of these politicians on the campaign trail. Rick Perry is certainly not the only conservative running and I am not sure he is one at all. I had only listened to Perry talk on TV before he starting running for President and he sounded some what good in his comments about the problems we are all suffering now in the US. After watching him perform in the debates, he has certainly failed. He is a terrible debator and Obama will destroy him bit by bit. We MUST have someone nominated that can carry the ball all the way with Obama and not fail us. Rick Perry is not the one. I thought his performance on the last debate this week was very unpresidential and he acted like a school yard bully. It seems ever since he came onto the campaign trail things have gone not so well. They need to be concentrating on issue and problems we have in this country now, not badgering one another as this debate indicated. If this type of debate continues like this, we certainly will lose the election.

  • ARMYOF69

    Perry, a CONSERVATIVE, REALLY?????????

    • Lostwages

      He is only if you believe what the liberals tell you!


      Good to see that you to see right thru the author of this articals line of Bulls_ _t the same as I do.
      Perry is no conservative, Instate tuition, strike 1, Builderburger meetings, strike 2,Al Gore’s Texas Campain Mgr. in 2000, Strike 3, Perry your out, GET OUT AND SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP.

    • IdontBrakeForDems

      Perry is the one who told his constituents “Not to worry that he was trading parties, all he would be doing is changing the little letter beside his name from a D to an R, he’ll still vote the same way as before” That my friend is the definition of a RINO

  • KH

    Ron Paul: I like Ron Paul because I share much of what he believes about thrift and other domestic issues. What I disagree with is his belief the United States brought the 9-11 Terrorist Attack on itself. It’s one thing to be an isolationist, but first we have to defeat our enemies with such fury they will never do it again. His candidacy would have been better served in the late 18th or early 19th Century before we became too involved in many foreign entanglements.

    Why are so many of you Constitutional illiterates? Doesn’t the document mean anything to you? Does history mean anything to you?

    The reason Iran hates us is because the CIA forced the Shah on a sovereign foreign nation. We’ve had trouble in the Middle East ever since. We supported Osama Bin Laden with military weapons in his struggle against the Russian invasion. It led to 3000 deaths in New York city.

    Why should we give military support to nations who have a better economy than we do?

    Why are we still in German, Japan, or South Korea?

    You people need to get a Constitutional clue before you go spouting off crap like “isolationism”. “Isolationism” is a neocon buzzword for non-interventionism. Neocons don’t mind big government, or printing money to police the world, forcing democracy on sovereign nations, even if it means bankrupting the country.

    You’re all hypocrites.


      Ron Paul doesn’t stand a chance in hell of being elected President of the International Dog Catchers Union let alone President Of The United States.
      He should save his campain war chest and retire as soon as he can, Like Yesterday.


      Unfortunately you have fallen victim to the media’s bias toward reporting anything about Ron Paul. They hope people will say “He has no chance…” This old trick has worked on you and no doubt will work on many others as well. The truth is he has raked in more in donations than any other candidate. he has a huge internet following especially among the young educated class. He has a huge chance with the popular vote to become the next president and that has the globalists terrified and shaking in their boots. At this point in time, he IS America’s ONLY hope and if you can’t see that you just aren’t thinking about whats really going on. Look at Obama and how he fooled everybody: he ended up being WORSE than G.W.
      Paul is the Only man for the job because he IS NOT a globalist; the only one who has a proven track record as a TRUE AMERICAN patriot. If Paul does not make it in…America is finished as a sovereign nation; its that simple.

    • tncdel

      Your point is well taken. However…we live in an imperfect world. There are only so many candidates to choose from
      and it is my contention that Ron Paul is the best choice. Why?
      Because he is untainted by BIG MONEY from any source. More importantly he loves the Constitution and the Division of Powers and all that goes with what those Founding Fathers respected back in 1776. Yes he’s not perfect but he is the BEST of a mediocre lot: many of which are tainted…bought and paid for by anti-sovereign interests. So, who better than Ron Paul? As i have said before, HE is America’s last best hope. I truly believe that.
      Something to think about.

  • tncdel

    What has the author of this, Eugene Vallorani, been smoking? RINO Rick a “true Conservative?” LMAO! Maybe he was just being sarcastic … in which case please allow me to apologize for my mistake.

    But, from what I’ve seen, only MICHELE BACHMANN is a true Conservative.

    Here’s the damning evidence against Rick Perry, who in no way, shape or form approximates a true Conservative:

  • Snow

    Myself I like Newt for pres_Ron Paul has great ideas for the country BUT his foreign policy sucks_he believes in letting that wack job in Iran get a nuke_No Thank You_
    Newt is a true conservative and he will wipe the floor with Obummer in any debate even on his worst day.Yeah Newt has some baggage but hey who of us doesnt_
    Newt Gingrich for Prez 2012

  • Jericho

    Perry conseviate ???
    Democrat in ever way He not only attacts other conidates policies but the conidates character and beliefs. A true democrat in all of his beliefs Christian ??? Not for the people if it’s not in his benefit for himself

  • tod

    Dr.Ron Paul 2012 for a Honest God fearing Patriot for President!!!Not a New World order Snake like Perry!

  • ThunderFunder

    Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate that really “gets it”, has no one to which he owes favors & has nothing to lose! The USA is not the reason Israel exists – GOD is & He will protect her. We must get our house in order. Read the Scriptures, read the Constitution, then vote Ron Paul!

  • ARMYOF69

    Obama , his close cohorts, the DEM politicians, and a large number of old farts RINOS are due for a shock if WE THE PEOPLE are forced to vote for ROMNEY, or PERRY or another of their RINOs.

    • ARMYOF69

      The TRUTH hurts, sometimes.

  • AmericansRon2U

    Let me sum it up for 2012: The GOP has a sorry line-up of candidates! I’m sick to death of being forced to choose between Commie and ‘commie-lite’. I’m still looking for a George Washington..or another Reagan. I don’t see any..not even on a clear day.
    The ONE issue NO ONE IN THE GOP understands is that Obama should not even be allowed to run for re-election!!! How many treasonous offenses does that psycho have to commit before someone..ANYONE from the GOP will arrest him and throw him in GITMO? How much more evidence has to slap the GOP in the face that Obama was never properly vetted and is INELIGIBLE to be POTUS NOW or in the future? I’m fed up with hearing about ‘who can beat Obama’ when, in reality, they’re the same crowd who’s allowed him to desecrate our Republic. It’s a game to all of these politicians, nothing more. God help us.

    • David

      If the RINOs and the media have their way, it’s going to be Romney the nominee and a big loss in November (I wouldn’t vote for him)… If the Tea Party and the Conservatives have their way, it’s going to be Bachmann and victory next year.


      Your absolutely correct in every way except you did not mention that the Hillary Machine discovered in 2006 that Obama was not a citizen of the U.S. and she told all of the powers & powers to be in congress and the senate in 2006. They choose to keep quite for fear of starting a race riot in 2007 when he announced for president and now they can’t any of them mention anything about it including Hillary because they really would start a race riot if it came up after he has been POTUS for 3 or 4 years.
      I blame Hillary & her Machine for this entire Obummer administration but she isn’t going to tell because she will go down in history as the Secretary Of State to the first BLACK POTUS of the United States as well as a First Lady from 1992 thru 2000 even though her husband the POTUS from 1992 thru 2000 was a sexual pervert while in office.


      Why haven’t they? He must have access to alot of dirty linen in Washington, ’cause as you say there is more than enough evidence than a blue dress to charge this “man” with treason.

    • tncdel

      That’s why we’ve been trying to draft ALLEN WEST to run.

  • Lostwages

    awaiting moderation, what is the problem?

  • Dale on left coast

    “Mr. Cain is obsessed with his 9-9-9 plan which would make everything we buy more expensive.”
    That is an Inacurate statement . . . when all hidden taxes disappear . . . the 9% would actually be LESS!!!
    I wonder which one of Perry’s advisors penned the lame attack on Romney at the debate? That was worse than Stupid . . . made Perry look like a clueless peacock!! Don’t we have one of those in the WH now???

  • zombywoof7

    I don’t have a problem with electric fences.

  • The Trruth

    Rick Perry is a RINO! Plain and simple. As a democrat he supported Carter and Mondale over Reagan, he voted for a $5.7 billion dollar tax increase, he was Al Gore’s campaign manager then backed Dukakis, he praised Hillarycare, he bragged about increasing Medicaid spending for immigrants in Texas, the Guardasil debacle, he wrote a letter in support of the gov bailout of Wall St banks, he bragged to Vicente Fox about increasing Medicaid spending for immigrants in Texas and proposed the possibility of “Bi-National” health insurance, he opposes border fences and is against Arizona’s anti-illegal immigration law. Perry is a dedicated internationalist who has attended meetings of the influential Bildeberger Group in Europe. Perry is a Big Government liberal! In 10 years as Governor, he nearly doubled the size of the Texas budget while tripling its debt!
    Go Bachmann!

  • G K

    Goldwater was a conservative — I don’t know what Perry is.

    But I do know that Paul is more like Goldwater that the rest are.

  • Joyceann

    The answer to your question is NO.
    In fact, he is not a core conservative in any shape of the word. He is a Obama wannabe in sheeps clothing. Don’t just listen to him making speeches, read his books. Carefully. He lets his ideas loose and they don’t say what a conservative should. GET ON THE CAIN TRAIN – A TRUE CONSERVATIVE AND A LEADER – SOMETHING ELSE NONE OF THE REST OF THEM ARE EXCEPT NEWT

  • Tom

    Rick Perry is a plastic haired used car salesman!!!.
    The writer here would do us ALL a favor by knowing that there is a difference between the words republican and conservative!! He thinks they are one in the same. THIS IS WHY CONSERVATIVISM IN AMERICA IS SKEWED!!! Just because some joker claims to be anti-one issue does NOT mean he/she deserves my vote.
    Yes Eugene we need to GET OUT of the military adventurism game and stop sending our treasure to those that wish us ill. Maybe get over the sound bite journalism you enjoy and look at things from the perspective of REALITY!!!

  • Jeff Clark

    Rick Perry a Conservative ? since when !
    He is an opportunist only, his career as a Liberal Democrat when Al Gore lost his bid for POTUS, he than flopped over in a very stringent manner enough so that President Bush handed him Texas on a silver platter, Perry only says what he thinks people want to hear to get elected and the only reason he is running for POTUS is because his career as Texas Governor is over, Would you people please wake up and research this idiot, at the debates he comes across as a drunken fool

  • Terry Black

    Speaking of Mitt Romney, did you know he does his homework with John Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar?


    Saynsumthn’s Blog
    Just another weblog« Muslim Brotherhood Gaining Foothold in U.S. Gov’t? Part 1Seeing through walls – Researchers at MIT’s Lincoln Lab have developed new radar technology »Republican Mitt Romney consulted Population Control Eugenics Czar John Holdren
    H/T Pajamas Media

    So we’ve learned over the past few days that a trio of Mitt Romney’s chosen advisers helped the Obama administration craft ObamaCare. And on top of that, that Gov. Romney sought the advice of Malthusian green activist John Holdren, when Romney was considering a cap and trade regime for Massachusetts.

    Holdren’s views humanity as a plague on the planet and the Industrial Revolution as a tragic mistake. The fewer people, he believes, the better, and he’s not shy about the ways he would use to reduce their number.

    Why Gov. Romney, a reasonable person, would pick such a man to advise him on anything is beyond us.

    On Jan. 1, 2006, Massachusetts became the first state to regulate CO2 emissions from power plants, something the Obama administration is trying to do to all states through the Environmental Protection Agency’s draconian job-killing regulations and mandates.

    A Dec. 7, 2005 memo from the governor’s office announcing the new policy listed among the “environmental and policy experts” providing input to the policy one “John Holdren, professor of environmental policy at Harvard University.”

    This is the same person who wrote that a “massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States.”
    Holdren wrote that along with Paul and Anne H. Ehrlich in the “recommendations” section of their 1973 book, “Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions.”

    Paul Ehrlich is also the author of the 1968 tome, “The Population Bomb,” which warned of imminent mass starvation from overpopulation unless excess humanity is dispensed with.
    Holdren has spoken in favor of such things as forced abortions, confiscation of babies, mass involuntary sterilization, bureaucratic regulation of family size, and a planetary regime to enforce climate regulation and population control.

    After researching eugenics and I reading several chapters of the book, Ecoscience, written in the 70′s, by Paul Holdren, who is Obama’s Science Czar, I can see clear signs that everything that is coming down from Washington was being birthed in our society in the 70′s and before. If you read Holdren’s writings, you will see the philosophy behind CAP and TRADE spelled out . Based on population control writings, they truly believe that unless we involuntarily depopulate the earth- we will see an end to human civilization as we know it. Back in the 70′s people like Holdren and Paul Ehrlich predicted that if the US reached 200 million, it would be divesting. They predicted that when people have reduced economic spending power, they have fewer children. Now that America is over 300 million and considered a society which leaves the largest carbon footprint, they are frantic. They do not have a Creationist/ Godly basis for their beliefs and thus they are not at all concerned about sacrificing a few million humans for the salvation of the planet.

    They believe that humans are polluting the earth and we are but ONE SPECIES among many that inhabit the planet.

    They also forecaster a weird way of mixing global warming, ecology, the use of automobiles, freedom to travel and then slip in the fact that all these things could be used for the ultimate goal of restricting population. i

    To demonstrate this, look in a section in the November 1970, Bulletin for Atomic Scientists entitled: Licensing for Cars and Babies – by Bruce M Russett, which states,

    “Broadly two methods of limiting population growth are suggested by the advocates of population control. One involves variants of coercion. Proposed remedies include, legally forbidding families from having more than two or three children; distributing contraceptives in some quasi-compulsory manner such as in the public water supply; and in extreme forms compulsory sterilization of couples with more than two or three offspring…… “

    Why would compulsory sterilization be found in an article about licensing cars?

    They also predicted that the growth of energy consumption per person could be slowed by “reducing waste and inefficiency” and that “practical mechanisms to alleviate the maldistribution of prosperity must be devised and put into use.”

    In a CNS News video interview, White House Office of Science and Technology Director John P. Holdren told that he would use the “free market economy” to implement the “massive campaign” he advocated along with Paul Ehrlich to “de-develop the United States.”

    White House Science Czar Says He Would Use ‘Fre…, posted with vodpod


    John Holdren’s 1973 publication: Population and the American Predicament: The Case Against Complacency was published the year after the Rockefeller Commission on Population and the American Future was recommended to President Nixon which opened the flood gates in government funded family planning and abortion.

    In Holdren’s section Liabilities of “Direct” Approaches, Holdren writes,

    No one has seriously suggested that stabilizing or reducing the size of the American population would, by itself, solve the problems of environment, physical resources, poverty, and urban deterioration that threaten us or that already exist. Attacks on the symptoms of these problems and on their causes other than population should be imaginatively formulated and vigorously pursued. There is evidence that the growth of energy consumption per person can be significantly slowed, by reducing waste and inefficiency, without adverse effects on the economy.15 Economic growth itself can be channeled into sectors in which resource consumption and environmental impact per dollar of GNP are minimized.16 Practical mechanisms to alleviate the maldistribution of prosperity must be devised and put to use. But those who advocate the pursuit of these “direct” approaches to the exclusion of population limitation are opting for a handicap they should not want and cannot afford.

    For the trouble is that the “direct” approaches are imperfect and incomplete. They are usually expensive and slow, and often they move the problem rather than remove it. How quickly and at what cost can mass transit relieve the congestion in our cities? Redesigning the entire urban community is a possibility, of course, but an even slower one. If substantially more economical cars are designed, how fast will their share of the market grow, and how much of the gain will be wiped out by an increased total number of cars? If residences and commercial buildings that use energy more efficiently are developed, how long will it be until the tens of millions of inefficient buildings that now exist have been replaced? Fossil-fueled power plants can, in time, be replaced by nuclear reactors-trading the burden of the noxious routine emissions of the former for the uncertain risks of serious accident, sabotage, nuclear terrorism, and management in perpetuity of radioactive wastes. We could back away from energy-intensive and nonbiodegradable nylon and rayon and plastics in favor of a return to cotton and wool and wood, thereby increasing the use of pesticides, the rate of erosion due to overgrazing and overlogging, and the fraction of our land under intensive exploitation. It is evident, in short, that there are difficult trade-offs to be made, and that fast and comfortable solutions are in short supply.

    It has sometimes been suggested that such population-related pressures as exist in the United States are due mainly to spatial maldistribution of people, and that, accordingly, the “direct” solution is redistribution rather than halting or reversing growth. It is true that congestion and some forms of acute pollution of air and water could be relieved by redistributing people. But many of the most serious pressures on resources and environment-for example, those associated with energy production, agriculture, and ocean fisheries-depend mainly on how many people there are and what they consume, not on how they are distributed. Some problems, of course, would be aggravated rather than alleviated by redistribution: providing services and physical necessities to a highly dispersed population would in many instances be economically and ecologically more costly than doing the same for a concentrated population. In the end, though, the redistribution question may be largely an academic one. People live where they do for relatively sound reasons of economics, topography and taste. Moving them in great numbers is difficult. Therefore, even those kinds of population pressure that might in principle be alleviated by redistribution are likely in practice to remain closely linked to overall size.

    I point out these shortcomings of “direct” approaches not to suggest that intelligent choices are impossible or that pathways through the pitfalls cannot be found, but rather to emphasize that the problems would be tough enough even without population growth. Why, then, should we compound our plight by permitting population growth to continue? Is it logical to disparage the importance of population growth, which is a significant contributor to a wide variety of predicaments, only because it is not the sole cause of any of them?

    Holdren later writes, “My own suspicion is that the United States, with about 210 million people, has considerably exceeded the optimum population size under existing conditions. It seems clear to me that we have already paid a high price in diversity to achieve our present size, and that our ability to elevate the average per capita level of well-being would be substantially greater if the population were smaller. I am also uneasy about the possibility that 280 million Americans, under conditions likely to include per capita consumption of energy and materials substantially higher than today’s, will prove to be beyond the environmentally sustainable maximum population size…it should be obvious that the optimum rate of population growth is zero or negative until such time as the uncertainties have been removed and the problems solved.

    It is also obvious that this “optimum” condition cannot be achieved instantly. Unfortunately, the importance of achieving it sooner rather than later has been widely underestimated. In this connection, the recent rapid decline of fertility in the United States is cause for gratitude but not for complacency. Efforts to understand the origins and mechanisms of the decline should be continued and intensified, so that the trend can be reinforced with policy if it falters.”

    Redistributing people ???? HUH? ?


    According to Terence P. Jeffrey who writes in CNS News, Holdren’s curriculum vitae lists as one of his “Recent publications” an essay entitled “The Meaning of Sustainability: Biogeophysical Aspects.” Co-authored by Paul Ehrlich and Gretchen Daily of the Center for Conservation Biology at Stanford, this essay served as the first chapter in a 1995 book—“Defining and Measuring Sustainability: The Biogeophysical Foundations”—published by the World Bank. The book is posted as a PDF on the World Bank’s Web site.

    “We think development ought to be understood to mean progress toward alleviating the main ills that undermine human well-being,” Holdren, Ehrlich and Daily wrote in this essay.

    Table 1-1 of the essay lists both “excessive population growth” and “maldistribution of consumption and investment” as “driving forces” behind these “ills.”

    “Excessive population growth,” the authors assert, is “a condition now prevailing almost everywhere.”

    Table 1-2 of the essay lists “Requirements for Sustainable Improvements in Well-being.” These include “reduced disparities within and between countries.”

    “The large gaps between rich and poor that characterize income distribution within and between countries today are incompatible with social stability and with cooperative approaches to achieving environmental sustainability,” the authors explain.

    Table 1-1 lists among the “underlying human frailties” causing the ills of mankind as “greed, selfishness, intolerance and shortsightedness.” These vices, they say, “collectively have been elevated by conservative political doctrine and practice (above all in the United States in 1980-92) to the status of a credo.”

    The authors present a formula for understanding ecological “damage,” which they say “means reduced length or quality of life for the present generation or future generations.”

    From the Footnotes:7 in The Meaning of Sustainability:Biogeophysical Aspects, Harm that would qualify as tolerable, in this context, could not be cumulative, else continuing additions to it would necessarily add up to unsustainable damage eventually. Thus, for example, a form and level of pollution that subtract a month from the life expectancy of the average member of the human population, or that reduce the net primary productivity of forests on the planet by 1 percent, might be deemed tolerable in exchange for very large benefits and would certainly be sustainable as long as the loss of life expectancy or reduction in productivity did not grow with time. Two of us have coined the term “maximum sustainable abuse” in the course of grappling with such ideas (Daily and Ehrlich 1992).

    The RICH/POOR Gap

    In a 1992 Cambridge Press Publication Energy Efficiency and Human Activity: Past Trends, Future Prospects , cosponsored by the Stockholm Environment Institute, John P. Holdren wrote a 52 page prologue called “The Transition to Costlier Energy”. In it, he repeats his long-cherished vision of a planetary regime under which population control would be implemented more effectively.

    From page 36 onward:
    “(…) the population can’t be frozen. Indeed, short of a catastrophe, it can hardly be levelled off below 9 billion. Indeed, without a global effort at population limitation far exceeding anything that has materialized so far, the population of the planet could soar to 14 billion or more by the year 2100.”

    Besides also mentioning to attempt reducing the world’s population to “manageable levels”, Holdren also pleads for a narrowing the “Rich-Poor gap”. Sounds noble enough, were it not that he is regurgitating Agenda 21: the UN program to redistribute wealth from the developed to the developing world. Holdren:

    “What is most striking (…) is that even the most optimistic assumptions about “early” population stabilization, increased energy efficiency, and narrowing the rich-poor gap still lead to world energy use in 2050 more than double that of 1990.”


    Holdren and Ehrlich also cooperated on the article Human Population and the Global Environment. In the last paragraph of the article, Holdren and Ehrlich declare acceleration on human population control efforts:

    “There is a temptation”, the authors declare, “to “go slow” on population limitation because this component is politically sensitive and operationally difficult, but the temptation must be resisted.


    John Holdren “tax the bads …we’re trying to reduce” Could Children be next?

    In 2002 – John Holdren, President Obama’s Science Czar said this in an interview with Living On Earth:

    “We need to accept the principle that it is better to tax bads, things that we’re trying to reduce, and correspondingly, lower the taxes on good things, things we’d like to encourage, like income and capital investment. And in that way, changing the incentive system that’s out there, we would start to move the society off the “business as usual” trajectory, in the direction that would reduce the disruption of climate with which we’re going to have to deal.”

    In the 1970′s Holdren published many books, several which were co-authored with radical population control guru, Paul Ehrlich. Although Holdren may not have absolutely stated that he wanted to add sterilizing agents to the nation’s water supplies to keep the population down, he did say that if the population did not “voluntarily” decrease, this could be one option. And Holdren should know, because he was on panels and in touch with high level government officials, birth control pushers, pro-abortion enthusiasts, and Zero Population Growth experts who were, in fact, espousing this type of coercion. In his book Eco science, Holdren mentions that Compulsory abortions could be a solution to population control if it were feasible to enact it –

    John Holdren, Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich wrote on Page 256 of their 1973 book, “Human Ecology: Problems and Solutions.”
    “Compulsory control of family size is an unpalatable idea, but the alternatives may be much more horrifying,”

    “A far better choice, in our view,” they wrote, “is to begin now with milder methods of influencing family size preferences, while ensuring that the means of birth control, including abortion and sterilization, are accessible to every human being on Earth within the shortest possible time. If effective action is taken promptly, perhaps the need for involuntary or repressive measures can be averted.”


    Paul Holdren, praised his mentor, Harrison Brown,
    In this clip of Harrison Brown, he raises questions about whether eugenics is as “common sense”

    What are the outstanding virtues we should attempt to breed in to our population? You might say intelligence, but what kind of intelligence? You might say attractiveness, but what kind of attractiveness?

    The episode, “The Mystery of Life,” can be found in its entirety on the A/V Geeks DVD, Twenty-First Century.

    more about “21st Century Mystery of Life “, posted with vodpod

    Brown also wrote the book: The Challenge of Man’s Future.

    Challenge of Mans Future by Harrison Brown

    In a speech he delivered as President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Holdren admitted that he admired Brown and read his book in high school. Holdren also admitted in his speech that he later worked with Harrison Brown at Caltech.

    Holdren quoted Brown as saying this during that same speech, “It is clear that the future course of history will be determined by the rates at which people breed and die, by the rapidity with which nonrenewable resources are consumed, by the extent and speed with which agricultural production can be improved, by the rate at which the under-developed areas can industrialize, by the rapidity with which we are able to develop new resources, as well as by the extent to which we succeed in avoiding future wars. All of these factors are interlocked. “

    Paul Holdren and Harrison Brown slide

    What is also interesting is that I obtained a copy of Harrison Brown’s book, The Challenge of Man’s Future, the one our Science Czar holds up as so important, and discovered this Nazi style infanticide statement by Brown on page 87 . ” In the absence of restraint abortion, sterilization, coitus interruptus, or artificial fertility control, the resultant high birth rate would have to be matched at equilibrium by an equally high death rate. A major contribution to the high death rate could be infanticide, as has been the situation in cultures of the past. “

    These eugenic zealots believe they are saving the plant – it is the “Life Boat” theory that it is okay to throw overboard those who have the least chance to survive. The sanctity of Human Life hangs in the balance and will include the unborn, elderly, and the disabled to begin with.

    For more on Eugenics and how it is used to exterminate

  • Robert Morrow

    I would not vote for Perry or Romney in anyway. Who wants Adults who act like 4 year old children squabbling over a toy. There was only two adults there, Cain & Newt.

  • Earle Belle

    Paul v Romney – Donations Show Stark Difference
    Paul raised most from active military, Romney tapped big banks

    LAKE JACKSON, Texas – A recent independent analysis of candidates’ campaign contributions reveals an interesting disparity between the Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign and frontrunner Mitt Romney’s campaign. Romney’s top supporters appear to be made up of big banks while, unsurprisingly, Paul’s top contributors were men and women serving in the U.S. Armed Forces.

    “This fundraising analysis confirms Americans’ beliefs about Ron Paul and their suspicions about Mitt Romney. It is that Dr. Paul is extraordinarily popular and accepted by the everyman and by everyday heroes, while Romney relies almost exclusively on his big-business ties,” said Ron Paul 2012 National Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton.

    According to the analysis, the top three organizations that employ Romney’s supporters are Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse Group, and Morgan Stanley. Reflecting his popularity with the everyman and our uniformed service men and women, the top three organizations that employ Dr. Paul’s supporters are the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Army, and the U.S. Navy.

    The study notes that the organizations themselves did not contribute. Rather, “the money came from the organization’s PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals’ immediate families.” The analysis suggests, then, that the use of PACs, bundling, subsidiaries and the like was not a feature of Dr. Paul’s grassroots fundraising.
    Ron Paul Campaign Tops Others in Q3 Active-Military Donations
    Outraises all other Republican candidates combined, outraises Obama

    LAKE JACKSON, Texas – The Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign raised more campaign donations from active military than all other presidential candidates—Republican or Democrat—including having raised more funds from this segment than all other GOP competitors combined, and more than incumbent President Barack Obama.

    Dr. Paul, an Air Force veteran, raised more than $75,000 from active military in the third quarter. This comes after Dr. Paul out-raised all GOP candidates – including all GOPers combined, and President Obama singularly – in the second quarter of this year. Dr. Paul also outraised his GOP competitors in a head-to-head comparison during his 2008 run for the presidency.

    This determination was arrived at using an independent campaign analysis of FEC filing data focusing on contributors who listed their occupation and employer when contributing.

    “Ron Paul is the only candidate with a plan to end the growing number of unconstitutional undeclared wars, having an unclear connection to U.S. national security, end costly overseas nation-building that pays no friendship dividends, and stop subsidizing global security. Instead Dr. Paul will bring our troops home, secure our borders and lead the nation in practicing a traditional Republican noninterventionist foreign policy,” said Ron Paul 2012 Campaign Chairman Jesse Benton.

    “Let me also submit that Dr. Paul out-raising all candidates in military donations demonstrates that his ‘Plan to Restore America’ might sit well among voters who are active-military or veterans,” continued Mr. Benton.

    To view the Ron Paul 2012 Presidential Campaign’s latest veterans-themed ad, click here. To view its latest foreign policy-themed ad, click here.
    Ron Paul’s Free Market Fix for Healthcare

    Ron Paul on how we can substantively fix our healthcare problems:

    Obama is just adding on more government…

    Our problem is that we have too much government management of our healthcare…

    If you want better competition and healthcare you should allow the American people to opt out of government healthcare…

    When a government gets involved in an industry prices go up…

    We need more competition in healthcare…

    Let people have control over their own money…
    Standing Above the Fray

    Once again, it’s worth pointing out that all of these candidates are viciously attacking one other over each of their lackluster, big government records.

    They all have them. Except one.

    And that candidate continues to stand above the fray because there is nothing to attack.

  • http://patriotupdate Emily P.

    Confusion: Someone else with the name Emily, but, what is printed above was not by me…So, I have changed it to Emily P. I have also put the Daily Prayer here.

    Now to today’s conversation. Perry is without a doubt to be a globalist, 100% for the NWO. In fact he was with Bush on the North American Union and began to build & sell Texas for the Trans Texas Corridor to Spain…with their choice of toll prices (as .75 per mile) for the next 50 years!! and would happily gone with the eminent domain to tear our ranches and farms to pieces.

    He went to Turkey in 2007 (by invitation) to the Bilderberg meeting. The above mentioned negatives about him are true. One that tore Texans hearts apart not to go with the Az. laws against the illegals aliens. Printed in the Dallas Morning news last year was that in the year 2009 our charity hospitals delivered “60,000” babies to illegals..for free, of course..(rather at our cost). He demanded all teachers to be bilingual to have a job..even tried the same on the principals who told him to “kiss it”…and they did not give in.

    Now we have a problem with the muslims in Texas. His daughter married one and he is bending over backwards to please them. Much of their history is taught in our schools by giving up our own..including the pledges and threats about the prayers, down to the word “bless you” if someone sneezes or wear a chain with the cross on it.

    Texans will not vote for him!! Knowing his 2 faces and his stupidity is shameful. He would be the next puppet to be owned by the elites that want to rule the world.

    God help us.

    • Bree

      To Emily P. Please let me quickly apologize to you for mistaking you for another person here. I sincerely hope you can forgive me. Thank you for the correction and your post now. It is of concern to me but it will also cause me to do further research which I am doing on most of the candidates. While I have not made up my mind on candidates, I am clear on Christians who may condemn other Christians. There can be no condemnation of those who are in Christ Jesus. We may disagree but I will never condemn you for it. Again, I thank you for the correction and I appreciate your prayers. God bless you.

    • Bree

      There is absolutely NO reason for my comment to be in moderation! It is my apology to Emily P.

  • BornintheUSA

    You can Keep Perry and Romeny. I’m going to raise Cain!

  • della

    Thank you for a great article.ITA with you! I hope people remember that Ronald Reagan was not good in debates.

  • wisdomcries

    Perry would get spanked by ovomit.

    Cain/Newt or Newt/Cain

    Newt would make Ovomit look like a little boy ans I’m yearning to see that

  • A. L. Stanley

    WOW…people! After digesting what ALL of you have sent in, I can see why we will have a very tough time coming to any consensus on ONE candidate to run for President. Much of what all of you have purported in your blogs is certainly true. Much is of concern and still more needs to be uncovered. We all need to continue to do our due diligence and RESEARCH WITH REASON and then share our factual findings. Let us be the informed and intelligent adults that we would like to see in our next leader. (However, I applaud your wit and the passion you all have for your favorites!!!)

  • ThunderFunder

    Ron Paul is the ONLY candidate that really “gets it”. Why do you think the media blacks him out?

    1)Turn off your TV
    2)Read the Scriptures
    3)Read the Constitution
    4)Vote Ron Paul!



    • Dara

      Herman Cain is a former Fed Chairman and supports the Federal Reserve, Bailouts, Tarp, etc. How is this “Conservative” by your definition? In fact, how is Cain supportive of the Constitution when he blatantly supports institutions, policies, and governmental intrusion that is in direct violation of the Constitution?

    • an american


    • an american


    • boneyfingers

      I wish we could be run by a triumverate, Gingrich, Cain, Ron Paul!

    • Texan living abroad until Texas secedes

      We can. I support Ron personally, but feel the GOP is going to elect Herman, the way things are going. So it’d be Herman as Prez, Gingrich for VP. There is a chance Ron Paul could be the kingmaker with his delegates though.

      Herman should offer him the post as Treasury Secretary so Ron can clean house at the federal reserve. It would also clear my worries about his ties to the Fed if he promised to make Ron his treasury secretary.

    • an american


  • Buck

    Rick Perry is NOT a true conservative , our only two true conservatives in the race are Bachmann and even though he is a libertarian , Ron Paul . Thats why they get so little press , good or bad . But look out if one of them is nominated , our loyal press will make either one of them the scourge of the universe .

    • Anne

      Buck: Do you understand that Conservatives are the antithesis of libertarians?

      Paul is anything but a Conservative.

    • Dara

      You need to do more homework. You do not understand the definition of a Libertarian. Libertarians have the same commitment to freedom that earned America its greatness: a free-market economy and the abundance and prosperity it brings; a dedication to civil liberties and personal freedom; and a foreign policy of non-intervention, peace, and free trade as prescribed by America’s FOUNDERS.

    • Susan

      So, I assume you believe Our Founding Fathers were NOT Conservative, correct?

    • Gene Vallorani

      How can anyone say Michelle Bachmann is a true conservative? Does it matter that she voted in favor of in state tuition for illegals while serving in the Minnesota State Senate in 2005? She’s a “true hypocrite” in her condemnation of Governor Rick Perry of Texas who actually does protect the Texas border.

    • Anne

      Gene: A little off topic, but did you hear?

      Report: Bachmann’s New Hampshire staff resigns en masse

      “The New Hampshire staff for Rep. Michele Bachmann’s (R-Minn.) presidential campaign are said to have all quit, with one of the staffers joining Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s (R) campaign.

      […] Messages left for the New Hampshire staffers were not immediately returned. But Perry’s campaign said Gigler would start work on behalf of the Texas governor within a few days.

      […] “We’re excited to have a new member come on to our field staff,” Perry spokeswoman Catherine Frazier said. “It’s an indication we have a strong organization, in addition to strong grassroots support and strong fundraising.”

    • Susan

      People need to pay attn to the Citizens of Texas re Perry. You might learn volumes by simply looking at the Ballot Initiatives reflecting the anger/frustration at our Guv… OR look at the Special Session Agenda items from this past summer which were absolutely DEMANDED by Texans…and do a little more reading as to “why” they somehow managed to not make the grade to the guv’s signature. OR go further back to the Trans-Texas-Corridor/TxDot/Cintra-Zachary/Eminent Domain Abuse/Perry Scandal.

      Actually, the title of this article made me catch my breath! What malarkey!

    • kysteelgirl

      Protects the borders? Surely you jest! Obviously you don’t live in Texas. We did not vote for Perry…we voted against obama. Just so you know.

  • jerry1944

    i want vote for rumney for sure with his lib ways from the past i dont like Perrys imigration policy for sure bachmann is the one i will vote for and if she dont get it then its 3rd party for me. If the GOP want to lose again then i guess they mite put romney in. Iread a buchcann article earlyer and i agree if the GOP cant get coservatie then a revolt fro the TEA PARTY mite get obambo back in but if thats what the GOP wants then so be it it want be my falt

    • tncdel

      Bachmann is the only TRUE Conservative among the major candidates.

    • K

      I like Bachman too, but I will vote for Ron Paul as President and if Bachman is Vice Pres that’s ok. Ron Paul has been the same for 20 years about everything he says. Smaller federal gov. Abolish the IRS and the Federal Reserve. Back to sound money! Do away with the rediculous federal agencies that are out of control and cost us so much. I believe that Ron Paul is the only choice we have to get back to the constitution and the freedom it gives all of us American Patriots. Ron Paul believes that the power should be removed from the federal government and returned to us ” The People “. Everything that Ron Paul espouses to is completely Constitutional. Vote for Ron Paul, please, our freedom is at stake here.

    • Lee

      100% right on.

    • James-N-Q8

      You GO K!
      They say Paul is too radical! Radical change is what is needed, not more of the same ol, same ol! They say his foreign policy is nuts! I say we have no business being the worlds police force and certainly can no longer afford to be.
      They say he wants to legalize drugs, NOT! He says the federal government has no business telling the states what should or should not be legal in the states. He is a true Christian, pro-life, fiscally sound conservative constitutionalist with real grit. Perry is a slick talking neocon who won’t be supported even by those of us in his home state.
      Sorry Eugene! This dog won’t hunt!

    • EMILYM

      Absolutely, with Paul you know what you’re getting. Perry is a Bildeberger insider.

    • Anne

      Emily: Actually, NO Perry is not.

      He was invited to attend a “Bildeberger” meeting, but that does not mean he is one.

    • kysteelgirl

      Don’t know about at Bilderberger but I do know he is an ILLEGAL LOVER!

    • ruth

      Bachman and Santorium are the only true conservatives. they would have my vote.

    • Lee

      How about Ron Paul? He is more conservative than Bachmann. I think Perry must be controlled by the big Pharmaceutical Companies, otherwise why would he require all the girls over 12 years of age to be vaccinated with the Gardasil vaccine. It’s either about the money or he is just plain NUTS.

    • EMILYM

      He’s in with the Bildebergers, nuff said!

    • an american


    • Anne

      jerry writes,

      “i dont like Perrys imigration policy”

      Well Jerry, Perry doesn’t have an immigration policy.

      Immigration is a FEDERAL issue, not a state issue.

      And the TEXAS Dream Act is NOTHING LIKE Obozo’s Dream Act. Quite the opposite, as a matter of fact.

      And as far as Texas’ in-state tuition policy, that was voted on by the Texas State Legislature (passed 188-4.)

      Not to mention, the children of illegals in Texas STILL PAY TUITION, it’s just at the same in-state rate as other Texas residents, and they have to be on the path to US citizenship.

      And here’s something new to learn, there are now FOURTEEN (14) other states that have the same or similar policies for children of illegal aliens.

    • kysteelgirl

      Perry called the legislature back to pass an anti-Sanctuary city bill because the people just kept after him…then “strangely” enough his biggest contributor (CEO of HEB groceries) came out against the bill so “poof” it went away. All of this took place about the time Perry was still being coy about a presidential run. This tells me he is corrupt and doesn’t give a flip about the will of the people…like obama.

  • http://ThePatriotUpdate C K

    WOW. I could not have said it better. This reflects my views about the candidates. I would like to add, As much as I like Ron Paul, he will not stand with Israel and said he would pull financial support. Though we are desperate for a fiscal overhaul, principles can not be abandoned. Also, I would like to add Rick Perry said in the last debate that he would support Israel and that he would be interested in discussion regarding defunding the U.N. That is exactly what we need to hear. Helping other countries with billions of dollars and lost military lives has been met with hatred, with exception of Israel and Britain. Look at the Candidate’s core values from which decisions will be made and not the flash. I despise the establishment Romney. Another fox in sheep’s clothing.

    • Dara

      I was thinking that if we recognized Israel’s sovereignty and allowed them to do what they feel is best for their country instead of the US being an “honest broker” and forcing them to do it our way or the highway is a pretty bad policy. – Ron Paul.

      Let’s see – they have the third largest air force in the world with the latest American technology. The the most highly trained pilots. 300 + Tactical nukes, icbms, world renowned intelligence.

      And then – we have our leaders and state department completely infiltrated with liberal one world policy wonks telling Israel what they can and cannot do concerning their internal and border safety.

      On top of that – we’re giving federal aid (welfare) to their enemies 7 times the amount we are giving to Israel. Yes, we, the united states, fund Israel’s enemies SEVEN TIMES more and you feel this is “supporting” Israel?

      Excuse me? But does this make sense to anyone? Is this logical in anyway? How come there is only one candidate that talks about these things? Why is it that there is only ONE candidate that TRULY cares about Israel in a logical sense and people remain so BLIND? Wake up.

    • http://yahoo littledee

      Pulling financial aid has nothing to do with support for Isreal. God said to not go against them and pray for them not take care of them like a little child.

    • EMILYM

      Perry can say anything he wants, but he’s a Bildeberger!

    • Susan

      I surely would have hoped Conservative voters would be aware of the significance of a Bilderberg ‘invite’. If any DOUBT the existence of this powerful Global Elite Group, please do some research. They’ve affected the outcome of our elections for several adms now – and their plans for the World, and that includes Our Beloved America, will NOT PLEASE you… unless you’re already a New World Order Supporter… and one of the Elites. (BUT you would NOT be on this Forum if you were!)

  • http://ThePatriotUpdate C K

    How about Perry/Cain or Perry/Palin? Actually, Perry and any of the others except Romney.

  • GladysMP

    Perry would make a great President. This native Texan hates to see the petty and false things that are being said about Perry that have absolutely nothing to do with running the country. He is not racist and has put blacks in high offices here in Texas. Perry is not pro-illegals! Nobody in Texas wants the border closed more than Perry and he has spent a huge amount of money doing what he can in that respect. Perry has no authority to deport illegals. As governor, he must deal with things as as they are, not as he wishes them. Perry has served as our governor longer than any other person. Do you question the intelligence of Texas voters? If all American voters could speak personally with Rick Perry, he would win by a landslide. He is personable, sincere, patriotic and the best candidate for the Republicans. When Perry’s poll numbers shot so high, the Democrats started shaking in their boots . Naturally they started to slander him as much as they can. They had hoped that Obama would be competing against Romney who is cocky, obnoxious and boring in his manner. How could Romney discourage Obamacare when he started the same in his state? Perry should be the Republican nominee if they hope to beat Obama. I pray they will wake up to that truth.

    It is great to see that folks are learning the truth and not believing the false rumors about Rick Perry.

    • Bree

      Very well said GladysMP and I agree totally. There has never been so many false statements made against any candidate except for Sarah Palin. I like Gov.Perry and I like Texas. I wish him God speed in all his endeavors to continue to serve America.

    • Noelle

      NO HE WOULDNT!!!!!!!!!!!

    • Tom Stevanak

      Very well said GladysMP!

  • GladysMP

    The Democrats are hoping to run against Romney. Here is their plan to defear Romney:,_draw_from_bush_vs_kerry

    • Anne

      Gladys: You are absolutely correct!!!

      And there’s also this…

      The Bain of Mitt’s campaign

      By: Alexander Burns
      July 14, 2011

      A company that laid off hundreds of employees. A federal “bailout” to rescue a failing bank. Mitt Romney, at the center of it all.

      It’s a story line from a tough Democratic ad that was teed up for use against Romney in his 1994 Senate campaign in Massachusetts. The spot, which was provided exclusively to POLITICO, never actually aired. But it’s all but certain that some version of its allegations will surface in the GOP primary or the general election, if Romney makes it that far.

      That ad would have been damaging had it appeared when it was produced nearly two decades ago. But it could take on new relevance in a 2012 campaign in which Romney is touting his business career as proof he can lead a national economic turnaround.

      Please access the link and read the entire column.

      The dems have enough dirt on Romney that should he, God forbid, get the nomination, they’d have him buried 24 hours later, and Obozo would be assured of another 4 years.

  • eddy james

    There are several that might make good presidents and Mitt isn’t the one I’d choose. The Obamaroma health care is a major item against him along with helping turn Massachusetts into Faggachusetts with Same sex marriage. I can’t believe that he believes in man made global warming which is a get rich quick scheme by Al Gore and the carbon credit crowd. So that leaves Rick Perry who has been my first choice all along.

    • Anne

      eddy james: Agreed 100%

  • http://N/A jerry

    I want a 15′ fence and guard towers….no romney,,NEWT=1st-perry2nd.==with Cain as V-P
    for either..—–NO females..PLS.

  • Anne

    Vallorani is pretty much spot on with his assessment of all the candidates.

    However, as far as Romney, he’s right as far as he goes. There’s a LOT MORE to Romney that voters NEED to know!

    Romney said he blew the whistle on what was going on in Damon while he was personally supervising. U.S. Atty. Stein said Romney was a ‘liar’ and what Romney had done was the ‘worst example of corporate greed gone amok’ that he had ever seen.

    Bain Capital acquired Damon Clinical Laboratories, Inc., of Needham, Massachusetts, in 1988. Mitt Romney personally ran Damon, which did medical testing that was paid for by Medicare. Romney made $7.4M on the acquisition. Bain sold Damon to Corning, Inc. in 1993.

    U.S. Atty. Donald Stein said Bain Damon paid the LARGEST CRIMINAL fine in Massachusetts history. The breakdown of the criminal fine paid is as follows:

    $119,000,000 – repayment to Medicare
    $ 35,275,141 – CRIMINAL fine
    $ 83,726,859 – CIVIL fines for related losses
    $238,002,000 – TOTAL payment by Bain/Damon

  • george tolhurst

    Perry is a closit conservative. He is a puppet as well as several of the other candidatesRon Paul is simpley stating the facts. By invading and occupying many countries we are creating hatred for ourselves. We do both by propping up and destroying dictators.
    Be smart and check out all of the candidates history and do your own research.

  • george tolhurst

    Check out Ron Paul’s 35 year unwaivering record and listen to a few of his speechs.
    Ron Paul is the the very best candidate and will win this election. If we all put our support behind Ron Paul, he would win by a landslide.
    Go Ron Paul Go and God Bless You

    • Mary P

      You have made a good point – Ron Paul is unwavering in his stance on everything. It doesn’t matter how circumstances change he doesn’t. We cannot afford to have a man that feels if we keep our heads in the sand the sand will not engulf us. Terrorism is not a product of us – we are just the antitheses of the “infidel” to them. Thousands of years of hatred is focused on us because we are everything they despise – FREE MEN, Christians, Jews, and not bound by their “religious” fanaticism. They cannot control us.

  • Mary P

    Why is it that Newt is so low on everyone’s list? Is it because he found God, married a Catholic and is brilliant? Listen to him carefully. Every time he opens his mouth common sense rolls out. He’s articulate, powerful, commanding, self-confident, self-aware, extremely knowledgeable in ways that Obama could NEVER exhibit or challenge. He will rise to the surface here soon. Look for him to move up real shortly. Perry/Romney just make fools of themselves daily; Michele does not have the confidence or command presence, Cain’s 999 plan is too hard to implement;Santorum’s not ready. Paul is a moron on foreign policy – period.

  • Robert

    I guess that is your opinion. But you know that opinions are like ***holes, everyone has one.

  • Sir2You

    You really disappoint and disgust me. Perry is a traitor to Patriotic values and principles, and is a big government elitist just like the Bushes, and just like Baraq. He may be the least bad of all the other rotten apples, but they are all the same, and we HAVE no good options. At least I can buy a gun in Texas, without telling my ‘Big Brother’ so he can come get it.

  • GladysMP

    Mitt Romney’s not a conservative: It’s hard to criticize Mitt Romney’s position on the issues because he shifts around so much you never really know where he stands on anything. One day he’s pro-amnesty. The next day, he’s not. One day he’s pro-choice; the next day he’s pro-life. One day he believes humans are the cause of global warming; the next day he’s not sure about it. One day he’s pro-gun control; the next day, he’s a staunch advocate of the 2nd Amendment. One day he’s disassociating himself from Ronald Reagan and the Contract with America; the next day he wants to assure you that both are close to his heart. While it is okay for politicians to change their mind from time to time and conservatives are sometimes too unwilling to “take ‘yes’ for an answer” from a politician, in Romney’s case, his positions have shifted so much, on so many issues, that it’s impossible to take anything he says at face value.

  • Edie

    Perry is not to be trusted and I am a Texan. He fought for the Trans Texas Corridor taking people’s land which was their life and also destroying small towns he wanted it completed and his name on it.

    All the Bushs and clintons belong to the Bilderberg Group. They have changed where if you don’t want your name listed they won’t list it. George’s Dad and Mom belong so does he.

    Also to each his own but I will hang with Ron Paul. As far as the Military I am tired of all our boys being killed or maimed for others that refuse to fight for theirselves. I know what I’m talking about my husband spent 26 years in the military. Our forefathers fought for us and that is why we are able to have this discussion. Also the UN needs to be told to move to another country but they are building a new UN near the one they have.

  • Paul

    Gingrich is the BEST true conservative patriot running for the office! The fact that the main-stream media all but COMPLETELY ignores him should tell you how afraid of him they are! They wish to marginalize him by proclamation (or lack of procalamation). Cain would make an EXCELLENT VP for Gingrich! What a team! No punches pulled. No cowtowing to special interests. No pandering (or bowing) to foreign powers! Could it be too much for the socialist elite media to bear?

  • Starbrander

    Perry Is Not Conservative…..Illegals Have Free Reign In Texas,Perry’s Buddy Aga Khan is Working To Institute Islamic Studies In Texas Schools, And Perry Could Be Bought Off By a Mere $5K To Mandate That Texas Should Inject Girls With A Bio-toxic Substance…….LOSER

    • Yael

      That’s an outright lie about the Aga Khan.

  • Eraija Shop

    A person essentially lend a hand to make seriously posts I’d state. That is the first time I frequented your web page and thus far? I surprised with the analysis you made to create this particular submit incredible. Great activity!

  • Licensing Agreement

    You could certainly see your expertise within the work you write. The arena hopes for even more passionate writers like you who aren’t afraid to mention how they believe. All the time follow your heart.

  • inspection technologies

    I just like the valuable information you provide in your articles. I?ll bookmark your blog and test once more here regularly. I am fairly sure I will be informed many new stuff proper here! Best of luck for the following!

  • inde artist

    Pretty component to content. I just stumbled upon your web site and in accession capital to say that I get actually enjoyed account your blog posts. Any way I will be subscribing on your augment or even I success you get right of entry to constantly fast.

  • forex free account

    Wonderful goods from you, man. I have keep in mind your stuff previous to and you are just too fantastic. I really like what you’ve got here, certainly like what you are saying and the best way through which you are saying it. You’re making it entertaining and you continue to take care of to stay it smart. I can not wait to learn much more from you. This is really a great site.