Top 10 Things Rick Perry Doesn't Want You to Know About Him

More white privilege from the undeserving. Not only will they tell you what you meant, but they'll insult your intelligence by suggesting that you don't know what you're talking about. Race didn't even enter into it, until you added "jiving", which was "coined" from the BeBop Era, by black jazz musicians, hence, the racial slur, hence the race card being played by none other than you. I can't play a card, that I've worn on my skin since birth. Complete idiot. Owned.


Poor blowit.


Not only does the imbecile not know the difference between "break" and "brake", he lied about it, then, humiliated, he race-baited and assumes I am Caucasian with no knowledge of my identity whatsoever.


Compounding his ignorance, he solely attributes "jiving" to "Be-Bop era black jazz musicians" and incorrectly asserts it is a "racial slur".


To jazz musicians who were the players of swing music in the 1930s and 1940s "Jive" was an expression denoting glib or foolish talk. Early Jazz: Its Roots and Musical Development. by Gunther Schuller. 1968. Oxford University Press. page 379. ISBN 0-19-504043-0

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jive_(dance)


Then our dimwitted diva of dipshits attributes the term "Be-Bop" to "black jazz musicians".


However, possibly the most plausible theory is that it derives from the cry of "Arriba! Arriba!" used by Latin American bandleaders of the period to encourage their bands.This squares with the fact that, originally, the terms "bebop" and "rebop" were used interchangeably. Peter Gammond, The Oxford Companion to Popular Music, 1991, ISBN 0-19-311323-6

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bebop


Thus is blowit the faux poet exposed as an ignoramus laureate.
 
17th is a shitty amendment, and needs to go the way of its successor. I don't care to see the 16th go, but we do need to desperately reform our tax code.
 
Listen, I don't feel that I have to defend myself, my education, my intelligence, my sexuality, my race, or anything else about me, to anyone, less to someone who identifies as "President Mittens", and has a cat for an avatar.
Yes, because my name and chosen avatar are the subjects to be discussed here, rather than the merit of my words. That's an Ad Hom, a logical fallacy if there ever was one.
And, indeed, this is the thread that I started but I hardly suspected it would be invaded by cretins and Neanderthals, who know more about appearing "stupid", than they do about politics.
Once again ignoring the merits of the statements made that are contrary to your beliefs. Be a hack as much as you like, but it won't engender anyone to your cause, nor make many people take you seriously. Especially when compared against a seasoned poster like myself.

This was our exchange/your response to my post:


Originally Posted by poet
1. Some people forfeit their right to be on Earth. Sorry.
So you are of the position that the government gets to decide who lives and who dies?

Capital punishment is the law of the land in many states. If DNA evidence says you did the deed, then, if heinous enough, you die. It's no longer a question of the government but the will of the people. Moron.
So the will of the people supersedes what is right or wrong? Not only do you support the government deciding who is and is not worthy of living but you support the idea that if it's popular it's right? That's a lulzy statement when compared against others you have made.
2. Disagree. We decided to form " a more perfect union". Can't do that with folks opting out.
Not related to #2.
I'm fine with the amendments as they stand...I give a shit what Rick Perry thinks or wants.
Clearly you DO give a shit as you have posted on it initially and defended said statements against his thoughts. That aside, you can accept the amendments as is. That has nothing to do with a 'more perfect union'. I however, do not. They are unnecessary to carry out the limited powers of government with regards to the 16th and have corrupted the election process of senators in the 17th.
3. Outrageous.
Lovely refutation

Letting states drop out of SS and Medicare/Medicaid , why????????? It's taken out of one's income. It's federally instituted and administered. Non-negotiable. And fuck you.
It's a wonder that anyone discusses anything with you at all with such disrespect. And by opting out, I mean that individuals should be allowed to opt out. Why should I pay into SS when I won't ever use it, and even if I do use it, I will have lost money on it?
4. Damn straight. Fine them to the max.
Don't care, lots of government regs with regards to pollution are ridiculous and unnecessary.

Spoken like a typical conservative/Republican, caring nothing about the environment, the air we breathe or the water we drink.
Why? For business' sake? For profits? Why the fuck wouldn't we need regulations concerning pollution? You're on the fucking side of the polluters. Fuck you.
Yeah, being HAZMAT certified and working as a safety inspector, I probably wouldn't know about the over regulation of certain industries and pollutants.
5. Government intrusion
Don't care one way or the other on abortion, so I don't care here either. '
So STFU
Cool story bro.
6. Lock the SOB up.
Yeah for doing his legally obliged job as elected by the people. Clearly a criminal offense.

I didn't vote for his sorry ass. Again, mixed and fucked up priorities. Pro oil, anti-people, anti-children. But he's supposed to be a Christian, right? Hypocrite of the first magnitude.
So because you didn't vote for him makes the election invalid? What was that about the will of the people a few sentences ago? Or is that only matter when it coincides with your own personal agenda?
7. Get out of my fucking bedroom
Agreed.
I didn't ask you to fucking agree with me. I don't fucking care what you think.
Such civility. You must be a blast at the local ball. If I had disagreed with your position I'm sure you would have had a different choice of words. But judging from your overall lack of tact exhibited elsewhere, probably not.
8. Fuck that shit...Obama isn't the topic of the discussion
He is if it's during an election. And what the fuck would you know, it IS during and about an election. Damned crazy coincidence there.

The topic is Rick Perry. You want to discuss Barack Obama, start a thread. He has to win the nomination of his party before it becomes about Barack Obama, dumb dora.
That's true, he does need to secure the nomination. Against other hypocrites, then he can be elected against the hypocrite in office, AKA Obama. So it's entirely relevant to the discussion, especially since you espouse unwavering support of Obama. That would mean his hypocrisy is fine but some how bad when Perry does it. It's called being a hack.
9. Fuck that. Find the Texans who agree with that mentally ill SOB.
Not my job. That's his. He'd have to have a majority support to secede. But it's their legal right to do so.

The last Civil War proved that it wasn't the right of a state to secede. That will never happen again. Stupid.
No it proved that the north was militarily superior to the south. In other flashes of the blindingly obvious, rain is made of water and the Earth is round.
10. 50/50
The level of care provided is not dependent on how many are insured or otherwise.

What the fuck do you know about the healthcare industry. I worked both for a provider and for a biller for private insurance. And your statement, irrelevant as it is, means squat.
Then you can easily provide evidence to support your statement that Texas does not have the best healthcare. If you can provide that evidence I will happily recant this statement.
 
Yes, because my name and chosen avatar are the subjects to be discussed here, rather than the merit of my words. That's an Ad Hom, a logical fallacy if there ever was one.
Once again ignoring the merits of the statements made that are contrary to your beliefs. Be a hack as much as you like, but it won't engender anyone to your cause, nor make many people take you seriously. Especially when compared against a seasoned poster like myself.

So the will of the people supersedes what is right or wrong? Not only do you support the government deciding who is and is not worthy of living but you support the idea that if it's popular it's right? That's a lulzy statement when compared against others you have made.
Clearly you DO give a shit as you have posted on it initially and defended said statements against his thoughts. That aside, you can accept the amendments as is. That has nothing to do with a 'more perfect union'. I however, do not. They are unnecessary to carry out the limited powers of government with regards to the 16th and have corrupted the election process of senators in the 17th.
It's a wonder that anyone discusses anything with you at all with such disrespect. And by opting out, I mean that individuals should be allowed to opt out. Why should I pay into SS when I won't ever use it, and even if I do use it, I will have lost money on it?
Yeah, being HAZMAT certified and working as a safety inspector, I probably wouldn't know about the over regulation of certain industries and pollutants.
Cool story bro.
So because you didn't vote for him makes the election invalid? What was that about the will of the people a few sentences ago? Or is that only matter when it coincides with your own personal agenda?
Such civility. You must be a blast at the local ball. If I had disagreed with your position I'm sure you would have had a different choice of words. But judging from your overall lack of tact exhibited elsewhere, probably not.
[/COLOR][/B]That's true, he does need to secure the nomination. Against other hypocrites, then he can be elected against the hypocrite in office, AKA Obama. So it's entirely relevant to the discussion, especially since you espouse unwavering support of Obama. That would mean his hypocrisy is fine but some how bad when Perry does it. It's called being a hack.
No it proved that the north was militarily superior to the south. In other flashes of the blindingly obvious, rain is made of water and the Earth is round.
Then you can easily provide evidence to support your statement that Texas does not have the best healthcare. If you can provide that evidence I will happily recant this statement.

If we looked up "hack" in the Websters' , your picture would be displayed. I'm not interested in engaging you, as your opinion is totally biased and unfounded in fact, which you mistake for "truth". It is not.
When Obama wins re-election...what will you chalk it up to? A moronic electorate? An unfair disadvantage? PR fiasco? Or your side not being able to offer up any viable alternatives? My money is on the latter.
 
If we looked up "hack" in the Websters' , your picture would be displayed. I'm not interested in engaging you, as your opinion is totally biased and unfounded in fact, which you mistake for "truth". It is not.
When Obama wins re-election...what will you chalk it up to? A moronic electorate? An unfair disadvantage? PR fiasco? Or your side not being able to offer up any viable alternatives? My money is on the latter.
I'd chalk it up to my prediction from months ago.

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?33140-2012-Election-results-(spoiler-alert)

And if I am posting something contrary to facts then they should easily be refuted. If so, by all means, refute the statements I have made. I'm man enough to admit when I'm wrong, and have done so a multitude of times here before. That you are incapable of defending your own ideology should be telling about which one is more true however. And as a side note, I'm HARDLY a Republican. Anyone who's seen my posts for any length of time should be able to tell you that, or you could see it for yourself if you were so bold as to read what someone else says rather than dismiss it because it does not coincide with your warped world view.
 
"Hardly a Republican", but you found it necessary to defend Rick Perry, in a thread titled "The 10 top things Rick Perry doesn't want you to know". Seems to be either a sign of mental illness or cluelessness to support one of the new darlings of the Republican Presidential field, and then on the other hand deny that you're a Republican. And you have the audacity to question my credentials? LOL. I'm sorry but I don't automatically buy into any "white privilege" or the "circling of the wagons" around one of your own. He is a religious hypocrite, blurring the lines between church and state...a piss poor governor, cut funding to the disenfranchised ( children, the elderly and the infirmed), intervened in womens' healthcare, making it more difficult for a woman to have an abortion, if that is her choice, is anti gay rights...rumored to be "gay" himself (which would make him an even bigger hypocrite, on par with Rep. Larry Craig), and has dubious foreign dealings ( Mexico and China). No...I pay attention to Huff Post, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, the BBC and occasionally read a newspaper. I hardly have a "warped world view", Missy.
 
"Hardly a Republican", but you found it necessary to defend Rick Perry, in a thread titled "The 10 top things Rick Perry doesn't want you to know". Seems to be either a sign of mental illness or cluelessness to support one of the new darlings of the Republican Presidential field, and then on the other hand deny that you're a Republican. And you have the audacity to question my credentials? LOL. I'm sorry but I don't automatically buy into any "white privilege" or the "circling of the wagons" around one of your own. He is a religious hypocrite, blurring the lines between church and state...a piss poor governor, cut funding to the disenfranchised ( children, the elderly and the infirmed), intervened in womens' healthcare, making it more difficult for a woman to have an abortion, if that is her choice, is anti gay rights...rumored to be "gay" himself (which would make him an even bigger hypocrite, on par with Rep. Larry Craig), and has dubious foreign dealings ( Mexico and China). No...I pay attention to Huff Post, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, the BBC and occasionally read a newspaper. I hardly have a "warped world view", Missy.

'White privilege'? What does that have to do with anything in any of my posts? And I would hardly consider myself defending Perry, considering my only support in this election goes to Ron Paul. And again, you absolutely fail at any sort of reading comprehension and continue to attack the poster rather than the issues. So if you are unable or unwilling to debate said issues, simply admit to it and move on.
 
'White privilege'? What does that have to do with anything in any of my posts? And I would hardly consider myself defending Perry, considering my only support in this election goes to Ron Paul. And again, you absolutely fail at any sort of reading comprehension and continue to attack the poster rather than the issues. So if you are unable or unwilling to debate said issues, simply admit to it and move on.

What does it have to do? It has to do with "tone". It has to do with "treading lightly". It has to do with the conventional wisdom that Rick Perry is a part of the extremist right wing of the Republican Party (i.e. the "racist" Tea Party) , and your defense of him, only underscores your solidarity with his ideology and his mindset...one that is racist, bigoted and elitist. Did you think to think before you posted, or was it a "knee-jerk" response to anyone challenging the white majority, which clearly could do without minorities, the poor, children, the elderly and the infirmed. The only folks the right cares about is folks that generally look like them...white, conservative and male. Education optional.
Ron Paul? Another challenged candidate with a history of racial baggage. I'm in Houston, Tx. Ron Paul is from Galveston. I know all about him.
And you're so right. I am unwilling to debate the issues...with the likes of a cat poser.
 
What does it have to do? It has to do with "tone". It has to do with "treading lightly". It has to do with the conventional wisdom that Rick Perry is a part of the extremist right wing of the Republican Party (i.e. the "racist" Tea Party) , and your defense of him, only underscores your solidarity with his ideology and his mindset...one that is racist, bigoted and elitist. Did you think to think before you posted, or was it a "knee-jerk" response to anyone challenging the white majority, which clearly could do without minorities, the poor, children, the elderly and the infirmed. The only folks the right cares about is folks that generally look like them...white, conservative and male. Education optional.
Ron Paul? Another challenged candidate with a history of racial baggage. I'm in Houston, Tx. Ron Paul is from Galveston. I know all about him.
And you're so right. I am unwilling to debate the issues...with the likes of a cat poser.
If you want to be an intellectual coward, by all means, have at it.
 
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/06/10/241830/top-10-thing-texas-gov-rick-perry/


With widespread discontent on the right over their current presidential field, all eyes are trained on a likely new entrant: Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R).

Perry, who has been elected governor three times and served for more than 10 years, enjoys bona fides from social conservatives and Tea Party-types alike. Glenn Beck even described Perry as a man he was so enamored with that he wanted to “French kiss.”

However, as conservatives fawn over their newest presidential hopeful, it’s worth taking a closer examination at his record as governor. On issues across the board, from Perry’s support for dropping out of Social Security and Medicaid to his state’s abysmal pollution levels and his proposal that Texas secede from the United States, the Republican governor has amassed a record of far-right extremism.

ThinkProgress has assembled the top ten hits from Perry’s tenure as governor:

(1) PERRY ALLOWED THE EXECUTION OF A LIKELY INNOCENT MAN, THEN IMPEDED AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE MATTER: In 2004, Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in Huntsville, Texas after being convicted of arson and the murder of his three children. Even after significant evidence emerged showing that arson had not caused the fire (thus exonerating Willingham), Perry refused to grant a stay of execution. Five years after Willingham was executed, a report from a Texas Forensic Science Commission investigator found that the fire could not have been arson. As the commission prepared to hear testimony from the investigator in October 2009, Perry quickly fired and replaced three of its members, forcing an indefinite delay in the hearing.

(2) PERRY WANTS TO REPEAL THE 16th AND 17th AMENDMENTS, ENDING DIRECT ELECTION OF U.S. SENATORS AND THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX: In his 2010 book Fed Up!, Perry called the 16th and 17th Amendments “mistaken” and said they resulted from “a fit of populist rage.” The 16th Amendment allows the federal government to collect income taxes, which is the single biggest source of revenue, accounting for 45 percent of all receipts. The 17th Amendment took electing U.S. senators out of the hands of political insiders and allowed the American public to decide their representation instead. If Perry had his way, the federal government would be stripped of its current ability to fund highway construction projects, food inspectors, and the military, and the American public would not even be permitted to elect their own senators.

(3) PERRY PROPOSED LETTING STATES DROP OUT OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICAID: Despite the programs’ importance and popularity, Perry has argued that states like Texas should be allowed to opt out of Social Security and Medicaid. Were Perry to have his way on Social Security, “the entire system would collapse under the weight of too many Social Security beneficiaries who had not paid into the system,” notes Ian Millhiser. On Medicaid, in addition to stripping 3.6 million low-income Texans of their health care, Perry’s proposal would actually hurt, not help, the state’s budget deficit. This is because, as Igor Volsky writes, opting out of Medicaid would take “billions out of the state economy that goes on to support hospitals and other providers,” while forcing hospitals “to swallow the costs of caring for uninsured individuals who will continue to use the emergency room as their primary source of care.”

(4) TEXAS IS THE COUNTRY’S BIGGEST POLLUTER, BUT PERRY SUED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR DISAPPROVING OF THE STATE’S AIR QUALITY STANDARDS: Texas is the biggest polluter in the country, leading the nation in carbon dioxide emissions. However, when the EPA published its “disapproval” of the state’s air quality standards for falling short of the Clean Air Act’s requirements, Perry sued the federal government to challenge the ruling. Perry’s environmental record doesn’t end there. He is a global warming denier who called the 2010 BP oil spill an “act of God” while speaking at a trade association funded by BP.

(5) PERRY DESIGNATED AS “EMERGENCY LEGISLATION” A BILL REQUIRING ALL WOMEN SEEKING ABORTIONS TO HAVE SONOGRAMS FIRST: In January, Perry proposed requiring all women seeking abortions to have a sonogram at least 24 hours before the procedure. Under the bill, doctors would be required to “tell a woman the size of her fetus’ limbs and organs, even if she does not want to know.” Before a woman is permitted to have an abortion, physicians are also forced to provide an image of the fetus and make the woman listen to the sound of its heartbeat. Perry designated his proposal as “emergency legislation,” allowing the bill to be rushed through the legislature. He signed it into law last month.


(6) PERRY GUTTED CHILDCARE SERVICES EVEN AS TEXAS CHILDHOOD POVERTY HIT 25 PERCENT: Facing a $27 billion budget deficit this year, Perry decided to gut child support services, despite a report from the Center for Public Policy Priorities that found nearly one in four Texas children lived beneath the poverty line. Instead of raising revenue like California, a state facing a similarly sized deficit, Perry scaled back more than $10 billion of child support over two years. As Think Progress’ Pat Garofalo noted, these cuts were proposed despite Texas’ possession of a $8.2 billion rainy day fund.

(7) PERRY WAS A STRONG SUPPORTER OF TEXAS’S ANTI-SODOMY LAWS: Perry was a strong proponent of Texas’s anti-sodomy law that was struck down in 2003 by the Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas. Calling the law “appropriate,” Perry dismissed the Court decision as the result of “nine oligarchs in robes.” Even after being struck down, Perry supported the Texas legislature’s refusal to remove the law from its books.

(8) PERRY IS A STIMULUS HYPOCRITE WHO LOUDLY CRITICIZED FEDERAL RECOVERY MONEY BUT USED IT TO BALANCE HIS STATE’S BUDGET: As the nation struggled to avoid economic collapse in 2009, Perry was a vocal critic of Congress’s recovery package, even advocating that Texas reject the money because “we can take care of ourselves.” Months later, after Perry was able to balance the state’s budget only with the aid of billions in federal stimulus dollars, Perry again repeated that he would reject federal funding, arguing that the government “spends money they don’t have.” Five months later, Perry again took advantage of federal funding to issue $2 billion in bonds for highway improvements in Texas. Even so, the state faces a $27 billion budget deficit.

(9) PERRY SAID THAT TEXAS MIGHT HAVE TO SECEDE FROM THE UNITED STATES: One hundred and fifty years ago, Texas and other southern states seceded from the Union, resulting in a bloody Civil War. 148 years later, Perry floated the idea that Texas may again have to secede because of a federal government that “continues to thumb their nose at the American people.” Perry was roundly criticized for his proposal, yet he repeated his threat the next month on Fox News, telling host Neil Cavuto, “If Washington continues to force these programs on the states, if Washington continues to disregard the tenth amendment, who knows what happens.”

(10) DESPITE HAVING THE WORST UNINSURED RATE IN THE COUNTRY, PERRY CLAIMS THAT TEXAS HAS “THE BEST HEALTH CARE IN THE COUNTRY” : On Bill Bennett’s radio show last year, Perry claimed that “Texas has the best health care in the country.” In reality, Texas has the highest rate of uninsured residents of any state. More than one in four Texans lack coverage; the national average is just 15.4 percent. As such, there are more uninsured residents in Texas than there are people in 33 states. Despite Texas’s low coverage rates, the state has some of the most restrictive Medicaid eligibility thresholds, and Perry has even proposed dropping out of the program. Texas also has an inordinately high percentage of impoverished children, yet Perry opposed expanding the successful State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).

ThinkProgress intern Sean Savett contributed to this report.

Unfortunately, The GOP and "the truth" have never occupied the same space- poet.

I could do a much better job at showing good reasons not to vote for Perry.

Your source sucks. Perry is actually bad. You make him sound, "not so bad".
 
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Liberty
I could do a much better job at showing good reasons not to vote for Perry.

Your source sucks. Perry is actually bad. You make him sound, "not so bad

Do it then.
 
quote_icon.png
Do it then.

OK,,,,,,, Perry wanted to mandate vaccinations for my daughter. For no other reason than to make a buck. Even though Texans like me said NO!

When the legislature said no, because Texans like me were saying "NO", he tried to do it through executive order.
 
Back
Top