Rick Perry Disavows His Own Book From Nine Months Ago

[Pendragon]

from http://thinkprogress.org/justice/201...savows-fed-up/

Last November, Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) published Fed Up, a 240-page ode to tentherism, which argues that everything from child labor laws to the Clean Air Act to Medicare violates the Constitution. As it turns out, however, claiming that America’s entire social safety net is unconstitutional isn’t a very popular position — so Perry’s now trying to take it all back just one week into his presidential campaign.

[Perry's] communications director, Ray Sullivan, said Thursday that he had “never heard” the governor suggest [Social Security] was unconstitutional. Not only that, Mr. Sullivan said, but “Fed Up!” is not meant to reflect the governor’s current views on how to fix the program. [...]

In an interview, Mr. Sullivan acknowledged that many passages in Mr. Perry’s “Fed Up!” could dog his presidential campaign. The book, Mr. Sullivan said, “is a look back, not a path forward.” It was written “as a review and critique of 50 years of federal excesses, not in any way as a 2012 campaign blueprint or manifesto,” Mr. Sullivan said.

This guy must really think we're idiots. Hell no we aren't going to vote for him! This guy blasts the Federal Government and now he wants to lead it.

[Mister D]

So anyone who criticizes the federal government in terms of its size and scope is not fit to lead it? That's ridiculous.

[Mister D]

Pen, if there is something my profile doesn't cover you can ask me directly.

[Conley]

Pen, if there is something my profile doesn't cover you can ask me directly.

I saw that too! Just about spit coffee all over my keyboard!

He's been studying it a while, eh? I guess you have a new admirer. ;D

[Conley]

I wonder if there are quotes from the book that will be effective against him. I don't know much about it and haven't read it. The only thing heard of was one quote, something along the lines of the federal government has no role to play in the education of a child. Seems like that is and should be a state's issue, at least in my mind.

[Pendragon]

So anyone who criticizes the federal government in terms of its size and scope is not fit to lead it? That's ridiculous.

Of course not. If you actually read the article and saw the excerpts of the book you'd know this goes far beyond that. Perry basically wants to do away with all government programs not outlined in the Constitution. It's the same lunacy that got Ron Paul in trouble. See how the Dems will hammer him for saying Social Security should be completely eliminated. That's going to hurt him with the seniors.

[Conley]

Why would a politician say that if he had any hopes of ever getting elected again? To do so would be political suicide...I think you are underestimating him and misstating whatever was written. Can you provide an exact quote?

[Mister D]

So anyone who criticizes the federal government in terms of its size and scope is not fit to lead it? That's ridiculous.

Of course not. If you actually read the article and saw the excerpts of the book you'd know this goes far beyond that. Perry basically wants to do away with all government programs not outlined in the Constitution. It's the same lunacy that got Ron Paul in trouble. See how the Dems will hammer him for saying Social Security should be completely eliminated. That's going to hurt him with the seniors.

Thinkprogress articles aren't exactly my cup of tea. Sorry. In any case, we are discussing your own comments which you can't help but post at the end of your cited opinion pieces. It's the same lunacy that got you in trouble before. Now you say that he goes far beyond criticizing the size and scope of the federal government and then offer example of Perry doing precisely that when he criticizes SS which, BTW, is unsustainable. Mind you, I have no doubt that the Democrats will lie and scare old people like they always do. That's to be expected. On the other hand, that will not change the fact that SS is unsustainable. If nothing else, Perry is rightly preparing Americans for what is inevitable.

I'm 35, Pen. I've written my SS deduction off because I will never see a dime of that money.

[Pendragon]

There's no reason Social Security can't continue indefinitely. All that is needed is to reduce the payout amount. If you're thirty-five then there is a chance you will see some of that money come back to you. It is easy to just assume social security won't work and should be scrapped, but it has worked very well for decades, up until this recent rash of Republican spending.

BTW, I encourage you to read ThinkProgress to learn more about our current government workings. You will find it educational and enlightening.

[Mister D]

There's no reason Social Security can't continue indefinitely. All that is needed is to reduce the payout amount. If you're thirty-five then there is a chance you will see some of that money come back to you. It is easy to just assume social security won't work and should be scrapped, but it has worked very well for decades, up until this recent rash of Republican spending.

BTW, I encourage you to read ThinkProgress to learn more about our current government workings. You will find it educational and enlightening.

I'll look toward my own retirement but thanks. Anyway, are you seriously suggesting that SS is unsustainable only because of the GOP's spending habits?

Thinkprogress is a laughably biased website. I'd encourage you to look elsewhere unless having your preconceived notions confirmed is the goal. If so, carry on.