TexasCHLforum.com

Dave2 wrote:Yeah... it makes me wonder why he didn't add campus carry to the emergency session, though.

"I conclude campus safety is less important to him than the things he added." - Occam's Razor

Well with his inclusion of the anti-groping TSA bill he has my vote in the Primary for republican nominee if he chooses to Run. Perry 2012 God Bless TX!

mamabearCali wrote:Well with his inclusion of the anti-groping TSA bill he has my vote in the Primary for republican nominee if he chooses to Run. Perry 2012 God Bless TX!

I would think he could make it's passage a big part of his campaign. Especially if he subsequently makes the TSA back down! After all, how many people, even democrats, are pro-TSA? The TSA would make the perfect universal enemy!

Well the touching of grandmothers, and 6 year old's private areas seems to incense everyone (as it should!).

What do you who have had to deal with him the past few years think of such a man as president?

Mr. Perry / Gov. Perry would be a FAR more suitable and effective candidate for president than the current individual in the white house.

The economy of Texas has held strong as opposed to many states, and the nation as a whole.

He tends to embrace many of the traditional American beliefs and values that made our nation strong, as opposed to the socialist ideals that have bankrupted many states, and have polarized our citizens.

He has been supportive of our 2nd amendment rights, and the rights of citizens to defend themselves against the criminal scum lurking in our communities.

All in all, he is an excellent candidate, and while NOT perfect by any means, he would be a VAST improvement over the current marxist who seems to be doing his best to destroy our way of life as we have known it for generations.

I'd vote for him.

Texas Dan Mosby wrote:

What do you who have had to deal with him the past few years think of such a man as president?

Mr. Perry / Gov. Perry would be a FAR more suitable and effective candidate for president than the current individual in the white house.

The economy of Texas has held strong as opposed to many states, and the nation as a whole.

He tends to embrace many of the traditional American beliefs and values that made our nation strong, as opposed to the socialist ideals that have bankrupted many states, and have polarized our citizens.

He has been supportive of our 2nd amendment rights, and the rights of citizens to defend themselves against the criminal scum lurking in our communities.

All in all, he is an excellent candidate, and while NOT perfect by any means, he would be a VAST improvement over the current marxist who seems to be doing his best to destroy our way of life as we have known it for generations.

I'd vote for him.

Who in the current feild of GOP hopefulls would NOT be a vast improvement over the current POTUS?

Texas Dan Mosby wrote:

What do you who have had to deal with him the past few years think of such a man as president?

Mr. Perry / Gov. Perry would be a FAR more suitable and effective candidate for president than the current individual in the white house.

The economy of Texas has held strong as opposed to many states, and the nation as a whole.

He tends to embrace many of the traditional American beliefs and values that made our nation strong, as opposed to the socialist ideals that have bankrupted many states, and have polarized our citizens.

He has been supportive of our 2nd amendment rights, and the rights of citizens to defend themselves against the criminal scum lurking in our communities.

All in all, he is an excellent candidate, and while NOT perfect by any means, he would be a VAST improvement over the current marxist who seems to be doing his best to destroy our way of life as we have known it for generations.

I'd vote for him.

First, he is also an Aggie.

Second, we need to take care in that we know a lot more details about Perry's record than many of the other candidates. Don't assume the others don't have just as many or more skeletons. For myself, I know a lot more of his record than any of the others save Paul.

I guess I don't know if he is my ideal conservative, but I think he is to the right of Bush which is the right direction for me.

Regarding the opinions of Ron Paul: My big issue with him is that I think he is a poor politician. When there were lots of relevant topics and important issues that could have been discussed, he instead decided to talk about abolishing the Fed and going back to the gold standard. Now, I have no problem debating those topics, but I would put at least 50 different items ahead of those two in priority. He did a terrible job of picking his battles and showed a bad sense of timing. Of all the libertarian/conservative issues out there, he certainly could have done a better job of picking issues that had an actual chance of getting support. He is a doctor. Why didn't he talk about getting the government out of health care? That would have been a very relevant issue just about any time in the last 10 years.

I have voted for him to be my Congressman, but I won't vote for him in the Presidential Primary.

MechAg94 wrote:Regarding the opinions of Ron Paul: My big issue with him is that I think he is a poor politician. When there were lots of relevant topics and important issues that could have been discussed, he instead decided to talk about abolishing the Fed and going back to the gold standard. Now, I have no problem debating those topics, but I would put at least 50 different items ahead of those two in priority. He did a terrible job of picking his battles and showed a bad sense of timing. Of all the libertarian/conservative issues out there, he certainly could have done a better job of picking issues that had an actual chance of getting support. He is a doctor. Why didn't he talk about getting the government out of health care? That would have been a very relevant issue just about any time in the last 10 years.

I have voted for him to be my Congressman, but I won't vote for him in the Presidential Primary.

Maybe he keeps talking about the Fed because I'd imagine that the value of the dollar and the even the existence of a federal reserve are somewhat foundational to our national economy.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Tamie wrote:Shooting a dozen more coyotes won't make up for not pushing campus carry.

Are you saying you won't vote for him because, in your mind, he didn't "push campus carry?"

Are you saying it's all good if he shoots a dozen more coyotes?

Tamie wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Tamie wrote:Shooting a dozen more coyotes won't make up for not pushing campus carry.

Are you saying you won't vote for him because, in your mind, he didn't "push campus carry?"

Are you saying it's all good if he shoots a dozen more coyotes?

What???
PERRY 2012!!!

I'd vote for him because:
1. Pro 2A--would not nominate an anti or neutral judge to the SCOTUS.
2. Apt to set the TSA straight if elected
3. Apt to promote far less Federalism as President
4. Perhaps the border issues will get some attention

Essentially, I agree with Mr. Cotten with the exception of the fact I agreed with Perry on getting vaccinated against HPV. I know lots of young people who are suffering from the virus this vaccine would have prevented and I have patients who have had to undergo chemo for oral cancer from it.

I have been way out of the loop for a few weeks with computer issues and vacation. Glad to be back online.

What with recent possible mis-speaks by Romney, if Perry does get in the race he might do very well. So, this leaves me with a couple of questions.

1. Other than some of the obvious, like repealing ObamaCare, cutting spending, and shrinking government what else would he do? I realize that is a lot, but what else could he do? Could he push for more gun rights all over the country at the federal level?

2. If he does run and becomes president, where does that leave Texas? Are we better off or worse with Governor Dewhurst? I don't know anything about him.

The big 3 in the mix as I see it are Palin, Bachmann and Perry. All have some baggage, none are electable in a general election. Having said that I would rather see Perry than Palin.

loadedliberal wrote:The big 3 in the mix as I see it are Palin, Bachmann and Perry. All have some baggage, none are electable in a general election. Having said that I would rather see Perry than Palin.

Why do you think neither are electable? Is it because two are women and the country might not be ready for another Texan yet? I think any of them would destroy Obama in a debate. Palin may not be electable because of the liberal media's response to her over the last two years. They have done everything they possibly could to discredit and destroy her, while doing nothing even remotely similar when it comes to Obama. I think Backmann or Perry would do very well. I wonder if they would be willing to be on the ticket together either way?