Why It Will Be President Perry in 2013

The funny thing about Texas, with the growth in the Hispanic population, It will be democratic by 2016.
You might be surprised to learn how many Hispanic neighbors of mine vote Republican. It has surprised me. Those who do tend to anchor on abortion, and a few other social issues. Some, I think, didn't vote for Obama for a what I fear are not so nice reasons, but won't admit that.

As to President Rick Perry ... that's a bad idea.

Voted against him twice in a row (beginning in 2006) after voting for him previously ... that guy's sell by date has long since expired.
 
There's all sorts of jobs here in north Dallas. It seems like they're opening a new big box store, fast food chain or gas station ever other week.
 
See? You all see what Obama's election has done?! You let one black man be president and just like that people are talking about president Tyler Perry. Black people don't even want to vote for him, but they just can't help themselves....
 
I had a feeling that this claim about Perry's job creation would be showing up on Politifact, and I was right (where's my check, Randi?).

Politifact said:
A broader look shows Texas has thrived over the last decade, but not at the miracle level McDonnell suggests. Texas is the nation’s second-most populous state, behind California.

The Lone Star state saw a 9.2 percent increase in private-sector jobs, good for sixth-highest in the country. Utah, Montana, Alaska, North Dakota and the District of Columbia beat the Texans, with North Dakota’s private sector job levels growing by almost 20 percent in 10 years.

Here's the full story.
 
According to that article having core convictions, valuing state and national sovereignty, and caring about small business are qualities that win Presidents elections.

Sounds wonderful but unfortunately from what I've observed the politicians that have the most principles usually don't get elected; they get destroyed by the politicians who are unprincipled; Presidents pretty much have to have the support of the CFR and they support big business; secondly caring about state and national sovereignty would also be against the aims of the CFR who want to create one world corporatist oligarchy run by international bankers/banks

[Oh, gods, I know I'm going to regret this...]

What's a CFR? I can't find a CFRWP that would seem to fill the bill here. The Council of Foreign Relations doesn't seem to care about business, and the Franciscans are a silent order, aren't they? Could be the Center for Forest Research, I suppose, but does everyone have to get their approval?

Pardon my expensively bought naivete (I put a little away for a long, long time), but the CT threads aren't my gig. So clue me in so I can fear them, too.
 
He's got it backwards about presidents and the CFR.

First they have to become president, then the CFR supports them. :)
 
I dint say anything about republican or democrats. It doesnt matter what party one is from if hes an idiot spending money state doesnt have.
Well, actually, it was a bunch of Republicon idiots who caused the state not to have the money.
 
So did I.

The think tank that makes prominent people honorary members in an attempt to influence them.

And the roughly 415th most important source of insane paranoid fears fostered by the conspiracy nonsense crowd, of which a certain poster here is an extremely prolific and gullible member...
 
And the roughly 415th most important source of insane paranoid fears fostered by the conspiracy nonsense crowd, of which a certain poster here is an extremely prolific and gullible member...


Moi?

I certainly don't believe any of the conspiracy theories about the CFR.

The last time the CFR were (indirectly) involved in any seriously successful conspiracy against the common good was when David Rockefeller made so much money in real estate after buying up the old New York stockyards.

But that was a long time ago. :rolleyes:

Any conspiring done by CFR members is strictly on their own time. :cool:
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom