The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Buzzard Bait: Rick Perry’s Immigration Blunder Took Him From Hero to Zero

Posted on | September 24, 2011 | 41 Comments

Donald Douglas at American Power links an important story from the Los Angeles Times:

Perry has “a surprisingly tin ear” on the immigration issue, said Tony Fabrizio, a Republican strategist who is unaligned in the presidential contest.
To most Republicans, denying tuition subsidies to illegal immigrants “is a question of fairness,” said Fabrizio. He added that Perry, in portraying his critics as heartless, is making Republican voters wonder whether he shares their values. . . .
Charlie Gerow, a Republican consultant from Harrisburg, Pa., said initial excitement over Perry’s entry into the 2012 race had entered a new phase.
“People were looking for something different,” he said. “Now it’s a question of what [Perry’s candidacy] is going to look like when it’s examined under the microscope.”

Yes, we have “entered a new phase,” the phase where talking heads on the Sunday morning shows will be discussing the first draft of Rick Perry’s political obituary. Didn’t I try to warn everybody about the “Phantom Menace”?

Don’t doubt my Jedi senses on this one, folks. I’m getting spooky vibes.  . . .
Yeah, I know political journalists aren’t supposed to believe in “omens.” Still, there’s something vaguely . . . hinky about the way Perry’s stealth campaign has been operating here in Iowa.
Call me crazy. Attribute my forebodings of doom to irrational prejudice. Say what you will, and I don’t care, but I felt a need to put on the record my instinctive sense that there’s something fundamentally wrong about the Perry campaign.

That was on Aug. 9, four days before Perry officially announced.

Now here we are, six weeks later, and the Perry bandwagon is inarguably in the ditch — thanks to Perry’s own “tin ear” blundering and the triumph of my man Herman Cain:

The Georgia businessman won more votes than the Republican primary’s frontrunners — Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney — combined.

Where is my vindication? Where are those who scoffed at my prophetic foresight? And why haven’t you hit my freaking tip jar?

UPDATE: Straw-poll delegate tells Politico: “We can get that liberal guilt trip stuff from someone else.” They also interview state Rep. Scott Plakon, whose Friday night endorsement of Herman Cain was described as “crucial” by Cain spokeswoman Ellen Carmichael.

Bookmark and Share

Comments

  • http://itsaboutliberty.com/ Co

    Bwa ha ha ha ha, Hinky?  Bwahahaha
    Herman Cain’s a good man but Perry’s Hinky.
    Bwahahaha

    Jedi, the next debate will be better for the both of them.

  • http://treeofmamre.wordpress.com/ John Scotus

    You aren’t the only one who has had this suspicion, though you probably did come out before everyone else. Cain did well in the straw poll because there is no where else for conservative/tea party voters to go. However, I really doubt he can make it to the nomination. I have no doubts about his passion, integrity, or vision for America. I do doubt his political acumen and experience, however. Can he get his 9-9-9 passed (for example), and it should it get passed? Can he fulfill the other planks on his agenda, if he were elected? These are big question marks. 

  • Anonymous

    They still don’t get Tea Party, they only see what the left and right have done in the past.  It was theater, this is not and they don’t get it.  Good, may the best and most qualified get us out of this mess.  I know just the person to do it too :)

  • http://twitter.com/sdo1 Steve in TN

    Cain also needs to decisively address questions about his understanding – or the lack thereof – about basic Liberty (1st and 2nd Amendment issues).

  • http://profiles.google.com/kpolenz k polenz

    Yes, Perry does  have some kind of blinders on when it comes to certain issues.
    In Texas he had this thing for toll roads in spite of almost universal opposition he kept on trying to pull that dead horse across the finish line.

    The only reason Pery won his last election was because we all knew what we’d be getting with Kay Bailey-Huchinson, and the Liberal Democrat who was Mayor of the sanctuary city called Houston.

  • http://treeofmamre.wordpress.com/ John Scotus

    I think this goes back to his inexperience. While one shouldn’t have to be a professional politician to become president, someone at least interested in politics beyond how it intersects with business would be good.

  • http://twitter.com/sdo1 Steve in TN

    Perry has won SIX state wide elections in Texas.

    (Not excusing his abysmal debate efforts or his immigration answers.)

  • MrPaulRevere

    His answer to the Dream Act question will go down in history as one of the greatest blunders in electoral history. He’s finished. You cannot call your potential base heartless bigots and walk away unscathed.

  • http://twitter.com/sdo1 Steve in TN

    I wanted Perry to do well, but the above is correct.

  • Anonymous

    I want Perry to stick it out for one reason:  To make sure Romney doesn’t.

  • MrPaulRevere

    He has a great resume and is very telegenic and all of that. I was all in favor of him getting in, being a big believer in competition. But in politics (especially conservative politics) there are certain things you do not do, lines you do not cross. You can dance on the line periodically, as all politicians do, but his debate answers indicate a flawed character. One mans opinion.

  • http://twitter.com/MinneMike Michael Wiley

    The problem with the Texas Dream Act is that it treats illegals better than Americans from neighboring states.

    American citizens from neighboring states (analogous to Mexico neighboring Texas) must pay the full tuition, whereas illegals get the special in-state tuition rate? In effect, Americans required to pay the full tuition are subsidizing the tuition of illegals.

    Where is your heart, Gov. Perry?

  • elaine

    Whether his stand is right or wrong isn’t the issue.  It’s that he said anyone who disagrees with him is heartless.

    I’m sorry, but when an alleged conservative Republican starts calling fellow conservatives or Republicans “heartless” for disagreeing with him, he might as well put a “D” after his name and be done with it.

    In America, we have this thing called “the loyal opposition.”  In Perry’s comments, he blew that away.  It’s bad enough when the political left treats anyone who disagrees with their positions as evil; it’s unconscionable when a Republican does it to people on his own side.

    Sorry, put a fork in him, he’s done.

  • http://twitter.com/MinneMike Michael Wiley

    I was really disappointed that he brought up that young lady who died of cervical cancer as being the instigation for pushing the vaccine, only to find out that they hadn’t met until after the Texas Legislature turned back is executive order.

    Disgraceful.

  • elaine

    BTW, Christie is carrying the same baggage here, after he called people who disagreed with him on the Ground Zero Mosque stupid.

    If people have to resort to name-calling, it’s proof they’ve given up on using logic and reason to win people to their side.

    They both might have just as well called those who disagree with them racists.  It’s all the same thing; it’s just more of the same, “Shut up, he explained.”

  • Anonymous

    Are we going to be that thin-skinned? He bungled an answer. I don’t think it was an Obama-esque “I’m bettah than you are” kind of thing. I’m willing to give him a chance to make it right with his conservative compatriots.

  • Anonymous

    If he had said we were heartless like he thought it was a good thing, perhaps a badge of honor.

  • http://profiles.google.com/kubby.communications Thomas Knapp

    The yowling about Perry’s answer is interesting, because not very many conservatives seem to understand what he was doing and how he was positioning himself.

    Yes, there are at present more Know-Nothing Republican primary voters than there are pro-American-tradition-and-freedom-on-immigration Republican primary voters.

    But with that answer, Perry positioned himself as owner of the plurality who still support the evil liberal immigration policies of those evil liberals, Reagan and Bush, while all the other candidates are stuck splitting the Know-Nothing majority.

    He’s trying to be Ronald Reagan by himself. The others are trying to be Bob Dole as a group.

  • Anonymous

    elaine, it’s been amazingly clear that the Copperheads haven’t been a Loyal Opposition since September 11, 2001. The blogosphere is the agency that made it clear.

    Unfortunately, realizing that you need to treat the opposition as a Fifth Column that needs nothing so much as killing has tainted our ability to conduct a rational debate between ourselves.

  • Anonymous

    Except that Reagan didn’t support anything like what you claim he did, Copperhead liar. His “86 amnesty” was a failure on his part to “trust but verify” when dealing with Copperheads who are fundamentally untrustworthy. What he thought he was agreeing to was sealing the border combined with the amnesty. If he’d actually gotten that, it would have worked. Unfortunately, he was dealing with Copperheads (and RINOs), so they gave us the amnesty and promptly reneged on the security.

  • http://profiles.google.com/kubby.communications Thomas Knapp

    SDN,

    I assume that the “Copperhead” reference has something to do with Democrats (the Civil War thing, etc.). FYI, I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican (even in name).

    That said, I don’t think Reagan was a fucking idiot, so I find it rather difficult to believe that he would have bought into the fucking idiotic idea that the border can be sealed.

  • http://thepagantemple.blogspot.com/ ThePaganTemple

    Well you would be wrong. Reagan agreed to the Amnesty proposal during his term with the stated caveat that the border would be secured, meaning that illegal infiltration by undocumented Mexican immigrants would be, at the very least, slowed to a crawl. Democrats of course didn’t bother to keep their side of the bargain, so we have now at least fourteen million illegal Mexican immigrants, many of whom are criminals, many of them violent, including organized gang members. No Republican who wants to be taken seriously be the Republican base is going to even hint at immigration reform without first securing the border. That is where Reagan made his mistake and is exactly what has got us into the chaotic mess we’re in now.

    Anybody that wants to promote an instant replay of that scenario deserves the RINO appellation and should be roundly rejected at the polls. And as we have seen lately with Perry’s latest troubles, they will be. And bear in mind, Perry is nowhere close to being even among the worst offenders, in my opinion. As such, he might weather the storm. But he is most definitely going to have to, let us say, “clarify” his position.

  • http://roughedgesandsharpelbows.blogspot.com/ Brian D Paasch

    I actually appreciate Gov Perry calling me “heartless”. It makes my vetting and research efforts pretty easy. If he is goes into personal attack mode against me over an issue we completely disagree on, then he’s off my list of candidates to consider. Makes my life easier.
    Still looking at Cain and Bachmann. (And if Palin gets in, she jumps to the top of my list.)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1385852725 Richard Mcenroe

    It worked for McCain.

  • http://profiles.google.com/caljrel James Knauer

    This position on immigration is going to be one of the contributing factors to the defeat of whomever the GOP nominates.  It is a policy which unites no one, nor solves anything, and is assured to go absolutely nowhere.

    The GOP is going to have to offer plans which appeal to the whole country.  This “just enough votes to win” mentality (e.g. the southern strategery) does not work, and it’s killing the GOP.  

    Immigration must begin with employers, that which draws them here.    By the bye, President Obama has deported far more illegals than W.  I suggest you try to find ways to work with him on it.

  • http://profiles.google.com/caljrel James Knauer

    This is a penny-ante position that reeks of jealousy.  There is enough wealth in this country to provide full college tuition to any public university for whomever wanted it at any time in their lives.  Such an investment would easily yield x10 over a generation.

    Something about, I dunno, teaching how to fish…

  • http://profiles.google.com/caljrel James Knauer

    McCain has Palin Problems as I recall….

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/EU5DQWQTTHTPO4A4ZYSL3AAV2U Adjoran

    Say, while you are basking in the glow of your crystal ball, why not take a bow on something else from the same general time frame – remember advising your readers to buy gold @ $1925/oz?  $1657 at Friday’s close in New York, I’m sure all those who took your advice would like to send thanks.

  • Anonymous

    But he’s giving amnesty to by fiat to almost as many. By claiming that immigrations court backlogs compel us to ignore all but the most heinous criminal illegals he’s merely buying time till universal amnesty can be implemented. Deporting criminal immigrants whether they are here illegally or not is a no brainer. I dispute the contention that are missing the boat on immigration. While the border remains unsecured most Americans are unwilling consider any other immigration legislation, this is why the dream act and Bush’s immigration push failed. Secure the border first does appeal to the whole country.

  • Anonymous

    Disappointing.

  • http://thepagantemple.blogspot.com/ ThePaganTemple

    Yeah, he does, as in he’s nowhere near enough like her.

  • http://thepagantemple.blogspot.com/ ThePaganTemple

    Wow! You really believe that bullshit don’t you?

  • http://thepagantemple.blogspot.com/ ThePaganTemple

    If Palin gets in, she IS my list.

  • http://thepagantemple.blogspot.com/ ThePaganTemple

    So what do you have against securing the border? What is so hard-boiled or radical about people who want their country’s borders secured? I just don’t get it. If you’re a Democrat, then I guess I can understand, seeing as how they tend to vote Democrat by a margin of at least two-to-one. Well, sorry, but that’s hardly an incentive for me to support it, nor is your scare tactics about losing the election going to change my position.

    Reagan’s actions in this regard was the biggest mistake of his presidency. Why in the hell should we repeat it?

    As for Obama, if he’s so great with illegal immigration issues why is he suing Arizona for trying to step up? For that matter, if he’s doing so great, why in the hell does Arizona feel they need to do that?

  • http://thecampofthesaints.org Bob Belvedere

    SARAH! SARAH!

  • http://thecampofthesaints.org Bob Belvedere

    Pure Leftist pablum born out of a belief that it is okay to confiscate wealth and redistribute it.

  • Pingback: Herman Cain Wins Florida Straw Poll | Revolutionary Media

  • Tennwriter

    Last I heard 70% of Americans were for securing the Border.

    Now, I do agree that the Rovian ‘just enough votes to win’ needs to be deep-sixed.  Which is why Conservatives need to go Full Throttle Conservative.

    Aim for the Sixty Percent Win.

    Problem with this for the professional pol is that then the voters would expect and demand results.

  • Pingback: Herman Cain on Obama: ‘I’m Listening to All This Bulls–t That He’s Talking About’ : The Other McCain

  • Pingback: The Spot-On Quote Of The Day… « The Camp Of The Saints

  • Pingback: Herman Cain Rhymes With Hurricane: Fund-Raising Surges in Third Quarter : The Other McCain