Rick Perry's Principles
This is an interesting article from Politico about Al Gore and Rick Perry in 1988. I am sure everyone knows that Governor Perry worked on Al Gore's campaign for President in 1988.
Perry argues that he supported Gore before he "got to be Mr. Global Warming." But Politico points out that Gore was openly concerned about global warming from the opening of his campaign in 1987. A spokesman for Perry claims that he has always been a conservative, and he disagreed with Gore on issues like global warming.
I was a bit surprised to read that Perry has always been a conservative. I have a difficult time seeing how a conservative could have supported a Democrat in a national election in 1988. The Democrats had run leftists for President since at least 1972. And this is assuming that LBJ, the author of the Great Society, was a moderate! Al Gore was certainly not a proponent of limited government in 1988.
The Great Society and the Carter years did not cause Perry to question his affiliation with the Democratic Party. Reagan did not seem to have made much of an impression either.
I would be interested to see an account of Perry's rationale for switching parties. Does anyone know if such an account exists?
I am concerned about Perry's devotion to constitutionalism. His conservative rhetoric is generally unmatched by deeds that would prove he is serious about promoting limited government. Perry has talked about state rights/federalism, education reform, limiting the TSA in Texas, and the need to stop illegal immigration. I don't know of any actions he has undertaken to follow through on these words.
Some of his deeds are right out of the managerial progressive/crony capitalism playbook. His attempt to mandate the HPV vaccine and promote the Trans-Texas corridor fall in this category. The Emerging Technology Fund looks like another instance.
It would be unwise to rely only on speeches--especially when those speeches advance the political fortunes of the speechmaker.
- Comment (23)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Apr '11
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
I know a lot of very conservative people both here in Oklahoma and in Texas who were Democrats in the 80's. In '88, Al Gore hadn't completely transformed from the pro-life, pro-gun, protect-us-from-the-commies southern Democrat to left-wing nut job he is now.
Mar '11
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
Would you have opposed Reagan because he supported FDR? It takes people a while to realize that the party their parents supported, etc., has left them.
Jun '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
In the late 80's, Gore was making baby steps to the left, but he couldn't go full-tilt Progressive until he was safely in the Vice President's office. Not if he wanted to continue representing Tennessee. You can't know what was going on in Gore's mind at the time, but compared to Dukakis, Gore was considered a centrist. The Gore of 1988 and the Gore of today would (officially) agree about 50% or 60% of the time.
Edited on August 16, 2011 at 6:47amAug '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
I agree. Back then, Gore was considered to be a conservative Democrat. He was strong on defense, which was a critical issue then and caused a lot of people to cross party lines in support. In addition, George Bush was considered a liberal Republican - he was forced to utter the "Read My Lips - No New Taxes!" line precisely because people were worried that he'd be a big government Republican - and he was. He did raise taxes, and he did grow the size of government dramatically.
Don't forget that Bush went at Reagan really hard for the nomination. He coined the term "Voodoo Economics". Reagan essentially chose him to avoid a split in the party between the conservatives and the liberal and establishment Republicans. A lot of Republicans were very leery of Bush because of that.
And given that this happened 23 years ago, I don't think it's a knock on Perry at all.
Edited on August 16, 2011 at 7:17amDec '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
Perry is a politician and very much so. It's a knock against him.
Inside Texas there was almost no Republican party and so if you wanted to go anywhere, you were a Democrat. (North Carolina, Kentucky and West Virginia still have a huge Democrat over Republican registration advantage.) He ended up supporting the most conservative Democrat he could find and then went Republican the next year.
As far as global warming, it simply wasn't relevant in 1987-8 and I don't think anybody even cared about it. It was a highly obscure non-issue.
His breaks with conservatism seem to fall in the cronyism category and that might be a major problem, I don't know if it's a pattern or lapses in judgement.
I think his appeal is that he isn't a compromiser and the one thing that conservatives appear to have no patience for is a Republican who meets Democrats halfway.
Dec '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
I'll still take a crony capitalist over a crony socialist any day. But that's just me.
Oct '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
Or oppose Reagan in 1980 because 13 years earlier the then Governor of California signed abortion into law? That’s not very conservative either. Oppose Perry if you want. I certainly haven’t made up my mind. But the only person you are guaranteed to agree with all of the time is yourself. And even then, I know of no one that has not changed their mind on something important at some point in their life. The purpose of the 2012 election is not to find the perfect philosopher king. It is to defeat the most radical ‘progressive’ (thankfully, the most incompetent too) ever to occupy the White House by installing the most politically conservative person that can get the votes needed to beat him. Conservative is as conservative does. Perry’s three terms as Texas Governor are not going to be any more or less perfect than Reagan’s two terms in California. So what?
Nov '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
Back around then Lord Monckton was Science Advisor to British PM Margaret Thatcher. He was one of the first to raise the alarm about potential problems with CO2 climate warming and his influence led to the funding of the now-notorious CRU (of "climategate" fame). I believe that government was one of the first, if not the first to pour large amounts of money into this issue.
Today, Lord Monckton is one of the most articulate and aggressive opponents of the pseudoscientific silliness known as AGW. He tours the world debating the leading alarmists (and generally humiliates them with his gentlemanly but devastatingly fact-laden routs). He has publicly challenged Gore numerous times to a debate, but all he gets is crickets.
So there is a lot of room to change one's views on this issue in that many years. Indeed, it's quite a different issue today. If Gore harbored his climate-motivated world-government plans back then, he kept it under wraps.
But of course you're right. Perry should come clean on how he's evolved on this and other issues on which the optics say he's shifted.
Nov '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
Is there any functional difference between the two? Obviously, I disagree with the underlying premise. Cronyism strikes me as the province of the "centrist". It is a disease most often manifest among left-leaning republicans and right-leaning progressives. I've never quite figured out why it takes the "extremists" to shed this common political form of indulgence. Could it be that a hard-line, but purist idealogue socialist is better than a creeping, squishy, sorta-socialist who continually cloaks his socialism in capitalistic terms? Or that a far-right conservative or purist libertarian is better than a Rino? Just askin'
Edited on August 16, 2011 at 8:51amJul '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
I figure if the entire state of Tennessee can repent of its support for Al Gore, Perry can as well.
Mar '11
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
There's a great post I am working through (it's very long) on 17 issues that critics will bring up against Mr Perry - I intend to keep it to hand, to tick off the items as they come - the ones mentioned here are in there.
Apr '11
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
I urge everyone to follow David Williamson's link to his 17 issues post. Great work!
Mar '11
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
Just to be clear, I didn't write the post - just linked to it. The author is garnet92, a resident of Texas, who seems to know his stuff.
Generally, there is nothing in there to put me off Mr Perry - quite the reverse. I think we will hear a lot about these 17 issues in the weeks ahead.
Mrs Bachmann has the advantage of no such history - but she has little executive experience - that's gonna be the tradeoff between them, I think.
Edited on August 16, 2011 at 1:10pmJul '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
Yep. I read them and agreed with Perry or said "so what?"
Plus he ripped off David Burge (iowahawkblog) for #6 without attribution.
That is a shoddy list, at best.
Jun '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
People in Texas became ethnic democrats -- because their parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents were. Texas democrats were not modern democrats. Did Perry vote for Carter or Mondale? that would be a more interesting question. Al Gore was a southerner, and perhaps Perry had the hope that a moderate - conservative Tennesseean could wrest his party from the throes of McGovernism. He may have been wrong, but he wasn't the only one to think of Gore as one of the conservative choices that year in that party. Bush 41 wasn't known as a great conservative himself, and there is a lot of texas in-fighting that could have been involved. Bush had a reputation as a carpet-bagger and not really a texan. Also, no one was talking about global warming as a huge issue then or about a wholesale take-over of western economies to fix it. That has in reality all happened since Perry changed parties. It was not manifest when he changed parties that the GOP would dominate Texas. Remember Ann Richards was elected governor after that. You cannot say he saw clear writing on the wall and switched.
May '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
It's also amazing the degree to which this is still the case for many. I still know quite a number of people in the state who are conservative on 80% of the issues, but still almost always vote democrat (particularly on the local level) because that's what their family "has always done".
Edited on August 16, 2011 at 4:02pmAug '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
Well, at least we don't have to worry about Perry draping himself in the Reagan mantel since - as a Democrat in the 80s - he evidently supported Carter, Mondull and Dukakis(!) over Reagan and Bush I.
Oops! Guess I was wrong
Oct '10
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
In 1988, I was a Democrat who, if I recall correctly, voted for Michael Dukakis in the primary because I thought he was the best choice. Then I voted for George Bush in the general election. In 2004, I voted for Joe Lieberman in the primary. Later that year, I finally got around to switching parties and voted for George W Bush in the general. When I first registered in 1984, being a Republican meant that you didn't get to vote in most raises locally because they were settled in the primaries between two or more Democrats. These days, the situation is reversed. Don't think that party affiliation always means anything. That was the mistake some made in 2000 when they didn't understand why northern Florida counties that were overwhelmingly Democratic voted overwhelmingly for W. And figure out why Rick Perry was the first Republican Lieutenant Governor of Texas in 130 years. Hint: It has to do with a group of Radicals and a time period known as "Reconstruction." Some people have long memories.
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
I don't think Perry's support for Gore etc. tells us everything we need to know about him. I want to know why he switched in 1988. Was it out of conviction or sheer political expediency?
The Reagan parallel doesn't quite work. Reagan switched in 1962. The Democratic Party of 1962 was very different than the Democratic Party of 1988 (or 1972).
I am willing to set the '88 issue aside. What about the fact that Perry's conservative rhetoric is not matched with conservative actions?
My tentative impression is that Perry's entire career can be summed up as having two facets. A) Saying whatever he needs to say to get elected or stay in office and B) benefitting his cronies.
Perhaps I missed Governor Perry's defense of constitutionalism in Texas during the ten years I lived in DFW. I would be glad to hear of some evidence that he is willing to match his speeches with deeds.
Re: Rick Perry's Principles
Hi HVT,
This is all fine. As you say below, "conservative is as conservative does." My point is that I don't see much "does" with Perry.
HVTs
Or oppose Reagan in 1980 because 13 years earlier the then Governor of California signed abortion into law? That’s not very conservative either. Oppose Perry if you want. I certainly haven’t made up my mind. The purpose of the 2012 election is not to find the perfect philosopher king. It is to defeat the most radical ‘progressive’ (thankfully, the most incompetent too) ever to occupy the White House by installing the most politically conservative person that can get the votes needed to beat him. Conservative is as conservative does. Perry’s three terms as Texas Governor are not going to be any more or less perfect than Reagan’s two terms in California. So what? · Aug 15 at 11:00pm