Though he has not yet officially committed, he has stated that he is clearing the path for a run if he does decide to make another go at it.

Report from Time:

Two-and-a-half years after his first campaign for the White House flopped, Texas Governor Rick Perry sounds ready for another run at the presidency. “I’m glad I ran in 2012, as frustrating, as painful and as humbling as that experience was,” Perry told a group of national reporters at a Thursday lunch hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.

“Preparation is the single most important lesson that I learned out of that process,” he said. “Over the last 18 months, I’ve focused on being substantially better prepared. Please don’t take that as an indication that I’ve made a decision that I’m going to run or not—but if I do make that decision, I will be prepared.”

As his third term in the statehouse winds to a close, the swaggering Republican has refreshed his message, retooled his workout routine and retrained his sights toward the national stage. Perry is crisscrossing the country these days, dropping in on ice cream shops in Iowa, hot-dog fundraisers in South Carolina and donor confabs in California.

Perry has been very active nationwide touting Texas’ job creation and economic success during his tenure. He has been in campaign mode for several months and I would be very surprised if he doesn’t toss his hat in the ring for another ride on the presidential campaign roller coaster.

17 COMMENTS

  1. Perry is a moron. After an aggressive (offensive) campaign against other states to steal their businesses–especially California–he has announced that he plans to MOVE to California.

    How stupid does a guy have to be to tell his own state that he cannot wait to leave–while he’s still in office??? And how insane must he be to think he might then get support from the state he is betraying??

    Oops.

    • sam — he lost face when he said he’ll support Texas to Secede if the Texans wanted it (and when actually Texans did, he reneged on his promise)!

      Reality Check:

      A few nasties are controlling all Americans!

      Americans are finally waking up to this ugly fact.

      This awakening is unstoppable — it’s just a matter of time — how long it will take is questionable. What’s undisputed is that it WILL happen, and when it does, All GUILTY Liberal Socialist Scum and Neocon Scum will get flushed into obscurity… or jail where most belong!

      That’s apodictic.

      The main concern is will these Scumbags go quietly into the night, and let us win our country back through LEGITIMATE Elections — or will they remain ugly in defiance causing another US Revolution to win our FREEDOMS back?!

      If they mistake US for docile Europeans, that have lost all freedoms without a squawk being just Subjects of their States, they’ll be playing a most dangerous game with The American Freedom Loving Citizens, and will end up suffering the consequence!

      In plain language: What’s it gonna be Scumbags, give up slowly but surely and keep all your ill-gotten gains $$$$$$$$$$ while living abroad like kings and queens — or face the wrath of Our Nation eventually that wants your ilk in jail?!

      Time will tell how arrogantly stupid they are.

    • Religion would be an anchor in the primaries if he were a democrat. But wearing your religion on you sleeve is a plus in the republican party. Reagan and Bush Jr both won strongly promoting their religious views. In a nation were supposedly 80+% claim they’re Christian, its not a negative…hypocrisy is a negative. Reagan was quite loud with his views, here’s a quote from him:

      “I know here that you will agree with me that standing up for America also means standing up for the God who has so blessed our land. I believe this country hungers for a spiritual revival. I believe it longs to see traditional values reflected in public policy again. To those who cite the first amendment as reason for excluding God from more and more of our institutions and everyday life, may I just say: The first amendment of the Constitution was not written to protect the people of this country from religious values; it was written to protect religious values from government tyranny. ” – Address Before a Joint Session of the Alabama State Legislature in Montgomery – March 15, 1982

      Perry has a hill to climb since he forgot that 3rd part of government he would get rid of. He wasn’t really ready to go and shouldn’t have tried in 2012, he was obviously rushed into it. But religion won’t weigh him down.

      • Josh & Surf – promotion of a religion in the GOP will bring unwanted attacks. The real key is 1) standing fast and pure on the first Amend. 2) write no laws that violate the first amend. 3) Personal morals that don’t violate the law is everyone’s personal right 4) It is fine to state your personal beliefs (hopefully based on the Declaration and Bill of Rights with maybe a few New Testament tidbits thrown in) – however Candidates and campaigns would be fairly safe by saying all laws will ensure separation of Church and State – but the 1st Amendment does not take away your right to practice or display your personal religion / religious values in or on public or private spaces – If there are rules that by definition is in violation of the 1st Amendment by doing that. bye-bye rule. Just because someone displays / conveys their personal or group feelings does not make it a law. If the sensitives don’t like it – turn it off or close their eyes – don’t try to take it away from those that do.

        Within it’self this delineates Liberals from Conservatives !!

        • I agree it would bring attacks, but no more attacks than have been faced and shown to be irrelevant before. The largest voting block in the conservative (even libertarian) wing of the republican party are ‘evangelical christian’, they are the base. You don’t shy away from activating your base because you’ll get attacked by people who won’t vote for you anyway.

          The trend of the past decades really of the first amendment really doesn’t have anything to do with the text of the amendment, or really even Jefferson’s ‘separation’ comment. I agree they should restate the intent of both the amendment and the statement as being freedom for religious activity, and freedom from government imposed religion. That will go a long way with a lot of people.

      • Josh: You’re so wrong. People think the GOP “owns” God. So Democrats would LOVE to have a Christian minister, such as George McGovern, or outspoken Christian like Jimmy Carter. Even Bill Clinton emphasized his southern Christian roots, and was/is a Sunday school teacher. And, of course, Obama touted his Christian faith until his Christian minister was attacked.

        During the 60s and 70s, priests and ministers were HEAVILY involved in the civil rights and anti-war battles. It was a religious crusade to fight for rights and peace.

        It was not until the rise of the religious right that Democrats backed away. If a Democrat could be found who could speak of religion as faith in God, faith in our Nation, and faith in our future, Republicans might as well stay home on election day.

        • Goethe – you are correct about the old days of the democratic party. But a new breed has come around the past 20 years or so. It is very atheistic, anti-semetic, and intolerant. The departure of the religious groups from the democrats started with their support for abortion and has grown in distance the more the democrats have swung towards socialistic/communistic ideals. Pat Robertson used to be a democrat and voted for Jimmy Carter, but talked about how he changed hist vote when he started seeing things he didn’t agree with morally being actively promoted.

          Similar to what Reagan said, Christianity didn’t leave the democrats, the democrats left them. I would say it is the largest reason they have lost the majority they held over the country since Roosevelt through the 90’s.

          Used to be, given the civil rights example, it was about getting freedom and equal opportunity. No more, they have become the party of hate. Hate the rich, hate the executives, hate the jews, hate those with traditional views, hate those who are against amnesty…etc.

          If a Democrat candidate today said, I believe in traditional marriage…there’s no way he or she would get through the primary. Just 6 years ago Obama said he was for traditional marriage. That shows how the democrat party is shifting.

          I guarantee that if they took such a vocal stance, they would be asked that exact question.

          • Josh, sorry, but that’s nonsense. While it’s true that Dems welcome (are tolerant of) atheists, it is not at all true that they are anti-Semitic. Jews overwhelmingly support Democrats, and the feeling is mutual.

            On what do you base that claim?? Totally baseless.

            We have had anti-Semitic comments on this site, but they have NOT come from the one or two liberals we hear from.

            And while fundamentalists did control a large portion of the Republican Party, they did not “leave” the Democratic Party. Their real failing was not trying to appeal to centrist religious people when the religions right marched way off in that direction. But I’m not really comfortable with moving toward an Iran-style influence of religion on politics, anyway.

            Regarding “hate,” that’s nonsense, too. Democrats think the GOP is the party of hate and intolerance. Neither side is being honest.

            And likewise non-sense is the “traditional marriage” claim. ALL Democrats DO say they are in favor of traditional marriage, as well as the nuclear family. It’s just that they are not AGAINST (intolerant of) non-traditional relationships.

            Dude, that ship has sailed. Might as well try bringing back Prohibition.

            There are a lot of errors and failings and weaknesses in the Democratic message, but these ain’t them.

            • In 2012 the democrats had officially voted to remove God from their platform and support for Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. They “voted” to put it back on…but it was hardly a fair vote. See this Youtube video where it was placed back in:

              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8BwqzzqcDs

              In 2008, no democrat could get through the primary supporting gay marriage (which is why Obama was for it), now, no candidate will get through without supporting it..you are correct, within the democrat party the ship has sailed…for now.

            • Josh: Typically, you did not answer the question. On what do you base your claim that Democrats are “anti-Semitic”??

              As for God in the platform, do you think God is so insecure that He will be upset if his name does not appear on every petty politician’s platform? Do you think He is upset that his name does NOT appear even once in the Constitution??

            • Goethe – i did not claim that all democrats are anti-Semitic. What I did state is that there is a new breed of democrats that is anti-semitic and that video (and the reason for the video) is evidence of it. The reason for that vote was that democrats had previously chosen to remove agreement with Jerusalem being the capital of Israel from the platform.

              Both of those things are evidence of the new breed of anti-Semites in the party.

              God is obviously not insecure. Removing God from the platform doesn’t reflect anything about Him, but more about those democrats.

            • Josh: I really didn’t want to waste my time watching another nonsense video, but since you claimed it proved something, I did.

              Going back to correct things, yes, you did not say ALL Democrats are “very atheistic, anti-Semitic, and intolerant.” And neither did I claim that you did.

              First “very atheistic” is silly. If you’re an atheist, you cannot become “very atheistic,” you either are or are not an atheist.

              Second, I see NO evidence in your video of ANYBODY being “anti-Semitic,” which is what you were saying you were “proving.” (a) the party DID buckle to Zionist pressure and DID put that back into the platform, even though it is clear that the chairman lied when he said there was a 2/3 agreement. From the sound of it, the vote was at least even.

              So if you want to criticize Dems, THAT should be your point–that they play the same games that the GOP establishment does when it wants to assert its hegemony.

              (b) Besides, it is also NOT “anti-Semitic” to agree with international law, as well as Israel’s agreement to have its capital at Tel Aviv. Not a SINGLE nation recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and neither does the UN. It is absurd to suggest that the US should subscribe to their fantasy.

              Israel does these outrageous things as bargaining chips that they can negotiate away (like the illegal settlements), but when your “uncle” is named “Sam,” you can get away with anything.

              And, ok, I agree. God is not insecure. It is the so-called believers who are so insecure in their faith that they feel that they have to shove it down the throats of everyone else.

  2. Sunday Funnies:

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/06/22/louisiana-gov-jindal-claims-rebellion-brewing-against-washington/

    According to Fox News, Bobby Jindahl is ready to lead the sedition:

    “I can sense right now a rebellion brewing amongst these United States,” Jindal said, “where people are ready for a hostile takeover of Washington, D.C.”

    What he doesn’t realize is that the battle was already won:

    Now that Eric Cantor is on the way out, ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of U.S. Senators will be Christians, and ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of U.S. Representatives will be Christians. Add to that a president and vice president who are Christians, and it’s ludicrous to say that Christians are not in control. And while we have a few Jewish Supreme Court Justices now, of the 112 in history, 104 were Christians.

    Jindahl again looking like a cartoon character.

Comments are closed.