Rick Perry’s new video provides a stark contrast to Cruz’s messaging
Not all Texans are alike
Though he’s yet to officially toss his hat in the ring, Governor Perry is quietly building out the framework for his 2016 run.
Iowa is RickPAC’s latest release.
Governor Perry’s message is markedly different from Senator Cruz’s for reasons other than his west Texas drawl — inclusion and experience.
Senator Cruz formally launched his presidential bid in a fiery speech at Liberty University Monday. Though he’s an undeniably passionate conservative, Cruz’s message might not be the fit for everyone, though it’s a lovely dream to have. More problematic is that this Conservatopia effectively marginalizes everyone who doesn’t seize the vision. It’s not an attractive ideal, rather a disappointingly exclusionary one.
Cruz is pitching himself as a true conservative. Of his principles and dedication to the banner of conservatism, there’s absolutely no question. Ted Cruz is a true believer in the purest sense. But trying to win the White House with only a faction of the conservative base and little to show in terms of tangible leadership results (other than the ability to rouse portions of the grassroots) are two obstacles Cruz will have to navigate around. Not to say either is unsurmountable, but they are unavoidable.
And then you have Governor Perry.
Governor Perry has a lengthy resume that touts years of executive work experience in a state with an international border, and the advantage of low expectations. After traveling the campaign trail post-back surgery in 2012, Perry has one poorly executed presidential run under his belt and nowhere to go but up.
He too has issues to face, or at least explain. Among which are the Texas Dream Act (distinctly unlike the federal variety despite the similarity in title), the trans-Texas corridor and the charges of cronyism, and then of course there’s his infamous “oops” moment.
But if the Governor’s latest video Iowa is any indicator, we can expect Perry to run as the man who will use his governing experience to heal a deeply disjoined post-Obama America.
“Regardless of where you are — left or right, we need somebody that can stand up and say, listen, let’s quit fighting each other. Let’s find the places that we can agree on,” says Perry, speaking to a small group of people in Iowa. “We long for someone in this country who has the experience to take America on a different path than it’s on today.”
Follow Kemberlee Kaye on Twitter
________
Author’s note:
Before this is labeled as a Ted Cruz Hit Piece, the reader should be aware that independently and while working with FreedomWorks, I worked tirelessly to ensure Senator Cruz was successfully elected to his current office. Before ever meeting Senator Cruz, whom I later had the pleasure of getting to know on a personal level, I admired his work as an attorney. I have tremendous amount of respect for the man and everything he is capable of accomplishing. Objectively assessing the playing field is neither a ‘smear’ nor a ‘hit.’ We strive for objectivity and even handedness, even if the result is less than vogue. This post has been slightly retooled to reflect the broader point.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Sorry, Rick. It’s not going to happen.
Perry is about as much of a true conservative as that of my left foot residing on the right side of my bod…
With articles like this whacking Cruz, Professor, you might as well sign up MSNBC for a weekly column.
You mad, bro?
(‘conservative utopia’ bwhahahahahahaha!)
I couldn’t disagree more.
I like Rick Perry. He is a nice guy, and has done a good job as governor. He definitely should not be the subject of the present frivolous legal proceedings.
But he is not nearly as smart as Ted Cruz. And, unlike Ted Cruz, he has proven himself to be an ineffective communicator on the national stage.
The country needs as its next President someone with a well-defined, positive vision for where to take this country, and the power to articulate that vision to the people over the heads of a hostile media. We don’t merely need an administrator who will do a good job of taking us further along our current course, which is leading us over a cliff.
Ted Cruz fits that bill. Perry does not.
The country needs as its next President someone with a well-defined, positive vision for where to take this country, and the power to articulate that vision to the people over the heads of a hostile media.
You just described Ronald Reagan.
Yes, exactly.
Two words for your consideration and illumination.
Calvin. Coolidge.
Silent Cal! Coolidge’s major problem was that he was succeeded by Hoover, a techocrat who failed to understand the people and didn’t address urgent issues during the 1929 Crash. But, Coolidge sailed this ship of state well after Harding died leaving his corrupt mess, which Coolidge generally corrected. In terms of conservative issues Coolidge ranks up there with Reagan. Recall that the roaring Twenties roared in part due to Coolidge’s steering the nation.
Still, to your larger point, in my view, this is a start of that very hard road down to selecting the 2016 GOP nominee and my hope is that the road tests each contestant well and exposes the wannabees and posers. Both Cruz and Perry are off to adequate starts but time will tell.
Cheers and keep on chugging.
“More problematic is that this Conservatopia effectively marginalizes everyone who doesn’t seize the vision. It’s not an attractive ideal, rather a disappointingly exclusionary one. ”
We keep hearing this. My question: what part of Cruz’s message is exclusionary?
I must admit, Legal Insurrection is not so conservative as it was when I began some years back.
This is just a hit piece on Ted Cruz, wherein the writer’s opinions are proffered as held facts.
A reader can get whiplash with these occasional anti-conservative screeds nestled in the traditional LI articles. I keep Mandy in my heart during her recuperation, but I can’t help thinking this site badly needs an editor.
I still come to see what Prof. Bill posts, and one or two other long standing authors. By chance I saw the “conservative utopia” tripe. Too bad.
I’m going to swim against the current here a bit. (I know…surprise!)
While I disagree with the gist of the piece, it isn’t a diktat. Opinions are often stated polemically. But all of us can winnow the wheat/facts from the chaff/opinions.
And it wasn’t just a “hit piece” against Cruz. Sometimes its valuable to look hard at reality, even a bit harshly, and look for weaknesses and holes. I disagree with a LOT of what’s being written about Cruz as being “too pure” and too ideological. People need to be challenged to support that stuff. I don’t think they can. If you look at polling on issues, like tax reform for instance, the American people are for that, and Cruz is out in front with that message.
But it isn’t wrong to take note of the perceptions around Cruz, wrong as they may be, and be prepared to deal with them. We’re going to have to, if he’s to be the nominee of the GOP.
This is good exercise. And jumping Kemberlee smacks of ThoughtPolicing. “Don’t attack the messenger” is still good advice.
When the message is ‘my unsupported opinions are fact’ it is perfectly appropriate to attack the messenger.
…or…
you can simply deal effectively and decisively with the opinions by stating facts and better argument. It’s a good exercise. Especially here, among friends.
http://patterico.com/2015/03/27/does-ted-cruzs-legislative-record-show-him-to-be/
See, this is a pretty good example of how to meet “Cruz is too…” opinion pieces.
They’re going to be written, and we should deal with them effectively. They sure were written about Reagan, and for the same reasons. But now we have better tools for crushing them.
Rags, you’re right but you miss the big clue in the center of the room.
When an author sees fit to offer a pre-emptive defense as part of the corpus of the article, he/she is a biased hack. Now maybe that biased hack is our biased hack and we love him/her but still…
HH responded and nails it IMNHO. KK should have realized that if your piece is slanted enough to require explanations, then it is too slanted and needs a re-write. I view editor’s notes as admission of failure by the writer.
They remind me of all those instruction and warning stickers on ladders. They aren’t there to inform but to defend against lawsuits.
This is grandiosity as stomach-churning as Barack Obama promising to overcome the red-and-blue state divide, and announcing that his victory would be “the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.” This isn’t a campaign: It’s a political fantasy and infomercial.
Yeah, that type of campaign is definitely what lost two Presidential elections for Barack Obama.
Oh, wait! He won.
Coupla other observations about that quote…
1. WTF…!?!? There’s no comparison. And what “grandiosity”?
2. Barracula was lying. Cruz isn’t.
>”Envisioning a socially and fiscally conservative utopia, Cruz inspired the audience to imagine a world birthed from ideological purity.”
Well, that’s quite a thing to say. I heard the speech. Did we hear the same speech? Or is there another problem here — perhaps the culture of Narratives has worked its warp so that imagining an actual Constitutionalist government and a free people pursuing life, liberty and happiness is “utopian” or reflective of “ideological purity”?
Please cite any part of the speech which fits your sense of Cruz’s exalted or unreasonable vision of utopia or purity?
I suspect this is how many Republicans once viewed Reagan. They were conditioned to accept their limited possibilities and to reflexively recoil at actual conservatism. But break the shackles. Think big. It’s your right as an American. That’s what Cruz is doing, that’s his message, and it’s why I believe he’ll prevail.
I was 25 when Reagan was first elected and I remember very well how the network news (ABC, NBC, CBS) of the time and the newspapers all denigrated Reagan. But there was another highly influential group that said Reagan was a cowboy, a loose cannon conservative nutjob who’d get us all killed by Russian missiles. This group was the moderate wing of the GOP.
They’re doing the same to Cruz now. It’s the highest compliment they could possibly pay Cruz, and the best thing the GOP leadership could do for Cruz’s campaign by saying Ted Cruz is not one of them. They actually think this damages Cruz. No wonder they can’t win the White House.
Like Reagan, Cruz is fearless. Thankfully.
I also voted for Reagan and remember well that, after an initial defeat, Reagan went about the nation doing radio broadcasts to deliver the conservative message to people’s living rooms weekly. He also was a regular speaker at conservative events and was reliably a *leader* in the conservative movement long before he ran successfully for President. Cruz has yet to show that he can do more than run faster than anyone else in the conservative movement and get out in front of a crowd already going in one direction. Reagan *led* people to his way of thinking by persuasion and education. I’m not sure Cruz is capable of doing that. I’m open to him showing me that ability but so far it’s not apparent at all.
I appreciate Kimberly’s article, especially since she is a long time associate and supporter of Ted Cruz. I admire the man as well, although I think his strength would be in the USSC, not as President. It’s a life time appointment, leaving him a strong *permanent* conservative voice in a position to right many more wrongs than becoming President for 8 short years might present to him.
IMO Perry is a formidable candidate and at this point is my favorite in the competition. And, as the campaigns go forward, he’s been doing better and better in my eyes. I look forward to his rise.
We need reform. (I HATE that “reform-conservatives” has been co-opted.)
I’ve thought for years that what really scared people spitless about Palin was that she IS an actual reformer. She had a track-record.
One thing we know about human nature; change scares us. No matter who we are, we resist change. We ESPECIALLY resist BIG change in an area where our money or power are concerned. It might just be it will be wonderful, but we’ll all still resist it to some degree, even while we’re pushing for it.
Now, we REALLY need some basic, fundamental balls-to-the-wall reformation in America, and THAT…despite knowing we HAVE to have it…still scares people.
So, I suggest we need a shepherd, not a mule-skinner. A leader, not a driver. I think Cruz can be the guy we need, but I don’t blame a lot of people for feeling scared until he shows them.
No offense rags but nowadays a shepherd is likely to get his political throat slit while being diplomatic. I’ll take a muleskinner who can make that political jihadi knife fly away with a flick of his whip. Just saying.
This spreading like an epidemic. Every web site that I thought had a reasonable amount of conservative intelligence is now proving me wrong. We do not need another hit piece on Ted Cruz or any other GOP wannabe. Just cover what they say and then STFU!
We have to prove how cool we are. All the cool kidz be hatin on Cruz. We cool, we cool.
Rinnse and repeat, and we’ll end up with Jeb as candidate, and he’ll lose of course like Mittens and McRino and Dole, and all the cool kids be battin their eyes going, OMG, how did THAT happen???
Nah. This is not a Cruz hit piece. This is an ordinary American hit peace. The author is insisting that the ordinary American is too stupid to realize what’s best not only for him or her personally but for all of America, therefore it is necessary to offer him or her a candidate who will do less than what America needs. That’s great! Thanks!
What is it that spooks people on Cruz? It can’t be his words – it’s basic conservative boilerplate, nothing crazy. Is it his religiosity? I’m an atheist and his faith doesn’t worry me one bit. (Atheist, agnostic, whatever, the labels are meaningless to me)
I wonder if it’s generational. Politicians used to speak like Cruz all the time.
Maybe too many (young) people don’t recognize political speech that doesn’t involve pandering or political correctness.
I suggested the right answer above, I think.
Cruz represents change. BIG change. People accommodate all kinds of bullshit, Henry, as well you know. People will stay in an abusive relationship for decades. Why? I think it comes down to a fear of change. They accommodate even terrible crap, and they even get used to it.
People…OUR people…have been used to being screwed over for decades. We are a patient people, and patience, like every other human virtue, can become a vice…a weakness. Shakespeare revisited that theme over and over.
I think Cruz, or any strong Conservative who unashamedly uses words like “liberty”, is going to scare people right at first. It’s a matter of conditioning.
Which is why I think he has to show himself a leader, and not a driver.
Just to make a point – when my family goes on vacation, I’m the driver and I lead us where we’re going. Everybody goes along. Interesting that such is not the norm any more – we need a vote on everything.
Oh yeah – that’s right. Traditional family is a republic with a benevolent dictator. Modern PC infested society is a democracy.
Ann Coulter, call the LI website please.
When a writer warns people that a hit piece is not a hit piece, you can bet its a hit piece. America needs someone who has the ability to win over voters by the articulation of his convictions. Sadly, Perry is spending more time remaking his image as a conservative than in winning support for his conservative principles. On the other hand, Cruz is offering America a needed change from the path that is destroying our country. Three cheers for Cruz.
Unnecessary and politically naive posts like this, as well as the filler rehash content that has burgeoned over the past couple of years, are why I (sadly and with regret) stopped contributing commentary and money to LI some months ago. Totally admire Perry for so many reasons, but this is just pointless detracting from Cruz and is not going to educate anyone or further the conservative cause.
Bingo…spot on, janitor.
Perry and Cruz are both excellent and good male candidates for POTUS! Still, it’s a long hard road to the 2016 Convention and each, along with others (Many?) all have to compete for that high office. Favorite sons, friends of the Gope, other wannabees, all have to face up to reality during this race.
This article is an excellent start of showing what some of the obstacles will be. One is that there are favorites out there, here! And while I do not totally appreciate the approach of this article, I take it as presented and make my own opinion of her views and motives; so be it.
Cheers and on to victory in 2016. America Restored and we remain truly Red, White, and Blue, Yankees all, even those in Texas.
Remember that Perry’s “oops” came in trying to recall the THIRD federal department he would eliminate.
Just to keep some perspective.
Cruz has developed a similar following to Sarah Palin’s: not all that big, but fanatically devoted and very, very noisy.
I doubt your comment was worth 6 down votes. In any event, we don’t know yet how big Ted’s following is. That’s why we have primaries and national conventions.
They keep trying to convince us we just want everyone to get along. That is what they want. They think telling us we are above it all will go down easier then saying sit down and STFU.
Hillary was trying that yesterday – we all need to work together – PU, that stinks.
I am sick of my representatives promising fire and brimstone at home and then going to Washington DC and getting along – PU.
And I know what working together means: Solindra, McAuliffe’s Electric Car Company, the Finestine’s or Harry Reid’s son get billions of tax payer dollars. While I, the taxpayer, have to give them more and ever more of the money I earn but never even get to see.
Hey – Cruz, Walker and now Perry? What an embarrassment of riches!
Now, compare the name ‘Boehner.’
I like Rick Perry. I know he’s not the orator that Ted Cruz is, but I’m more interested in the candidate’s record. Perry has a great record. He’s done a lot for Texas, and Texas is a big state.
I’d be real happy to see either man, or Walker, Jindal, Rubio, Fiorina, Kasich, ANY of them over Hitliary. As long as we fight against Jeb and Christie, we’ll do well enough.
That’s why this article has virtually no value to me. The only way we help ourselves is to expose the ‘rats. They are the enemy, not our own and not nitpicking between the very good potential candidate we have. I think it’s more productive to discuss what each brings to the table, evaluate it, and each make his or her decision based on what is most important or appealing to him or her about each candidate. It’s not rocket surgery, FCS.
Don’t fall for the media attempt to instigate in-fighting. That’s exactly what they want.
I hope that Kemberlee’s next article presents a comparison between one of our more prominent potential candidates and Hitliary, not between solid conservatives.
We don’t need hit pieces on any conservatives at LI. I want information on any and all collusion between obola and Hitliary on Benghazi, their connections to ‘rat corruption, and their relationship to each other and operatives and advisors, such as Valerie Jarrett.
I want to see a damage assessment. I want to see the media focus on Hitliary and her endless Machiavellian maneuvers to cover up her corruption.
Why is it that the ‘rats are always focused on protecting each other and forging ahead with their agenda while we get mired in bullcrap infighting generated by articles such as this one? Do we have to have a circular firing squad every four years? Is that something the constitution requires? Is it codified in the GOP platform?
What the hell.
At this point, I still favor Cruz and Walker.
There is no doubt Perry accomplished a lot as Governor of Texas. However, my concern is that (similar to George W. Bush) he does not recognize the threat posed by political Islam. It appears he championed and implemented a curriculum for the Texas schools that distorts and whitewashes it.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/08/here-is-the-aga-khanrick-perry-curriculum-scrubbed-from-the-web-cache-scrubbed-from-google-search
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/05/governor-rick-perry-partnered-with
To me, this is a deal-breaker. There is no way he is a better candidate and there is no way he would make a better President than either Cruz or Walker.
As a lifelong Texan who has voted for Rick Perry every time he was on the ballot, I wouldn’t vote for him in a primary election for all the rice in China. I have met him on several occasions and find him to be exactly as he seemed in the presidential debates—way out of his league. No doubt he is a good and honest man, but if you think George Bush appeared as a lightweight in his overall presentation, multiply that times 2 for Rick Perry. He is dumber than a box of rocks and has no business being on the stage with the other serious heavyweights we have on our presidential bench. Ted Cruz is the real deal. There is no sense of us putting anyone but the best up against Hillary and the Democrat machine.
I think you’ve boiled it own to its essence. He simply isn’t bright enough to compete at this level. We can’t or shouldn’t accept that, and don’t have to.
“Regardless of where you are — left or right, we need somebody that can stand up and say, listen, let’s quit fighting each other. Let’s find the places that we can agree on,” says Perry
I’m trying to find an occurrence when that guidance has ever worked out well for Conservatives.
Very, very, VERY disappointed in finding this article at LI. Despite the authors denial that it is a hit piece (why is it necessary to deny it?), it IS a hit piece against Cruz. I would like to know what Cruz has said that is “exclusionary?” His message is that conservatism can make things better for all people, not just favored interest group.
Here we go again, fighting each other and giving the left more ammunition to use against us.
Personally, for me, the key to deciding who’ll I want for the GOP nominee in 2016 will be the various debates leading up to my decision point. In 2012, some possible candidates showed their lack of suitability during the debates; Pawlenty as one when he F’ud by attacking Bachmann, Newt when he kind of flamed out, and Bachmann when she showed less ability to deal with the issues. Still, Mitt had his under the table supporters and flipped off the rest of the bunch and that was our problem.
For me, the issue is showing the GOPe that their choice is a dead-end for 2016. That unless there’s a conservative of the Reagan, Goldwater brand, strong Conservative principles and strong for our Constitutional form of government, the GOP nominee won’t win.
Lastly, KK and the others authoring on LI need to know that we’re here because of the strong conservative base of the kind shown by the Professor; anything else is not going to help keep this blog strong and vital; IMHAO, of course.
All the Cool Kidz be hatin’ on Cruz. We have to prove we’re Cool Kidz too.