Rick Perry will reportedly ‘make clear’ he’s running for president on Saturday

[LDB]

Give them 90-120 days to campaign before the primary. Anyone that wants to get involved can get involved during that time.

 

[tumbleweeds]

W had a good record in TX as well. That and $3 will buy you a cup of coffee. I want to know if he will uphold the Constitution!

He's soft on immigration and that would make it hard for me to support him.

 

[Tennesseahawk]

we aren't gonna ask Perry for his birth certificate, he doesn't sound like he is from some other continent,amen.

Nope... but apparently, he's not from Conservative Nation either.

 

[Pilgrim]

The party can choose anyone they want and I understand that they are here to stay but when we have an important election with a number of idiots and fools trying to get the nomination and a number of advisers on both side of the isle repeating the same thing, the primaries can be forsaken and the party can choose a candidate.

Technically yes, but the primaries are here to stay unless something drastic happens to our system as it stands now. Repeating myself, I'll say again - it's political reality.

By the way, ever think that this is the problem with a two party system?

In theory, no doubt there are those that think we should have more choices than just the candidates from the two parties - because it would be "fair". However, what would spawn from either party just nominating a candidate (Romney for instance) and bypassing the primary system would be a multi-party system; maybe the Libertarians would nominate Ron Paul, the Bullmoose party would be reborn and nominate Perry and the new Whig party could nominate Bachmann, and on it goes. Then we wind up with no party getting a majority and the country gets a coalition government as the result. The two party system really seems to suck until we seriously examine the alternatives.

You ever think that this propagate the dumbing down of our voters by telling them the process is part of our "democratic society" while the fact is not many vote in primaries because they have no party affiliation?

If they have no party affiliation, then maybe they should consider becoming politically active. In some countries people risk their lives to vote, while the majority of Americans are more concerned with the latest sale at the mall, or the big deal at work they have to close, or they just don't want to miss The View or Inside Edition because they're having Lady Gaga on. The fact is, there's no excuse for not voting other than laziness or apathy.

NOPE didn't drink the koolaide, just grown really tired of not having substance in these forums or in the media about what really is going on. A lot of BS is being spread about and no one seems to be talking the truth, it is either defending or ripping down Obama/congress while not saying anything useful or with substance.

Actually, Obama is going to have to answer for his record. His first two years in office he had complete control of congress with a super majority that was filibuster proof. How else would he had the liberal democrats have shoved through a health care bill that hardly any in congress read and the majority of the public didn't want? They could have fixed all kinds of imagined ills and wrongdoings they claim were Bush's fault. They could have avoided this debt ceiling crisis altogether by raising it then while they had the majority - but Harry Reid wanted the political issue to try and hang around the GOP's neck, and he was caught on tape saying so. In addition, the Democrat controlled Senate hasn't submitted a budget in over two years, plainly ignoring the law of the land. That's just another example of Democrat mismanagement and lack of leadership from the Oval Office.

As much as this may sound liberal, it is not and I have yet heard many conservatives say this and stand by is - we all have the absolute right to practice our religion, PERIOD.

Agreed - unless the religious practice goes hand-in-glove with a political agenda that is contrary to our legal system and our way of life.

I understand you all seem to keep bringing up his record but really it won't matter.
Why?
Because he already did the shrewdest thing could be done - blamed congress.

Sorry, but that excuse won't fly with the majority of the American public any more. He can't blame his miserable record on Congress because he and the Dems had complete control of congress his first two years in office. The GOP can't be blamed for everything he's screwed up just because they've stood in the way of his liberal agenda since the 2010 elections.

Did Bush take responsibility for the housing bubble?

No, nor should he have. It's common knowledge the housing bubble was caused by the abandonment of traditional lending standards by Fannie and Freddie and their implementation of lax policies that were put in place during the Clinton administration, and were held in place by the Democrat-controlled congress during Bush's administration. We've all seen and heard the tapes of Barney Frank, Maxine Waters et al praising Franklin Raines and his cronies for the great job they were doing. They refused to allow more stringent regulations to be put in place by congress.
Now, was Bush responsible for the Wall St. bailout and its consequential fallout? You betcha!

Why do people keep equating with running a business with leadership that is needed to run a country?

Because business executives have to incorporate economics, politics, legal matters and public relations into their decision making process. Then they have to live with the consequences of their decisions which affect the lives of many others. Obama came into the election with none of this type of experience, and we're living with his incompetence in this area every day.

Maybe this time the process will again fail and it will need going back to having a "few RNC bigwigs meet in a smoke-filled room to simply declare a candidate".

Ain't gonna happen, for reasons previously stated. Guess this is one more subject upon which we're gonna have to agree to disagree.