Rick Perry's Political Savvy


"Say, from whence You owe this strange intelligence?"

Is Texas Gov. Rick Perry an idiot? Reason contributor and former Reagan economic adviser Bruce Bartlett made a minor news splash for saying as much about the newly announced GOP presidential contender. I've never spoken to Perry, and while I've followed a number of his state's recent health care and budget policy fights, I've done so from afar, so I'm hesitant to judge too strongly. But The Economist's Erica Greider has had a front-row seat, covering Perry from Austin since 2007, and interviewing him several times. And she has a somewhat different opinion about the governor's intelligence:

To the first critique, that Perry is a moron, I would respond that he has been governor for more than ten years now and he has actually made very few political missteps. The HPV vaccine order (which was overturned several months later) was probably the biggest. The other controversy that has caused him the most headache in Texas was the Trans-Texas Corridor, his plan to build a network of new roads, including a new interstate that would cut a swathe up the state. This would have been largely financed by toll roads, with the proceeds going to private contrators. The project was wildly controversial, partly because it would have yielded a number of eminent domain actions, and it was officially killed last year.

This tracks with Texas Monthly's assessment of the governor. "Perry is cannier than you think," writes Paul Burka in a "Dear Yankee" letter designed to provide some local insight as Perry steps onto the national stage:

In 1989, realizing that a conservative had little future in the party, Perry switched to the GOP. He has been a rock-solid Republican ever since and has driven the state party further to the right. Only twice has he made strategic errors that brought him into conflict with his hard-right base. One was an edict that twelve-year-old girls be inoculated against cervical cancer (it was quickly overturned); another was his promotion of a giant system of toll roads called the Trans-Texas Corridor, which stirred up significant opposition from landowners. These two bobbles aside, Perry has a genius for sensing where his base is on any given issue.

With big-time political figures like Perry, I think it's necessary to distinguish between wonky policy smarts and calculated political savvy. Perry is obviously less of a wonk than your average Congressional Budget Office director (although he's apparently familiar enough with budgeting gimmicks to game the system fairly well). But when it comes to political smarts, there seems to be a good case that he's a reasonably effective operator—perhaps by calculated design, perhaps by natural instinct—who not only knows what his base wants done, but what it wants to hear. And that, I suspect, helps explain the "superficial extremism" I wrote about in my column this morning: Perry's "genius for sensing where his base is" has led him to stake out a number of fiery rhetorical positions, but also to follow-through with substantially less radical governance. 


Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Is Texas Gov. Rick Perry an idiot?

    Is Texas Gov. Rick Perry a politician?

  2. http://scienceblogs.com/pharyn….._texan.php

    PZ Myers doesn’t approve of Rick Perry’s Texas A&M academic transcript.

    1. No, I think I’d rather watch meatspin for a few hours than read PZ Myers.

      1. Mmmm…..gyro.

  3. Seven ways Perry wants to change the Constitution.


    1. Numbers 3, 4, and 5, yes, no to the others.

      1. I like the idea of giving judges a fixed term, say 20 years, but #1 leaves them open to political influence.

        #2? Really? Does this guy understand what ‘limited government’ even means?

        #4? Huh? What’s that going to fix?

        #5 sounds like a good idea, but you’ve got to account for emergencies. If you do that, expect everything to be an emergency.

        #6 and #7 are the kinds of things that will keep a democrat in office. Can’t the GOP get over it – the religious folks are going to vote for you anyway… stop beating a dead horse.

        1. #4? [Repealing the 17th Amendment] Huh? What’s that going to fix?

          It would give Senators more incentive to recognize the 10th Amendment. Obamacare (and a lot of other intrusive BS) might not have passed if Senators had to answer to their states.

          1. Not really. It would just make state elections all about national issues, rather than about state issues. Do we really want state legislatures elected on the basis of party views of foreign policy?

        2. Also, re: your comment on #5 – then they can budget below annual receipts, and build a rainy-day fund. Or Congress can hold a fucking bake sale. If it’s really an emergency, Americans have never been shy about helping each other out.

      2. We should probably point out that 6 and 7 (and, heck, probably all of these, but especially 6 and 7) would never come close to meeting the requirements for passing a Constitutional amendment.

      3. We should probably point out that 6 and 7 (and, heck, probably all of these, but especially 6 and 7) would never come close to meeting the requirements for passing a Constitutional amendment.

        1. Wow. This is my first time being burned by the squirrels.

    2. 1. Abolish lifetime tenure for federal judges by amending Article III, Section I of the Constitution.


      2. Congress should have the power to override Supreme Court decisions with a two-thirds vote.

      Hell no. Its a co-equal branch. There’s already a process for overriding SCOTUS – amendment.

      3. Scrap the federal income tax by repealing the Sixteenth Amendment.


      4. End the direct election of senators by repealing the Seventeenth Amendment.

      Yes, indeed. A critical part of our federal system balance of powers was gutted, and should be fixed.

      5. Require the federal government to balance its budget every year.

      According to the amendment’s language, the restriction could be overridden by a two-thirds vote in both Houses of Congress or by a declaration of war.

      Sounds good to me.

      6. The federal Constitution should define marriage as between one man and one woman in all 50 states.

      No. We have better things to do. Laboratory of states, etc.

      7. Abortion should be made illegal throughout the country.

      No. Better things. Laboratory, etc.

      1. “”or by a declaration of war””

        Yeah, but we don’t declare wars anymore.

        1. Then it won’t be an issue.

          1. SCOTUS has opined that AUMFs are equivalent to declarations of war for constitutional purposes. Not sure how they would treat an amendment like that.

            1. We haven’t not been at war in a very very long time, so I think this provision would make it all useless.

    3. How about this for an amendment:

      In Article I Section 8, the phrase “regulate commerce among the several States” is to be defined to mean “regulate commerce among the several states.”

      In Amendment IV, the phrase “for public use” is to be defined to mean “for public use.”

    4. I’m not even going to bother reading that. You know why? Neither the Governor of Texas nor the President has any role in the constitutional amendment process. So it doesn’t remotely matter what Perry thinks about amendments.

    5. If #3, he’s going to have to figure out how to fund the government, because no one seriously thinks he’ll cut the budget enough. Sales tax? VAT?

      No to all the rest. #4 will accomplish nothing. #5 will be gamed through budget gimmicks or drag the judiciary into the legislature’s job.

      1. This. You can’t be a free trader and want the US to go back to the same source of finance that it had prior to the income tax. Historically, the federal government was financed through tariffs.

    6. Killing the commerce clause isn’t even on the list? Forcing government to use GAAP? No office of the Censor? What a shite list.

  4. Idiots have rights, just like the morons, hustlers, hucksters, war mopngers and even them perverts.

    1. But enough about Congress.

  5. Really, America would be better off governed by a council of overweight nerds posting snarky quips from their couches.

      1. That sounds like a viable Constitutional amendment right there.

  6. With big-time political figures like Perry, I think it’s necessary to distinguish between wonky policy smarts and calculated political savvy

    You don’t get to the level of politics that Perry has gotten to without being politically savvy, but that savvy is a feral cunning, and not intelligence. Fuck, look at Joe Biden. He’s a high-functioning retard, but he must be good at scuzzy political maneuvering, because he made it to VP.

    1. “Perry is cannier than you think,” writes Paul Burka in a “Dear Yankee” letter designed to provide some local insight as Perry steps onto the national stage:

      I think “feral cunning” sums it up nicely. Perry is little more than the “sharpest” con walking the yard. If his history is indicative that will also be how he governs….thug like with a big Texas grin.

    2. Well, at least he’s clean and articulate.

      1. Yeah.. if Obama was our generation’s Carter, maybe Perry will be our generation’s Reagan… (Shudder…)

        1. !!

          1. You were doing a swell job of massacring one another before I ever heard of you.

            1. Thanks again for the weapons!

              1. And no thank you to us? Typical fucking Muslims.

    3. You don’t get to the level of politics that Perry has gotten to without being politically savvy, but that savvy is a feral cunning, and not intelligence.

      Having now worked for a large number of too-highly paid inept middle managers, a lot of it has to do with showing up to work, waving the flag and saying stuff like, “Yes We Can!” no matter how retarded the idea flapping on the flagpole.

      Wait, you know who else said, “Yes We Can”?

      1. Joseph A Campbell?

    4. He’s a high-functioning retard

      I completely disagree on the high-functioning part.

  7. Clinton, I suppose, had some policy wonk in him, but I don’t think Bush did, and I don’t really think Obama does. While his supporters like to portray him as super-smart and stuff, to the extent he pushes policy, its warmed over Great-Society era stuff.

    All, needless to say, have plenty of feral cunning, although Obama’s seems to be cut with a dose of indecision, insecurity, and fear.

    If his Obama’s history is indicative that will also be how he governs….thug like with a big Texas grin bloody Chicago knuckles.

    1. Obama has, from the beginning, seemed like an empty suit the national party had groomed to take office. If he’s intelligent, it isn’t in any way related to leadership, economics, or administration. Maybe he’s good at crosswords? When I was at the White House for my fellowship, the rumor was that Clinton was a kick-ass crossworder.

      1. “Honey, what’s a 7-letter word for coldhearted frigid bitch? Starts with H and ends with Y.”

        1. “Honey, what’s a 7-letter word for coldhearted frigid bitch? Starts with H and ends with Y.”

          Hiney…Hennesey…Hi Number…Hitlery? Okay I give.

      2. Obama has, from the beginning, seemed like an empty suit the national party had groomed to take office.

        I disagree. He took the national party by surprise and caught the democrats up in a perfect storm of, “which multicultural, history-changing identity politics lever do I pull, the Feministing Lever or the First-Black-President lever?”. Sorry Feminists, but you lose that contest.

    2. While his supporters like to portray him as super-smart and stuff

      They do is so desperately that I have to laugh. It was obvious from the start that even before we knew he was total lying scum, he was all act and no substance. That’s why the “he’s super-intelligent” shit started; in TEAM BLUE’s heart, it knew that he probably wasn’t.

    3. He may be a smart guy policy-wise (coming from first principles totally alien to ours, no doubt) but he seems loath to ever say or do anything for which he might be criticized.

      There were a lot more specific policy proposals coming out of the Bush White House than we’ve seen come from Obama. He’s left most of the policy decisions to Reid and Pelosi.

      Oh…and he’s not at all politically savvy. I’d accept him as a policy wonk before I’d accept him as a good politicker.

      1. I mean, how many people even remember who the leaders in the GOP Congress were during the Bush administration? They were practically invisible. Dennis Hastert and Bill Frist had very little in the way of policy influence compared to Pelosi and Reid, that’s for sure.

      2. I’m sure he’s not as dumb as he appears at times, but he’s definitely a political idiot.

        1. On that we agree.

          And tbh his advisors must be idiots too. A crop that can make Bush’s cadre of Liberty University graduates look smart must be stultish indeed.

          1. It is one of the worst set of appointments in living memory. I wonder why? Obama not being experienced would, you would think, lead to him wanting to appoint exceptionally experienced staff. Yet he did the opposite.

            You think this is all some sort of goof? Maybe he really is Andy Kaufman.

  8. If you do #3 and #4 you don’t need #5.

    Election of Senators by the state legislatures and apportioning taxes to the states according to electoral numbers will lead to proper level of taxation and spending.

    Without 16 and 17, Senators defend their state purse, House are trying to spend it. With this tug of war appropriate level of spending and taxing is decided whatever it is.

    Currently, tax layed directly on the people and both Senate and House have incentive to spend.

  9. Bruce Bartlett calls Rick Perry an idiot.

    Takes one to know one, I guess.

    1. Seriously. Shorter Bruce Bartlett: “I love me some Obama cock!”

  10. In a country of 300+ million, it’s fucking ridiculous that we need to wonder if likely future presidents are drooling retards. “Cannier than you think” is normally reserved for three-card monte hustlers and pet ferrets ferchristsake.

    1. “It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see….”
      “You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?”
      “No,” said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, “nothing so simple. Nothing anything like so straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people.”
      “Odd,” said Arthur, “I thought you said it was a democracy.”
      “I did,” said Ford. “It is.”
      “So,” said Arthur, hoping he wasn’t sounding ridiculously obtuse, “why don’t the people get rid of the lizards?”
      “It honestly doesn’t occur to them,” said Ford. “They’ve all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they’ve voted in more or less approximates to the government they want.”
      “You mean they actually vote for the lizards?”
      “Oh yes,” said Ford with a shrug, “of course.”
      “But,” said Arthur, going for the big one again, “why?”
      “Because if they didn’t vote for a lizard,” said Ford, “the wrong lizard might get in.”

      Douglas Adams, in So Long, And Thanks For All The Fish (1984) Ch. 36

      1. *Looks at the current field of candidates and at the incumbent

        I wish a Lizard would run for President here.

        1. Sorry, the insurance gecko is from Australia.

          1. American A-bombs made Godzilla….does that give him birth right citizenship?

      2. Tulpa, that was very good. Thanks.

        1. You’re welcome. Intellectual trespass is my specialty.

  11. Why I’m supporting Rick Perry:


    A good read on the good, bad, and ugly about Governor Perry:


  12. 4. End the direct election of senators by repealing the Seventeenth Amendment.

    Damage has already been done. I’d rather replace the Senate w/ the state governors, but only let them vote up/down legislation unmodified. No legislation could start there. No conference committees since there would be on ‘Senate’ versions of bills. They’d also vote on confirmations, treaties, etc.

    They’re elected state wide, but would have incentive to keep political power at home. Everyone wins.

    5. Require the federal government to balance its budget every year.

    This will just get gamed.

    1. Technically states don’t have to have governors under the constitution, they just have to have a democratic form of govt. If Massachusetts wanted to have a parliamentary govt with a prime minister elected by the state parliament, they could do it without violating the federal Constitution.

      1. Then use the state’s prime minister. There’s sure to be some way to word it.

        I’d like to see a US state go to a Parliamentary form of govt, just for the hell of it.

        1. Me too! I like breaking things.

          But then I’d like to see some other state have a supreme dictator elected every year. That’s technically democratic, right?

          1. No, it’s technically a contradiction in terms.

            1. no contradiction

  13. He’s certainly not dumber than Bush, which has been both implied and explied.

    And he’s probably no dumber than Obama.

  14. Perry has one sour puss.

    It is not even cool and rugged looking…looks more like a 45 year old women who used the tanning salon one too many times.

  15. I don’t know if he’s a moron, but he’s definitely a douchebag. Everyone in Austin knows that. As do the ghosts of those executed on fishy evidence.

    1. Sure, Perry’s a douchebag. But wave a magic wand, and replace Rick Perry with Radley Balko one week before those executions, and you know what? Balko would have issued the one 30-day stay allowed the Governor of Texas, and then the executions would have gone forward as scheduled.

      1. Good point.

  16. Perry’s “genius for sensing where his base is” has led him to stake out a number of fiery rhetorical positions, but also to follow-through with substantially less radical governance.

    (i.e., says one thing and does another)

    (e.g., most politicians)

  17. So, he’s made “only” two significant political mistakes in 10 years. Swell…but has he done anything politically ingenious during that time? Or is this the gubernatorial version of voting “present”.

    1. but has he done anything politically ingenious during that time?

      If the answer is no then by definition he has.

      Shit Tulpa you are making me want to vote for conservative…shame on you.

      1. If the answer is no then by definition he has.

        Dude, I just about set off a fire alarm with the smoke coming out of my ears.

        1. Did you make one of those 4chan “FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU” faces?


    2. A Texas Governor pretty much has to just vote present.

      Take the budget stuff mentioned in the article. It’s silly to blame or credit Perry for it. The budget, in Texas, is basically whatever the independently-elected Lieutenant Governor manages to negotiate with the House of Representatives.

      The Lt. Gov. is the chairman of and he and his appointees are half the members of the budget-writing Legislative Budget Board. (Under Perry, the governor has for the first time ever started sending budgets to the legislature; these are completely ignored by the LBB.)

      Then the LBB-written budget is sent to both houses of the legislature. In the Senate, the Lt. Gov. establishes all special and standing committees, appoints all chairpersons and members, assigns all Senate legislation to the committee of his choice, decides all questions of parliamentary procedure, and has broad discretion in following Senate procedural rules. In short, the Lt. Gov. decides what the Senate gets to pass.

      So, the Texas budget would be actually worth discussing if we were discussing a Dewhurst for President campaign, but Perry? He’s just the governor, not anybody important to the Texas budget process.

    3. Or is this the gubernatorial version of voting “present”.

      I’m trying to decide if this is a bug or a feature…

  18. For me, the vaccine issue is not a big deal. Schools already require kids to have several vaccinations before they can enroll. I think some people got their panties in a wad because unlike the other diseases, that one (HPV) is primarily transmitted sexually. Of course it was hardly a libertarian thing to do. It’s probably dumb luck when politicians do anything to increase freedom.

    I’ve held my nose and voted for the lesser of two evils several times, and always regretted it, and in the future will only be voting for candidates who are vocal about ending the drug war, and Perry’s definitely not one.

  19. He’s clearly an idiot, because he attacked Ben Bernanke, and there’s no one more beloved by the American people as the Federal Reserve Chairman in the middle of a banking crisis.

    Conventional Wisdom

  20. Y’all need to realize: Perry is the best we’re gonna get. Yeah, yeah blahblahblah. But you know what? He’s actually pretty good. Pro capitalism and pro free trade. Anti regulation and anti EPA. Pro gun and pretty damn pro-constitution as a whole. And he constantly brings up the tenth, which is damn good. Could “we” do better? Sure. But we could do a lot fucking worse. A lot.

    Reason, don’t you have better targets to tear down? Shouldn’t you stop worrying about Perry until you’ve quashed the blatantly worse candidates, like, oh I don’t know: Romney, Bachmann, Palin, Hunstman, Cain, Obama, Gingrich? If the race was between Johnson and Perry I could understand your position, but its just not. So what the fuck?

    1. Were you around for the 2000 campaign, friend? Remember Bush’s “humble foreign policy” spiel?

      1. Well, I hate the military. A bunch of self-righteous welfare cases demanding to be worshipped as “heroes”, because .01% of them get capped by angry towelheads from time to time.

        But theres bigger fish to fry,for now. Besides, the dumbshit electorate at large constantly slobbers over military dick, its a losing issue to really attack it at this point. Capitalism and hacking away regulations and practicing federalism is good enough for now.

      2. I definitely remember Obama’s.

        1. Let’s not even go there…

    2. Aside from his flaws as a candidate, a couple of contributing impulses:

      “Everyone sucks all the time, see! See! We don’t just bash Obama!”


      “Culture war! Culture war! Culture war! Religious Southerner, yeeeeech!”


      “You see, we’re not uncivilized like those icky Conservatives/Republicans! We’re cool too – right hipsters? Right? Right? (Why won’t you pick up my phone calls?!)”

    3. Shouldn’t you stop worrying about Perry until you’ve quashed the blatantly worse candidates, like, oh I don’t know: Romney, Bachmann, Palin, Hunstman, Cain, Obama, Gingrich?

      Reason rips Obama daily, and has ripped into all of the other people you mention at least a few times. I don’t know that they have the ability to quash anyone.

  21. From the Forbes article

    There has been some speculation that the Obama campaign is overjoyed at Perry’s entrance into the race, as it introduces a candidate potentially much easier to beat than Mitt Romney while also potentially forcing Romney to shift farther to the right in self defense, thus forcing Romney away from appealing to the great independent middle on whom the election will probably ultimately hinge.

    What the fuck? Do people actually think the independents are the middle?

    From what i can see most are tracking to the right or tracking libertarian…the only middle part is the polls show independent’s opinion being diluted with far left wingers who are independent only because Obama is not left wing enough.

    1. There used to be a notion that independents were so because they had a smattering of traditional conservative or liberal beliefs but didn’t feel comfortable in any party. The media still largely prescribes that model to political independents.

      It’s changing though. They wait until they hear you utter something which suggests the government, you know, might not grow quite as fast as it has in the past and they quickly pull you out of the “independent” bin and cast you into the “teabagger/koch brothers” bin.

      1. However, if you’re a Ralph Nader independent, you’re labeled as a “Social Justice” advocate. It’s actually kind of a fun game to play.

    2. Yes, the great assumption of our political time is that “independents” are in between the 2 parties, and that they will vote for whichever sounds more convincing, free from the burdens of ideology.

      Now, any such “independents”, are a goddam joke, and they do exist. But they are probably only 50-60% of so-called “independents”. The rest are either too far left or right for the team that was assigned to them, and have no loyalty to it.

      1. The mainstream media told me libertarians are just the NAMBLA wing of the Republican Party. So, where are all the hot boys?

        1. All we got is Tony and he is like 5’6 220 lbs and 31 years old and technically not even a libertarian.

          1. Not a problem if you just close your eyes and pretend.

  22. I’d pay Rick Perry $100 bucks to say, “If a frog had wings, it wouldn’t bump its ass a-hoppin’! I am sick of your excuses, Miles! It is now precisely… 8:45 in the p.m. I’m gonna be down that store in
    exactly 12 hours to kick me some butt!”

  23. With big-time political figures like Perry, I think it’s necessary to distinguish between wonky policy smarts and calculated political savvy.

    “There’s two types of smarts, book smarts, which waved bye-bye to you (Perry) long ago, and there’s street-smarts, the ability to read people. And you know how to do that, just like W. He was the best at knowing what people wanted to hear, and what people needed to hear. That’s what selling is all about. In a way, these people are buying you, not just your political platform.”

  24. I don’t think I can bring myself to vote for a social conservative.

    Personal liberty is to important to sack for the sake of less taxes (and really, unless he signs up for gutting SS/Medicare/Medicaid – which I can get behind – that is hardly viable).

    1. I got the opposite idea…economic liberty is more important to me than social liberty, if only because economic liberty allows the accumulation of power in the private sector, and therefore may eventually lead to social liberty.

      But that’s just my take.

      1. I think that’s a good point. Historically, liberty has followed prosparity as money buys political influence. I also think most of the socons pandering is only just that, and they know it. I’m not saying they wouldn’y pass a socon agenda if they could but it’s not politically feasable. Federal bans on abortion or gay marraige would require a constitutional amendment which would require a lot more support than they have. I would prefer someone who wasn’t a socon but I would not not vote for someone over it unless they were an insuffarable asshole about it like Santorum. That guys a total dick.

      2. ‘Social’ and economic liberty actually aren’t that easy to separate. Is a prostitution ban a detriment to economic or social liberty, for instance? It’s also unusual to have a lot of one type of liberty without any of the other, so it’s kind of a pointless question. (The PRC is oft-cited as an example of economic liberty without social liberty, but there really isn’t much economic liberty there either)

        And of course it’s not really clear what “social” or “personal” liberty really is; on the usual political spectrum it seems to be defined as “liberty that liberals tend to support” which basically encompasses most sexual liberty plus a random, incoherent grocery list of other “freedoms” like drug use, feticide, and speech and religion practices that don’t look like threats to liberalism.

        Gun rights, property rights, and school choice, for instance, don’t seem to fit in either category. I attribute this to the attempt to simplify the political landscape to “Conservatives believe in one type of liberty, while liberals believe in another type.” We’re giving their respective crazy quilts of political positions too much credit.

  25. Is there some Hollywood conspiracy to keep allowing Josh Brolin to play presidents?

    Citizens need someone to point out things that must be done politically! Citizens want Action Points creating an organized plan coming into this election. While in this crisis, they don’t want messages to be fuzzy or esoteric.
    These Points outlined in national news programs would catch fire!
    ? Set forth a Bill to immediately strip out all redundancies shown by the recent march 11th 2010 GAO Report saving over 500 billion dollars. Reduce EPA & NHLRB to 1985 levels. Make TSA private again and disallow any new Federal Agency formations.
    ? Waive all permitting and grant immediate rights to oil companies to drill in all of Alaska and our Continental shelves. This would create over 200,000 good jobs and immediately lower oil prices.
    ? Waive all permitting and allow immediate infrastructure for natural gas distribution created for each gas station in America and allow auto conversion for cars at $300 per car with a $1000 tax write off. For proven poor, a rebate check from the Government would be available. Another 100,000 jobs.
    ? Waive permitting and allow the environmentally proven Canadian processes be used to convert Shale and sand oil in Colorado and other State deposits. (There’s more oil there than in Saudi Arabia) Yet another 150,000 good jobs. These three actions would lower oil and gas prices by 30%.
    ? Freeze Federal Government hiring now. (It’s the only way to reduce long term spending. You can see the inability of spending cuts without it.)Freeze all Federal Pension increases.
    ? Create a Bill restructuring the Tax Laws to a very simplified Fair, Flat or Consumption tax now!
    ? Pass a Bill that no tax payer money will be used for future restructuring or assistance of any kind for Private or Public Pensions.
    ? Pass a Bill that prevents the Federal Government from ever bailing or taking active roles in private industry areas again.
    ? Reduce tax rates on corporations to 12% if they repatriate all foreign earnings for 2011.
    ? Select a capitalist that truly believes in and is skilled in creating an atmosphere for private industry and jobs. Governor Perry seems currently the most qualified.
    With on-air saturation, these actions could be made public. These are “Bills” that would create a clear distinction between the political parties and solidify Voting Blocs.
    Matthew Burns has created several national financial institutions and has expertise in capital markets structuring, derivatives, credit default swaps (CDS), mortgage creation and servicing.

  27. Here you can choose more new products, enjoy more discounts, so you get favorite products while saving money.

  28. Greetings Now i’m for that reason happy I stubled onto any site,Nike Dunk High Prefer came across you will just by error, at the same time Document was first Nike Dunk 2008 Gold Black browsing relating to Bing just for something.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.