Rick Perry to run for president, spokesman says
Texas Gov. Rick Perry speaks at the National Conference of State Legislatures Legislative Summit at the Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center in San Antonio on Wednesday, Aug. 10, 2011. / Lisa Krantz,AP Photo/San Antonio Express-News
Updated at 4:46 p.m. ET
Texas Gov. Rick Perry is running for president, a spokesman confirmed Thursday, a move certain to shake up the race for the Republican nomination much to the delight of conservatives looking for a candidate to embrace.
Perry spokesman Mark Miner said the governor would make his intentions known on Saturday while visiting the crucial early primary states of South Carolina and New Hampshire just as most of his presidential rivals compete in a test vote in another key state, Iowa.
Official word of Perry's entrance into the race came just hours before eight candidates, including Republican front-runner Mitt Romney, were to appear on stage during a nationally televised debate.
On Sunday, Perry will speak at a Republican fundraiser in Iowa for the Black Hawk County Republicans, his campaign confirmed to the CBS News earlier this week. His decision to travel to the crucial first-in-the-nation voting state signals that he plans to compete aggressively there for the Republican presidential nomination.
Perry's entry into the race is sure to draw attention away from the Iowa straw poll in Ames on Saturday, which traditionally has a significant impact on the Republican presidential race. Perry is not on the straw poll ballot.
CBSNews.com special report: Campaign 2012
The Texas governor is expected to immediately jump to the top tier of contenders for the nomination if he enters the race, in part because he has support from both the Republican establishment and the social and fiscal conservatives.
Perry, who participated last Saturday in a controversial prayer and fasting event in Houston, has spent recent weeks meeting behind closed-doors with potential donors and supporters about the possibility of a presidential run.
In a recent interview with Time magazine, Perry said that former President George W. Bush -- who preceded Perry as Texas governor -- has been advising him on the decision.
"He said, 'You'll do what's right,'" Perry said, of a June conversation with the former president. "He said, you don't want to wake up when you're 70 and go, 'I wish I had tried that. I wish I had done that.'"
Questioned about the strength of his conservative credentials, Perry said he didn't think there was "any doubt" that he was at least as conservative as every other candidate in the race - if not more so.
"I've got a record. And that record, particularly when it comes to the most important issues in this campaign, which is creating the climate of America that gives incentives to job creators to risk their capital and create jobs for our citizens, I will put that up against anybody who's running and particularly against this President we have today, whose jobs record is abysmal," he said.
Perry has never run a national campaign before, and it's unclear whether his Texas swagger and contemplation of state secession will sit well with Republican primary voters outside his state.
The narrowing GOP presidential field
Popular in Politics
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice"
- Poll: Most think IRS targeting was deliberate 151 Comments
- IRS scandal highlights leadership vacancies
- Obama: "Full focus" is on recovery from Oklahoma tornado
- Top IRS official to invoke 5th Amendment at congressional testimony
- Va. GOP candidate: Planned Parenthood "more lethal" for blacks than KKK 1119 Comments
- Former IRS chief: "I can't say" what led to IRS targeting
- Letter to a young scandalmonger
Taken from Public Records.
Think about it, especially if you are old or female, or going to school.
Percent of Population 25 and Older with a High School Diploma - 50th Per Capita State Spending on Mental Health 50th
Per Capita State Spending on Medicaid 49th
Percent of Pregnant Women Receiving Prenatal Care in First Trimester 50th
Women's Voter Registration 45th
Women's Voter Turnout 49th
Percent of Non-Elderly Women with Health Insurance 50th
Home Ownership Rate 44th
Homeowner's Insurance Affordability 46th
Personal Bankruptcy Filings Rate, Per Capita 39th
Percent of Households with Internet Access 42nd
Percent of Voting-Age Population that is Registered to Vote 43rd
Percent of Voting-Age Population that Votes 45th
Average monthly benefit for Women, Infant, and Children (WIC) recipients in Texas was $26.86, the lowest in the nation. The national average was $41.52.
And those air conditioners I know in Houston, we have people gong door to door for people who need air conditioners and on your electric bill they ask if you need help with your bill just ask .
And I know this is all done .
I think this is very short sided and their maybe a group hunting for the heads that threaten the ones that are going down for the count.
So you all that have been riding the ride better jump soon because the reck is going to be hard and may be deadly to your lively hood
Bush did make several attempts to address the pending mortgage meltdown only to come up against serious pressure from Democrats Chris Dodd and Barney Frank telling us that nothing is wrong. Bush clearly believed Dodd and Frank or enjoyed telling us that home ownership was at an all time high repeatedly. He should have gotten Fannie and Freddie to tighten up the guidelines a bit to head off the pending Mortgage Meltdown. In any case it is easy to talk after the fact about what should have been done. Clinton was the one that losened lending. Dodd/Frank fought Bush to keep it in place.
AGAIN - the garbage mortgages were written from 2002 - 2008, while the republicans were in complete control of Washington.
Dodd and Frank WERE NOT the chairmen of the senate and congressional banking committees, and as such had NO POWER to block Bush from doing anything. The only people that could have done anything were Mike Oxley - Barney Frank's predecessor, and Richard Shelby - Chris Dodd's predecessor, who both happen to have been republicans.
And Clinton cannot "loosen lending", whatever the hell that is. And Fannie and Freddie don't "write mortgages".
You clearly have NO IDEA what you're talking about.
is your thinking only limited to corporate taxes on profit ?? wow, you are more ignorant than I thought.
Still can't answer the question on how increases can affect jobs.....still thinking you know, about office machinery, which is so stupid, and distant from reality, that I'm not even going to address it.
How is it "distant from reality"?
If an employer NEEDS 5 people to staff an office, do you really think that they're not going to have ANY people working in that office because "taxes are too high"?
No dummy - if they need 5 people, they're going to hire 5 people. Not 4, not 6, but 5 - because that is what they NEED to operate the business.
"Taxes" don't factor into staffing decisions - "labor needs" do.
Your knowledge of business and employment is non-existent.
is your thinking only limited to corporate taxes on profit ?? wow, you are more ignorant than I thought.
Still can't answer the question on how increases can affect jobs.....still thinking you know, about office machinery, which is so stupid, and distant from reality, that I'm not even going to address it.
What other taxes are there, other than "taxes on profit"?
You think GE should get a TAX REFUND on $14.2 BILLION in profits?
You think Stanley Tools should pay $46,000 in corporate taxes for the ENTIRE YEAR OF 2010, simply because they moved their "headquarters" to the Cayman Islands?
Do you think that if those loopholes are closed, that Stanley is going to stop selling tools, and GE is going to eliminate the hundreds of different businesses that they operate in, from jet engines to banking?
Do you realize that if GE paid even 10% income taxes, which is about 1/3 the rate that I pay, it would lower the national debt by $1.4 BILLION?!?! And that's ONE COMPANY!!!!
Or do you not really care about the national debt?
Maybe one of you can explain the process by which tax increases create private sector jobs......since you seem convinced that tax cuts DON'T create private sector jobs......I'm curious of how tax increases would ? Please explain
Raise taxes, so companies have less money to hire....nope
Raise taxes, so people have less disposable income....nope, no jobs
Raise taxes, so the GOVERNMENT has more taxpayer money.....nope, still no private sector jobs
Rasie taxes, so the government can hand out more money for welfare and then have that welfare person buy something and THAT will created a job......fat chance
Still wondering how tax increases, creates any jobs in the private sector...explain
=======
Good question. I apologize for the verbosity but here's part of a response sent to "No More" earlier today:
"Unemployment is driving this recession and has broken the theory. It is true basic one-o-one economics asserts that lower taxes create the incentive to create jobs. The problem is they have created the incentive to create the jobs overseas. Hence, the necessity to keep the money at home and the incentives to keep those jobs here in the US and not Mainland China requires that we revisit the tax structure.
Whenever we import a product our debt is increased and when that is combined with having one of the lowest import tariffs in the world we are losing money. Before you asks; yes, you would expect the largest consumer nation on the planet to have low tariffs. However, when American companies use tax breaks and low tariffs to the detriment of the GNP we should rethink the relationship and that is not happening.
I do not know of anyone who is disagreeing with Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security being reviewed for long term stability. That recommendation has been on the table since the report in January 2010 of The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (Bowles-Simpson).
However, although the president has agreed to place these programs up for review no one trust the republican party to deal with them in a responsible manner. Nor do they believe the President will stand up to unrealistic cuts and really use a veto. How can people believe they are going to be treated fairly when entitlements are the only thing republicans are willing to put on the table of economic stability? The public does not expect anything but the worst from Republican lawmakers. The thin veneer that they are working in the best interest of America ended with the unnecessary downgrading of our credit rating.
Although you have not said no new taxes the party of Lincoln has lost sight of the need for revenue to run a government. Instead we hear the mantra of government waste can only be controlled by smaller government. The problem is that is unrealistic. We do not live in the 18th century, we live in the 21st century in a global economy. Does anybody really expect that Europe and Asia are going to sit on the sidelines while a small ineffective federal government waits for the states to make a decision that impacts the stability of the world economy?"
Yada; yada. Taking my wife out to dinner and I hope this at least answers your question in some form. Let me know and I will check in later.
Starving, you actually thought that was an answer to my question ?
Yes, it was.
What company has a machine sitting their plant, and DOES NOT hire someone to work that machine, because taxes are too high?
Starving, you actually thought that was an answer to my question ? do people usually serve you crap, and then say, "it's chocolate"....that was the biggest non-answer I've seen in a while.
Just to say "taxes don't affect" doesn't explain why your fellow libtards constantly say, "tax cuts don't create jobs" to which I posed a very intriguing question, so how do tax increases create jobs.
Who said "tax increases create jobs"?
Sure...The Dems with Barney Frank and Dodd had freddie/fannie back loans to low income people which caused the mortgage meltdown. Low income people are usually dem voters.
====
Dan are you trying to insult your own intellegence regarding what caused the mortage meltdown; are do you also want to disenfranchise every voter who lives under the poverty line who used to vote republican?
I think a thank you is owed to you by the Democratic Party because it the party of unalienable rights of the individual. My gosh think of all the votes you just lost in the trailer parks, evangelical churches, and Klan members you just dis'ed. Keep up the good work.
Still no takers.....thought so
Answered at 3:23.