“Why I Support Rick Perry” — Dr. Melissa Clouthier

Posted on October 5th, 2011

Dr. Melissa Clouthier, a widely-read and well-respected conservative blogger, wrote a great piece on her support of Rick Perry to get America working again:

Rick Perry will be the next President of the United States if I have anything to do with it.
Who am I? I’m a mom, a doctor, a business owner, a former Michigander, Californian and New Yorker, a conservative with a libertarian streak, a Tea Party attender and reporter, a blogger, an activist, and for 14 years, a Texan.

Dr. Clouthier is also one of the most prolific conservatives on twitter.

I live under the light hand of the Texas system–a hand that Governor Perry has done everything in his power to make lighter. He cut the size and scope of government even as the Texas population grew faster than any place in the nation. We started a business here with nothing but a credit card. You know how much money we were making a month when we first moved here fourteen years ago? Two thousand a month. Gross. With a baby. Slowly, surely, we built our business and life here. 

When we first got to Texas, my husband worked with doctors who were heavily involved in the Worker’s Comp (work injuries) and Personal Injury (car accidents) system. It was rife with abuse. There were rings of lawyers, doctors, and accident fakers who exploited the system. Governor Perry directly took on the fraud and abuse which meant taking on the trial lawyers association. In one day after the law was passed (my husband had long since gone into practice for himself and had a holistic practice), the shysters lost the whole scam. It was beautiful to behold. 

And then, this last year, Governor Perry pushed through “loser pays” on lawsuits. I cannot even tell you how much lawyers in Texas hate Rick Perry. And it’s one reason I love his record. It’s also a reason, they’ll fight tooth and nail against him nationally.

Perry has curbed malpractice judgments. So now, doctors are moving to Texas in droves. The Houston medical center is a haven of medical innovation and bold new treatments. People fly from all over the country to come here for cancer treatment and more. When a family member was diagnosed with cancer, do you know how long it took to get an appointment with the number one specialist in the world? Less than one week. I would shudder to be in Massachusetts suffering under impossibly long doctor wait times. 

Rick Perry has fought Barack Obama from day one. I don’t know how many lawsuits have been filed back and forth against the federal government, but I know there’s multiple fights with the EPA, there’s Obamacare, there’s Medicaid, there’s the border, and on and on. Other people talk about fighting President Obama. Governor Perry has gone straight at President Obama’s socialist agenda and tangled with him both rhetorically and in the courts of law.

Dr. Clouthier offers a clear distinction between Rick Perry, President Obama, and the other GOP candidates, highlighting Gov. Perry’s record and conservative resolve.

I want our president to know what it’s like to have skin in the game, to be in the military…to sacrifice. Rick Perry was a C-130 air force pilot who finished as Captain. Pilots need to make quick decisions in demanding situations..life and death decisions. 

Governor Perry is solidly anti-abortion, pro-gun-rights, anti-job killing regulations, pro-capitalist, pro-America, pro-Israel, and for economic expansion. More than being for these things, his professional walk supports these things. He doesn’t just talk or evangelize (though he does both), his record supports these principles. 

I believe that Governor Perry can bring the success that his administration facilitated in Texas to America. The Obama-Keynesian experiment has been an abject failure. What’s the alternative? A mushy Mitt Romneyesque big government Republicanism that expands the power of the government just at a slower rate? A rhetorical flourish from a businessman with no legislative experience?

 Read Dr. Clouthier’s full write-up here.

As I read Dr. Clouthier's full article, I was sitting here thinking she speaks for a lot of us who have witnessed what Rick Perry has done in Texas.  Even black Texas Democrats are saying he is not the least bit racist so what gives with some of our attack dog candidates who ignore facts?  Would they rather scare senior citizens like Romney or declare that they won't support Perry because a rock makes him racist like Cain?  Just like on Gardisil when Bachmann wouldn't let it go.  What's with our candidates who cannot seem to get it through their head that Obama is the enemy?

When Obama came to Texas this week, he was greeted with an ad by Perry.  This week Romney was at The Villages in Florida scaring senior citizens on what Perry would do for social security.  Unlike Romney who has flip flopped BTW, Perry understands the problem younger people are facing with the Social Security scheme.  Never has Gov Perry advocated that current recipients or those near retirement would have their benefits changed.  That doesn't stop Romney from lying and saying he does.

I still haven't recovered from Herman Cain going on Hannity, discovering the truth about the rock and refusing to apologize to Governor Perry.  Is this what happens when you were a Romney supporter in 2008 and now running in the race with him.  You forget your integrity because this sure shocked me out of Cain.  Cain has no Government experience at all so why is he running when we need someone that understands what it is going to take and how the bureaucracy works?  Who got Cain in the race and why?  Was it to run interference for Romney because that looks to be what is happening?

We have to take a stand that we will accept no more candidates being chosen by the elites and the media.  Another tainted debate out of Fox News like Orlando and Fox should never be allowed to moderate a debate again.  After you learn what happened from Howard Kurtz with the facts of the biased Fox debate, then Fox News people along with Roger Ailes have a real problem with integrity and credibility.

There are some so-called conservative sites who have also been playing right along with Fox News in trying to push candidates who are not conservative or have little to no experience.  Why?  Who is pulling their chains and what would be gained to have a candidate like Romney who is not a conservative or Cain with no experience when we know Cain endorsed Romney in 2008?   I shudder to think what it would be like as Romney is not conservative.  Might be the biggest bait and switch ever.  If Cain is conservative, how could he endorse Romney in 2008?  Will someone answer that question?

All the answers go back to the elitist, insider Republicans who want to choose our candidate who would enhance their bottom lines the most and could care less about what happens to the Country if what we are witnessing is an example.  The attacks with lies and innuendos against Governor Perry are so far over the top that they leave a lot of us wondering why so much vitriol from fellow Republicans toward a sitting Governor of a state that is doing very well compared to the rest.  Whatever the reason it is not something I want to keep witnessing out of Republicans but we don't see it stopping with Rove and Ailes in the background pulling puppet strings.  This is hurting Republicans as a whole and that one group doesn't seem to care.

Filibuster 'reform' Dead but AmeriPAC Still Wants Money to Defeat Reid's Plan to Destroy the Filibuster

UPDATE:  After further research when we received the same email from World Net Daily, we decided to do some more investigation and discovered two PACs.  The first PAC is American Political Action Committee (AIRPAC) #C99002396 we found after going to the AmeriPAC website and found the number listed on the bottom of the page and they had this PAC since 1980 and are conservative.  The AmeriPAC we found using that acronym at the FEC is AmeriPAC:  The Fund for a Greater America #C002711338 and very Democrat.  When you search for American Political Action Committee, a whole host of sites comes up and buried in there is AmeriPAC with the correct number. 

Should have checked it out completely but using an acronym of the PAC for search is done frequently.  Are Democrats now picking acronyms and adding a few words to confuse people because it certainly confused us and we have been following PAC contributions for years.  My recommendation is to not only check out FEC contributions but now check out their websites before you give one penny. 

What you read below is when we thought AmeriPAC was a Democrat PAC following the search on the FEC database.  We decided to leave up the initial post to show how easy it is to be fooled by these PACs using the same acronyms.  The one thing that stands is the fact this filibuster change rule died last night but AmeriPAC wants donations and for everyone to buy a book so my premise that these PACs are out for money even after something has happened stands.  We apologize to the ACU for thinking they were sending out paid email from a Democrat PAC.

Recommend the FEC have a link to all PACs alphabetical by name with their number. Maybe they do but I couldn't find it -- you have to search by name of the PAC off the main link. 

Anyone for cleaning up the FEC to make it user friendly?

******

Started out this post complaining about PACs like AmeriPAC who asks for money after it is too late to have any impact which has always made no sense.  The Filibuster Reform bill died last night with the adjournment of the Senate but that didn't stop AmeriPac from asking for money to stop it this morning:

Reid To Destroy GOP By Filibuster!
Reid Pushing For A Vote This Week!

ALERT: Dictator Harry Reid is pushing a new rule to give liberals carte blanche power to pass any bill they want - whether the American people like it or not!

This was not the first time AmeriPAC has sent out emails like this.  I usually just delete their emails but this time I decided to follow my own link below to the FEC and check out how AmeriPAC was connected and to my shock discovered they gave to Democrats who were running for Congress along with Democrat Congressional Committees.  Talk about non-truth in advertising.

There is a a searchable campaign data base at the FEC so if you put in the name of the PAC in search, you should be able to find out how many donations they received and how they spent those donations. I decided to follow this link for AmeriPAC and it turned up their donations were given to Democrat Congressional candidates and committees:  Blue Dog Democrat PAC, DNCC, and familiar Democrats like Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) and Jason Altmire (D-PA), Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), and Alan Grayson (D-FL) for starters. Don't know if this link will take you to the list or if it will time out but it is worth a try: http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/com_supopp/2009_C00271338-- at that link you see contributions to Democrats running for the House in 2010.

AmeriPAC is sending out their emails to Conservatives like us looking for donations -- will bet money some people will be fooled with their rhetoric because it was sent out by info@conservative.org from the ACU when actually AmeriPAC is a Democrat PAC.  Why would the ACU send out an email for a Democrat PAC?  Most likely they never bothered to check out the PAC as we would bet it was more important to get paid to send out the email which gives the group credibility then to spend time checking them out.  We didn't didn't send them money but we also didn't check them out until this morning.  Lesson Learned -- check out every PAC that asks for donations in email.

We have lost track of how many times PACs like AmeriPAC have asked for money to stop something when it is already defeated/passed or to ask for money for campaign ads the night before the election so they can go on the air. People need to be very careful when donating to a PAC and check out how a PAC spends its money before donating. All these scare tactics to get money should be a tip off.  Now we will follow our own advice and check out every PAC that sends an email.  Who knows how many other PACs we are getting emails from give to Democrats.

In contrast to asking for money to lead the effort against Reid's attempt to change the rules for filibuster, we have the real story from Byron York of the Washington Examiner below that details the quiet death for the filibuster 'reform' ended last night.

In Senate, a quiet death for filibuster 'reform'
By: Byron York 01/26/11 10:10 PM
Chief Political Correspondent

Lost in the hubbub over President Obama's State of the Union speech was the quiet death of liberal Democratic hopes to "reform" the Senate filibuster. Those hopes officially expired at 10:20 p.m. Tuesday, as lawmakers prepared the leave the Capitol after the president's speech, when the Senate adjourned for the first time this year.

For months, some Democrats had been working on a plan to use a parliamentary maneuver called the "nuclear option" to put an end to minority Republicans' ability to block Democratic initiatives. Under that scenario, on the first day of its session -- and only on the first day -- the Senate would be able to change its rules regarding filibusters with a simple majority vote. Normally, it takes 67 votes to change the Senate's rules, but on the first day, Democrats believed, they could kill the filibuster with just a 51-vote majority.

Of course, the first day the Senate was in session was January 3. Most people would assume that such first-day changes, even if they were possible, would have to be made on that day. But in the Senate, "first day" can be a flexible term. So when the Senate finished business on January 3, Majority Leader Harry Reid did not adjourn the body, which would have meant the end of the day. Instead, Reid declared the Senate in recess, which meant that it remained, in technical Senate terms, in its "first day" until whenever Reid chose to call an adjournment.

Through January 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 -- through all those days the Senate was in recess and therefore still officially in its "first day." That meant liberal Democrats could continue to maneuver and negotiate ways to end the filibuster and, if they could find 51 senators willing to go along with their scheme, take a vote on the Senate's "first day."

Furious negotiations went on behind the scenes. The Democrats' anti-filibuster wing, led by Sen. Tom Udall, tried to muster support for the effort to kill, or at least substantially weaken, the filibuster. Udall wasn't, of course, trying to persuade Republicans to go along; all GOP senators opposed the idea. Rather, Udall and his allies were trying -- and, it turns out, failing -- to convince 51 Democrats to put an end to the filibuster. By Tuesday, it was clear they had failed. After the State of the Union, Reid adjourned the Senate, and the 22-day "first day" was over.

The filibuster was untouched; nothing has been done to it. "Literally nothing," says a Republican Hill source.

Excerpt: Read more at the Washington Examiner

NOTE: Updated to show that the email of the group who sent out the AmeriPAC email is the American Conservative Union.