Morning Examiner: Perry vs the Entitlement Apologists Romney, Bachmann and Liberals

What a group to align yourself with as a Republican candidate for President -- Center for American Progress who tries to scare senior citizens on social security to get votes.  Looks like Romney has not left the politics he had as a one term Governor in MA behind.

The real Bachmann is now starting to come through as well.  She is from liberal Minnesota, was a Democrat at one time which never gets mentioned, and loves pork and earmarks.  She tried to spin the farm subsidies which appear on on her federal report,  her husband's subsidies for his therapy clinic, and now we find out that she likes social security just the way it is as long as it gets her votes.  She is more than willing to scare senior citizens to get votes.  Her and Romney are alike -- whatever it takes to get votes -- throw the truth out the window.

Bachmann’s penchant for earmarks dates back to her days in the Minnesota state Senate. Despite her reputation as a fiscal conservative, from 2001-2006, then-state Senator Bachmann proposed more than $60 million in earmarks, including a $710,000 “Bond For Centerville Local Improvements Around Highway 14″ and a $40,000,000 “Bond for Lino Lakes And Columbus Township Highway Interchanges.” 

The federalist argument is also severely undercut by the fact that since joining the U.S. Congress in 2007, Bachmann has appropriated more than $3.7 million in earmarks. What is more, when Republicans sought an earmark moratorium, Bachmann pushed to exclude transportation projects from the ban. 

Bachmann may also be plagued by her involvement in a controversial pardon. In 2007,Bachmann wrote a letter requesting a presidential pardon for a convicted drug-smuggler and money-launderer named Frank Vennes. Vennes was convicted of money laundering in 1988 and pleaded no contest to a cocaine and weapons charge. Making matters worse, he and his wife donated a total of $27,600 to Bachmann’s 2006 and 2008 election.  

During an interview with The Daily Caller, Matt Kibbe, president and CEO of FreedomWorks, called her an “articulate spokesman” for the Tea Party, but added: “She doesn’t have a long list of legislative accomplishments.” 

Read more: Daily Caller

We would be willing to bet that if Mitt Romney, who went independent because of Reagan, (“I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush,” Romney retorted) who went back to Republican when he ran against Ted Kennedy in 1994 had won, he would have been the king of earmarks and pork.  All you have to do is listen to him know when he is now putting a finger in the wind to know he is NO conservative.  Romneycare in MA which is a mandate on the citizens of Massachusetts and unfortunately for the states north of them, drove more MA liberals to Maine and New Hampshire.  People of Maine have no use for the people from MA who make up a large portion of the southern part of the state.  Heard it with my own ears while visiting my daughter at Brunswick NAS in Maine.  What is there not to like as a conservative about Romney?  Almost everything!   

Romney helped raise money for Planned Parenthood and supported gay rights until it was time to run for president. He supported a bail-out bill in Michigan during the primaries before it was popular. And, while he now claims to be pro-life, he supported legalization of the “morning-after” abortion pill, RU-486. Moreover, as recently as his 2002 run for governor his platform stated:

“The choice to have an abortion is a deeply personal one. Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not the government’s.”

Of course, Romney says that his views have “evolved.” But one can strongly suspect his adaptation relates more to the evolution of political ambitions than that of conscience. Call me cynical, but unless you’ve been cloistered in an ancient monastery for the duration, I’m very suspicious of deep personal growth occurring between ages 55 and 60.

Romney opposed the Boy Scouts’ policy prohibiting homosexuals from serving as scoutmasters and prevented the organization from participating publicly in the 2002 Olympics. Then the Boston Globe wrote in 2005, “Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters (75%) of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents – including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights.”

The problems with Romneycare are well known: Mitt argued that Massachusetts needed to reform its health-care system because the uninsured were placing huge strains on the state’s emergency rooms and the rest of the population had to pick up the tab for the free-riders, and that was driving up Massachusetts health costs. So, as a famous can-do technocrat, he looked at the problem and came up with a can-do technocratic solution. Three years later, everyone was insured, but emergency-room use was higher than ever, and 70 percent of those newly insured were all but entirely subsidized by the state, and Massachusetts residents were paying 30 percent more for their health care than the U.S. average, and Boston had the longest wait time in the nation to see a new doctor.  

Check out more facts on the The Romney RINO: Scorecard from the klsouth blog. 

The keywords of the day put together by Karl Rove is that Romneycare is nothing like Obamacare.  Tell that to the people of MA where doctors are fleeing the state.  This is who Bachmann has now aligned herself?

Guess they both missed the part about the social security system is going bankrupt rapidly.  In order to do guarantee younger people anything from social security, it needs fixed.  Maybe they didn't miss that social security is going bankrupt and are just like the Democrats willing to scare senior citizens with their lies about social security and now Rick Perry to get votes.

How many times do people have to inform senior citizens that their benefits will not be affected if they are currently getting social security or if they are over 50?  Why is that so hard to understand?  Because Democrats and now two Republican candidates want to scare them for votes.  What kind of candidates are Romney and Bachmann to join the liberals to scare senior citizens to try and make Rick Perry who spoke the truth the bogeyman?  Shows they will say and do anything for votes.

For Romney and Bachmann to take this tact shows it really is all about politics with those two in what looks to be a coordinated effort.  Did Romney (Rove) find his stooge to join him or is dangling VP in front of Pawlenty  since Pawlenty endorsed Romney today.  One of our problems  we had with Pawlenty running for President was that even though he was a nice guy, as Governor he seemed to be a caretaker for the MN government most of the time with no new and innovative ideas to make government work better.  Did Romney infer an offer of the Vice President slot to Pawlenty -- he thought he was going to be McCain's VP in 2008.  First he endorsed McCain and now Romney.  That is all you need to know if you are a conservative.

Bachmann also has an ad coming out from her Super PAC against Perry on immigration just like Romney.  Both of those candidates do not have a clue about the Texas border but they don't care as long as they score points against Rick Perry -- why let the facts get in the way.

Wonder what the Tea Party thinks of Bachmann now on the same side as Mitt Romney and the Center for American Progress. Those two are too weak to to stand up and admit the truth, so they go on the attack for Perry telling the truth hoping it will bring in votes which is right out of the Karl Rove playbook.

Morning Examiner: Perry vs the entitlement apologists 

By Conn Carroll 

At last week’s Reagan Library Republican presidential debate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney cast his lot with decades of Democratic demagogues and attacked Texas Gov. Rick Perry for speaking the truth about Social Security. The Romney campaign made it clear before, during, and after the debate that Perry’s accurate description of Social Security as a “Ponzi scheme” should disqualify him from the race. The George Soros funded Center for American Progress quickly echoed the Romney campaign’s message.   

Now it appears that Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., wants to join Romnney and his new liberal allies in attacking Perry on entitlement spending. An anonymous Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., aide tells The Examiner‘s Byron York: “Clearly she feels differently about the value of Social Security than Gov. Perry does. She strongly disagrees with his position on that, and it’s clearly not something that’s going to sit well with the people of Florida and Iowa and South Carolina and many of the early states, where there is a large population of seniors who rely heavily on Social Security. For [Perry] to scare them is wrong.” 

The only people trying to scare seniors are the Romney and Bachmann campaigns aided by leftist groups like the Center for American Progress. Perry has never said he wants to abolish Social Security or cut benefits for current seniors. That Romney and Bachmann are so quick to reach for this page from the liberal campaign playbook on entitlement spending is disheartening. We will see how the Tea Party crowd at tonight’s CNN debate welcomes these developments. 

Source:  Washington Examiner

We do not believe that conservatives for a minute are fooled by Romney and now the faux Tea Party person Bachmann who believes the entitlement program social security is okay.  Had a hunch when she formed the Tea Party Caucus in the House that it was only for her political future.  The House TP Caucus doesn't meet, doesn't take a position on bills, and has no coherent message.  All you have to do is compare the House and Senate Tea Party Caucus' to see that the Senate has an active caucus with members who take a stand but then none of them are running for President while the House TP Caucus is mostly a joke which has not left their members very happy.

Welcome to the world of Romney who most have considered a moderate for years and still do and Bachmann, the opportunist who now has joined Romney in saying and doing anything to get elected.  The rate these two are going they are using up all the background the Democrats had ready to throw.  Is this a general election or a Republican Primary -- Romney and Bachmann sound more like Democrats -- liberal ones -- by the day!

Rick Perry at the debate says Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme -- MSNBC Chris Matthews agrees

When I logged on to Hot Air this morning, I almost fainted to see that Chris Matthews was agreeing with Governor Perry that social security is a ponzi scheme.  Knew others would, but Chris Matthews would have been almost my last guess.  Had to read this twice to be sure I read it right.  Didn't have the stomach to watch the video even if I agreed with what he was saying.  You can view the video at Hot Air.  I am still in shock about his words:

Chris Matthews first put forth what he thought Social Security was originally intended to be: “You pay for it while you work. When you retired and have no other form of income, this will help you out. In fact, a lot were impoverished in the old days without Social Security. It’s a great anti-poverty program. But then people started to live past 65. Even the great Franklin Roosevelt didn’t make it to 65. In those days, if you made it to 65, you were lucky. You got a few bucks on Social Security.” 

Then he put forth what it has become: “Today, lots of people fortunately make it past 65,” he said. “They live into their 80s and 90s. They’re still getting checks. The system doesn’t work that way anymore. It’s not as healthy as it once was. So, how does a Republican deal with the fact it is a Ponzi scheme in the sense that the money that’s paid out every day is coming from people who have paid in that day. It’s not being made somewhere.” 

Does anyone honestly believe that Karl Rove is not pulling candidate Romney's strings now?  It has had the fingerprints of Rove all along but site after site has figured out that Rove is the puppet master for Romney -- he pulls the strings and Romney speaks.   This latest attack on Perry by Rove and Romney on his words about the ponzi scheme are backfiring.  Someone had to tell the truth and Romney's comments that “Under no circumstances would I ever say, by any measure, it’s a failure. It is working for millions of Americans” didn't go over well.

It has been a failure from Day One when the money people paid into social security was put in general revenue for the Congress and President to spend at their whim.  It has never been in a lock box like some Americans have been led to believe as they have been lied to by politicians.  That is epic failure that this money was sent to the Government for the general revenue fund not to be put in a fund that the Federal Government could get interest on the eventual recipients money.  Can someone explain to me why that is not a failure of social security on the part of the Federal Government?

This is like reliving 2008 all over again and in some cases like reliving 1980 when Bush 41 would attack Reagan.  Close my eyes and I can remember the attacks by Bush 41.  Doesn't Rove know any other way to operate except being nasty?   Romney attacks on Perry are increasing with vitriol as Rove and Romney see that this attack on the ponzi scheme didn't have the desired affect so now they are doubling down.

Democrats won't need any ammunition as Karl Rove and Mitt Romney are providing the ammunition they can use against Perry which won't work for them either.  Most adults are not as dumb as they think we are and just want the truth.  If you don't want the truth, then you most likely are not voting Republican.  What they don't understand is that this Rove strategy we saw against McCain wasn't liked in 2000 and is liked less now.  In 2008, after Romney finally threw in the towel, he promised to help McCain by campaigning in Michigan and other states.  He never kept his word to Senator McCain so why would we think the recent flip flopper on Global Warming would keep his word now.

As David Freddoso points out, Karl Rove and Mitt Romney are definitely not on the same page as Ronald Reagan but then I was reminded today that Romney became an Independent during the Reagan/Bush years.  Now he wants to claim the Reagan mantle? Romney who dissed both Reagan and Bush 41 now holds on to every word of a man in his 80's.  Know there must be some word I am missing for that.

Update: David Freddoso gives Perry “two cheers” for essentially echoing Ronald Reagan and a generation of Republican leaders: 

So why are people like Karl Rove and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney attacking Texas Gov. Rick Perry for repeating the same truth that Reagan and countless other Republicans have spoken for decades? In his book “Fed Up!”, and then again at Wednesday’s Republican debate at the Reagan Library, Perry rightly labeled Social Security as a “Ponzi scheme.” Yes, it’s a provocative phrase but the Texas governor understands that most Americans have had it with mealy-mouthed political talk. 

But instead of supporting Perry’s courage in speaking frankly about entitlements, the Romney campaign wants conservatives to believe that Perry’s “Ponzi”comment automatically disqualifies him from being the GOP nominee. If Republican primary voters buy that argument, it will be a disaster for our country’s fiscal future. The big three entitlements, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, add hundreds of billions to our federal debt every year. And the drain they are inflicting on our economy will only get worse. Why not speak bluntly about this fact? 

Should Perry be specific about how he proposes to fix Social Security and insure the benefits of those who are or are nearing retirement? Absolutely — and no doubt he will in the days ahead. But so should all the Republican candidates, as well as Democrats like President Obama. Anything less is just business-as-usual gibberish from the professional politicians in Washington.

Let’s recall what Perry actually said (bold by Hot Air), PERRY: 

Well, I think any of us that want to go back and change 70 years of what’s been going on in this country is probably going to have a difficult time. And rather than spending a lot of time talking about what those folks were doing back in the ’30s and the ’40s, it’s a nice intellectual conversation, but the fact is we have got to be focused on how we’re going to change this program. And people who are on Social Security today, men and women who are receiving those benefits today, are individuals at my age that are in line pretty quick to get them, they don’t need to worry about anything. But I think the Republican candidates are talking about ways to transition this program, and it is a monstrous lie. It is a Ponzi scheme to tell our kids that are 25 or 30 years old today, you’re paying into a program that’s going to be there. Anybody that’s for the status quo with Social Security today is involved with a monstrous lie to our kids, and it’s not right.

So yes, Perry was talking about changing the program, and not eliminating it. He will have to follow up with a plan to do so, of course — but as Freddoso writes, Perry’s challenge will now force everyone else to do so as well. Isn’t that what elections are about? 

Excerpt:  Read More at Hot Hair 

Because of snippy remarks from some other candidates about Governor Perry returning to Austin in daylight to see the devastation with the Bastrop wildfire which caused him to miss the DeMint debate, I posted this on a site (have added a few things today) about my feelings on Mitt Romney who seems to feel he is entitled to the nomination along with Karl Rove and Bush 41 who are pushing him:

As everyone knows, Governor Perry has been involved with his responsibilities as Governor with the massive fire that hit Bastrop along with other fires since he returned to Austin on Sunday afternoon to survey the damage. 

Romney has been prepping for debates and running for President since January 2007 when he decided not to run for reelection as Governor of MA. That is over 4 1/2 years of constant running for President yet when watching the debate on my DVR this morning, I didn’t see him as a clear winner but someone who sticks their finger in the wind to see which way conservatives are headed today. We already know he flip flopped on global warming recently. He is way too establishment and supported by Karl Rove all these years for me. 

The job growth under Romney as Governor was close to zero yet he was on the attack against Perry when he has been unemployed since early January 1997. 

I want a candidate who will go in and shake-up DC not be the status quo for the weak dollar that the Ivy League Presidents seem famous. I want a fighter not an establishment type from the Bush 41 camp which is who Romney is after endorsing Kay Baily against Rick Perry trying to take him out so he couldn’t run against the Bush 41 favorite son Romney. 

Not to mention Romney in 2006 as head of the RGA chose the consultant for the Independent Bush 41 candidate Rylander for his consultant. Imagine the head of the RGA with a consultant from an independent race trying to take out a sitting Governor. Didn’t like her son as press secretary either.  

Considering what Governor Perry has been through the last few days, I think he did an excellent job against others who have been through the debates especially Romney and Paul who debated in 2008 as well. Do I want a debater or a leader? I will take Perry who is a leader hands down over a man who calls himself unemployed and has been running for President for since 2006. 

As I was  putting this post together, it hit me that what we saw with Governor Perry at the debate Wednesday night was the real deal not someone who had been using his time before the debate to prep his answers.  He had been out in the field surveying damage from the wildfires and meeting with various heads of agencies to get some help for the people who had been affected.  There were no stand ins for several days for other debaters so he could prep -- the Governor didn't have time for that as he had a real job to do as Governor that affected people's lives. 

On the other hand, you have Romney who Rove has been prepping and it makes you go -- why would I want someone who has to be prepped who has been running for over 4 1/2 years versus the real deal?  Whose ideas are Romney using?  His own or Rove's?  

We will stick with the real deal Rick Perry to be our next President and Romney can go build his   $12M dollar mansion in LaJolla, CA.  Then Rove can go on Fox and continue to pontificate how he knows what everyone is going to say or do as he continues to attack Rick Perry.  He is looking smaller by the day with these attacks.  Don't know what he hopes to gain but I know plenty of people who were part of the Bush campaigns who want nothing to do with him.  His dirty tactics have worn thin. 

We are looking forward to the reaction of more people as they learn to know who Rick Perry is and start to understand he tells it like it is not the usual sugarcoating to buy votes and then flip when the person gets in office.  You know what you have with Governor Perry -- he is the 'real' deal from Paint Creek, Texas, an A&M grad, and former C-130 pilot who is now the Governor of Texas where the economy is good and job creation is ongoing.     

IBD Editorial: Romney's Doomed '3rd Rail' Attack on Perry

Is it possible since Romney has Bush 41 and Rove on his side, that he and his supporters think all of the Bush people are going to support Romney?  How else can you explain the Romney people giving Marc Thiessen, a former Bush 43 speech writer, their plan of action?  If so, that was stupid.

Conservative are more galvanized then I have seen them since 1980 in wanting to turn the Country around and want someone who understands what they are going through on a daily basis with this horrible economy.  In 1980 it was high interest rates with inflation.  Now it is lack of jobs, raises, and inflation with groceries and gasoline even if the powers at be in Government won't admit it as they took them out of the inflation criteria.  Go buy groceries and see prices going up almost every week and then tell us there is no inflation.

This is what happens when someone very wealthy runs for office -- they are out of touch with most Americans who work for a living to buy a home, a car, pay utility bills, buy groceries and gas for the car while hoping to have enough left over for cell phones and cable TV.  Vacations were pretty much out of the picture for a lot of people this year with the high cost of gas since taking a family on a trip by air is expensive not to mention the cost hotels and meals.

Romney is getting ready to tear down a 3,000 sq foot home on the beach in La Jolla, CA to build a $12M mansion.  I don't care if he builds a $20M mansion, but trying to tell most of us he understands as he is unemployed himself is a total insult.  With those comments, it became personal for me after what I have seen happen in the last few years.  Want no part of a candidate who builds a $12M mansion and compares himself to someone who is really unemployed.

Is Romney so clueless that he doesn't understand young people are upset that Social Security they have paid into over the years is most likely either not going to be there, or they will receive a small pension if something is not done.  Most young people understand Social Security needs action not just bandaids and words to ensure solvency.  Romney is against raising the cutoff for how long people have to pay into social security which is now $106,000.  Why?  He calls it a tax increase -- most of us call it fair.  If someone makes $105,000 and has to pay social security on his whole income, why doesn't someone making $250,000 a year have to pay social security on his whole income?  

Any way you slice it, Social Security is a ponzi scheme for young workers whether Romney wants to admit the truth or not.  Commentary Magazine has this to say:

Whatever the case, on substance, Perry is quite right. For younger people, Social Security is almost the definition of a Ponzi scheme. It takes money from the current generation in order to pay out money to support (among others) current retirees. Younger workers are led to believe they are putting money away for their retirement when in fact, they’re giving money away to others. There is no “trust fund” and no “lock box” – and because of demographics the younger generation cannot count on anything like the support past generations have received.

Romney attacks on Perry on the 3rd rail are going to backfire like the attacks on the letter that he sent to Hillary Clinton when he was the Texas Ag Commissioner:

In a letter to Clinton, who is now U.S. Secretary of State, Perry wrote: “I think your efforts in trying to reform the nation’s health care system are most commendable.” 

“I would like to request that the task force give particular consideration to the needs of the nation’s farmers, ranchers, and agriculture workers, and other members of rural communities,” Perry continued, noting his administration’s focus on economic development for rural Texans. 

“Rural populations have a high proportion of uninsured people, rising health care costs, and often experience lack of services.”… 

Asked by TheDC about the 1993 letter, Perry’s presidential campaign defended it, saying the full scope of Clinton’s healthcare plan was not yet known when Perry signed it. 

“You need to read the letter,” top Perry political strategist Dave Carney told The Daily Caller. 

“He praised her efforts in trying to tackle the issue and urged her not to overlook rural Americans. The letter was at the onset of her efforts before she proposed anything. No one could have imagined the horrible monstrosity she cooked up, in fact not to be outdone until ObamaCare years later.”

Rove has lost it after all those years inside the beltway if he thinks that Romney is going to pick up steam and votes by wanting Social Security to remain the status quo or getting someone to release this letter to Hillary that shows Perry was looking out for the farmers and ranchers.

In fact, with all of Romney's flip flops in recent months he is reminding us of another Massachusetts candidate, John Kerry, who was legendary when it came to flip flopping on the issues.  Romney is rapidly closing in on him.  Not only is Romney sounding like the flip flopper John Kerry but when Romney launched his campaign on April 11, 2011, he stole the slogan of his campaign from Kerry:

Mitt Romney's launched his exploratory committee today with a dynamic new slogan: "Believe in America." 

If that slogan sounds a little familiar, that's because it was the title of John Kerry's cross-country tour in August of 2004, as CNN reported a two-week, 3,500-mile, coast-to-coast trip, dubbed the 'Believe in America' tour, that will take them to 21 states and 40 cities."

Romney and his people cannot even come up with an original slogan using the one for Kerry instead.  Tell me again why he is running for President.

Romney is also sounding more like Bill Clinton by the day with putting his finger in the wind to see which way it is blowing on Global Warming and now Social Security and then doing a flip flop.  Add his 'me too' mentality like now saying he may go into Iowa after dissing their straw poll in order to take on Perry in Iowa is laughable.  He wanted no part of Iowa but now may challenge Perry in Iowa?  Good Luck with that in a farm state like Iowa.  What is he going to do offer Iowans more of an ethanol subsidy and make the rest of the country mad?

The Romney campaign has the look of 2008 when he was put on his heels by McCain and never recovered.  He started grasping at straws then and is now doing the same thing.  He never should have run in 2012 when he couldn't beat McCain in 2008.  Now more people I know are even more galvanized against Romney for saying he was going to support McCain and help him win when he dropped out but he did virtually nothing in the campaign.  It is payback time!

Editorial: Romney's Doomed '3rd Rail' Attack On Perry 

Posted 06:16 PM ET 

Election '12: Mitt Romney reportedly intends to use the "third rail of politics" — touch Social Security and you die — to kill Rick Perry. But the winning strategy next year may be something novel for politicians: the truth. 

For unexplained reasons, Mitt Romney's people in New Hampshire told former George W. Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen about their grand strategy to defeat Texas Gov. Rick Perry — and the plan couldn't be more out of sync with the anger currently raging at the Republican grassroots. 

"Romney strategists are quick to note that in his book, 'Fed Up!,' Perry writes that 'By any measure, Social Security is a failure' and calls the program 'something we have been forced to accept for more than 70 years now' that was created 'at the expense of respect for the Constitution and limited government,'" Thiessen wrote in the Washington Post on Monday. 

The Romneyites promise their man "will use Perry's book to scare seniors in early-primary states with large retiree populations, such as Florida and South Carolina." And, he says, they'll charge that Perry is against the very idea of Social Security and Medicare. 

There is, dare we say, a RINO-sized problem with Romney taking this approach. The former Massachusetts governor is already at a disadvantage as the least conservative, establishment-favored major candidate in what for rank-and-file Republican voters are very anti-establishment times. 

On top of explaining away his "Obomney Care" health reform, plus flip-flops on carbon emission restrictions, the minimum wage, capital gains taxes, abortion and other issues, does Romney really want to be guardian of the big-government status quo on entitlements too? 

Perry rightly has charged that "Deceptive accounting has hoodwinked the American public into thinking that Social Security is a retirement system and financially sound, when clearly it is not." 

Perry compares it to an "illegal Ponzi scheme."Subscribe to the IBD Editorials Podcast 

He obviously knew such stark language would give ammo to opponents in a presidential run. 

"But by remaining quiet," Perry wrote in his book, "politicians are really saying they think the American people won't understand it if we share the grim details of our financial future ... Is that how we should respect our fellow citizens? By underestimating their intelligence, their desire to retire with greater stability, or their commitment to the next generation?" 

The unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare now exceed $100 trillion. Perry might just think laying out the frightful facts about entitlements to the American people is the way to the White House. 

Moreover, targeting Perry on Social Security would be yet another Romney flip-flop: In early 2008 he told Glenn Beck he supported "giving people more of their income going in, or their Social Security withdrawal going into, private accounts." 

Can Rick Perry use his high voltage rhetoric to switch that electrified "third rail of politics" to another track? 

Instead of reform-minded politicians being the ones in danger, will those who support spending as usual have to beware the voters?  

GOP Needs to Call Obama's Bluff

No way with his 50th Birthday Bash/Fundraiser looming in Chicago on 4 August will he allow social security checks to be held up.  If he does, he is dumber than we thought.  Now we are waiting for the graphic of him in the high chair throwing peas!