The Fight Is ON! – Ron Paul Slams Perry For Supporting Al Gore And Perry Retaliates

I nearly peed my pants laughing at the Perry campaign response to this ad by Paul:

The Perry campaign released this statement in response to the pummeling:

“Rep. Paul’s letter is a broadside attack on every element of President Reagan’s record and philosophy. Paul thought President Reagan was so bad, he left the GOP,” said [Perry spokesman Mark] Miner. “It will be interesting to hear Rep. Paul explain why Reagan drove him from the party at tomorrow’s debate on the grounds of the Reagan Library.”

In one part of the letter, Paul wrote, “There is no credibility left for the Republican Party as a force to reduce the size of government. That is the message of the Reagan years.”

Paul continued, “Thanks to the President and Republican Party, we have lost the chance to reduce the deficit and the spending in a non-crisis fashion. Even worse, big government has been legitimized in a way the Democrats never could have accomplished.”

Paul even went so far as to call Reaganomics, “warmed-over Keynesianism.”

The part that made me lol my pants off was the actual contents of the letter itself.

You really have to take the time to read this.

In the letter, Ron Paul explains that spending under Reagan exploded and that the administration didn’t live up to its promises to keep the debt under control. Then Ron goes on to PREDICT THE FUTURE as he explains the dangers behind exploding deficits. So in essence, the Perry campaign is saying Ron Paul is bad because HE IS TOO CONSERVATIVE

GREAT JOB PERRY

NICE COME BACK LOL

BUT THEN PERRY HAS THE GALL TO HOST THE LETTER ON HIS OWN CAMPAIGN SITE! IT'S LIKE PERRY IS ADVERTISING FOR PAUL ON HIS OWN DAMN WEB SITE!!!!! HAHAHAHAHHAHA

It's hilarious that he is calling Perry a cheerleader for Gore. Because Perry was a cheerleader in college.

I'm not a fan of this type of politics, I'd rather Ron Paul focus on his own game than just slandering Rick Perry. I prefer Ron Paul but to win people over he needs to tell them what hes all about, not what Rick Perry has done in the past.

Ron Paul is right. I never ceased to be amazed at the worship of Reagan by republicans. He was a nut! I remember those days interest on a house was +18%, while the banks got richer people suffered. He kicked all the mentally ill out of the hospitals and now they roam the streets. I just figured they rever him because they truly have no one else but he was far from good

I would like to know how much input Ron Paul has on these ads. They seem of a bit of a different stride than his mannerisms, not that they aren't good or aren't well made. He should just re-use a youtube video of him at a debate for his ad, that would probably win over more people than "the one" and "trust" which are words he never really uses to describe himself. But I understand that with only 1 minute or so to work with it's hard to get the message across. Especially when the message is more complicated than just "jobs, war, America." Or should I say jobs, war, NATO.

Bad move by Rick Perry.

Do not give Ron Paul any attention. Ron Paul is the type to disappear on his own.

Just ignore him.

reply to post by mnemeth1
I kind of have to wonder, did the Paul campaign know Perry's group would respond in this fashion and plan this ad specifically to bait them into it?

I could be missing something here, but it seems to me like this honestly could not have worked out better for the Paul team, an attack response that merely damns the republican party for how far it has drifted from its roots and blows a whole wide-open in the side of Reagan worship while confirming that Paul was one of the first to support Reagan's ESPOUSED and approvable original intents, while illustrating Paul as the true conservative here...in addition to highlighting his prescience.

Priceless...like I said elsewhere, Perry's like the goose who laid the golden egg on this one.

reply to post by Praetorius


I totally agree.

In all honesty, I think the Perry campaign would be better off simply ignoring Paul. If they respond, they run the risk of simply driving more people to the Paul campaign.

reply to post by BigBruddah


He's been telling people what he's about for years and nobody has listen. Although I think these attack ads are childish it just goes to show that Ron Paul is more determined to win then ever and is trying to reach a border audience instead of echoing to his grassroots movement. If this what it takes to get him into office and to reach the people well then so be it.

Greta find OP. I do not see this as attack or slander on Perry. Ron Paul told the truth about Perry being a Democrat and backing Gore. He is simply pointing that fact out to people who did not hear about who Perry really is.
It very well points out who the real Conservative is.

Ron Paul really is trying to show others how much more Red he is. That's unfortunate because the more he pushes partisanship the more I lose interest in him.

reply to post by Chewingonmushrooms


I think he's simply trying to demonstrate that he believes in liberty, while Perry only talks like he does.

Ron walks the walk, Perry just talks the talk.

This is exactly what Ron Paul needed to do. The media has already decided that Perry is going to win the nomination. If Ron Paul wants to get more air time, he has to give the media what they want and they want to talk about Perry.

I also think it is very funny, Perrys response that is. How does he get back at Ron Paul? He shows a letter written by Paul explaining how Paul doesn't like how presidents say one thing when they run for office and do another thing when they get in office.

Is this the way Perrys campaign is going to react when his very checkered past is brought up? I have to say that it doesn't even matter that the media has elected him for the nomination, he doesn't have a chance at getting it if that is the best he can do.

I don't see this as an attack by Paul on Perry though as many have. Since when is bringing up an opponents past considered an attack? Do they not run on their record? Are candidates supposed to ignore facts because they would make their opponents look bad? An attack, in my mind, would be a mis-representation of facts, Pauls ad simply laid out the truth of the matter, Perry was a cheerleader, Perry backed Al Gore, Perry was in Texas.

I can see why people see it that way but I just don't agree.

To the person who called Ron Pauls ad "slander"... To be slander it has to be both negative and false. It is not false, Rick Perry was Al Gores campaign chairman in 1988 for the State of Texas. No slander there, just a listing of facts.

reply to post by mnemeth1


I really really hate Perry. I hate to think what will happen if he gets elected.

I think a lot of my brothers here at ATS feel the same way.

He has way too much money backing him from very very high places.

His record is horrible as well. Even Rove is scared of him.

Something is amiss with this guy.

reply to post by mnemeth1


To be fair though I would vote RP 100 times before I vote for any other Pub candidate including the fraud Perry.

I see people sitting around a strategy table writing the soap opera all of you are foolish enough to watch.

You really believe this stuff?

cmon people.

They call them political strategists because they failed at getting sponsored into the screen writers guild.

reply to post by mnemeth1
Oh, it just keeps getting better, I'm definitely watching the debate tonight. Christian Science Monitor has covered the situation here, and I love these last bits:

Perry responded to Paul’s linking him with Mr. Gore with a news release titled, “Ron Paul’s Reagan Revisionism.”

This release points out the inconvenient truth that Paul resigned from the GOP in 1987 over frustration with then-President Reagan’s policies...

...That said, we think the Perry camp has more to answer for. On Perry’s campaign website, they provide a link to Paul’s 1987 resignation letter, and Perry aides either did not read that letter or are counting on the fact that few other people will...

...So you could argue that Paul resigned from the party because he was consistent in his beliefs – not because he didn’t like Reagan.

Oh, priceless and so very entertaining...

reply to post by BigBruddah


So if a closet democrat pretends to be a republican and runs for president as one, it would be WRONG to point that out? Ok, if you say so.

reply to post by Carseller4


Yes, that is what the mainstream media says too, just ignore him. So why should anybody believe you?

Ron Paul won't disappear, he gets more popular while Perry has peaked and has nowhere to go but down once America finds out he is very liberal and hears him speak for the first time.

reply to post by mudbeed


Perry is definitely establishment, people say Ron Paul is the illuminati's secret weapon, they've been using him to defend the constitution for over 30 years to gain peoples trust, run and lose for presidential campaigns on purpose to look like an underdog and now is his time to shine. LOL.

really now, why is perry polling at nearly 30% and paul barely at double digits?

Perry is a liberal, there is no doubt about it, his record proves everything and so does Ron Paul's.