Rick Perry’s Defense Of 1988 Al Gore Endorsement Runs Into Reality
EmailABC News’ Michael Falcone reports:
As he has risen to the top of national Republican presidential polls over the last few weeks, Rick Perry has been forced to confront his past — including the years he spent as a Democrat.
In particular, Perry has been fielding uncomfortable questions about his support for Al Gore in the 1988 presidential race. Perry, who did not switch to the Republican Party until 1989, served as a high-profile Texas supporter of Gore’s presidential bid.
More than two-decades later, as the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination, Perry frequently cites Gore’s support of the Strategic Defense Initiative, a Ronald Reagan-era anti-ballistic missile proposal that later came to be known as Star Wars.
“I was a Democrat in my days in the Legislature in the 80′s and I was under the false idea that somehow or another that conservative Democrats could save the Democrat Party. They couldn’t,” Perry said in an interview with conservative talk show host Sean Hannity on Tuesday. “Al Gore appeared to be the most conservative — a strong Strategic Defense Initiative guy — and frankly we thought that he would be the most conservative Democrat. You, know, we were wrong.”
Last weekend, at a campaign appearance in Ottumwa, Iowa, Perry called Gore a “strong Strategic Defense Initiative proponent.”
But Gore’s support for the Strategic Defense Initiative while he was running for president in the late 1980′s was not nearly as enthusiastic as Perry implies.
In fact, just weeks before Gore launched his presidential bid in the summer of 1987, he dismissed the defense proposal as “an electronic Astrodome over the United States” in an interview with the Associated Press.
In a January 1988 interview with Florida’s St. Petersburg Times, Gore was asked whether he would support increasing research funds for the initiative. His response: no way.
“I oppose absolutely any plan for development or deployment of the Strategic Defense Initiative system,” Gore said. “Research on SDI should be confined to a strict interpretation of the ABM treaty. The focus of this research should be to assure that we have a state-of-the-art understanding of the basic science and technology that could be relevant to defense.”
And a few months later, in April 1988, Gore was quoted in the Washington Post as saying that the Strategic Defense Initiative was wrong-headed.
“‘I’m sure that President Reagan sincerely believes he is acting with the best of purposes in looking to SDI as a way to permanently end the threat of mutual nuclear annihilation,” Gore said. “But he is wrong — wrong because SDI is not feasible, wrong because it would entail exorbitant costs and, most important, wrong because it would make the possibility of a nuclear first-strike more likely.”
In the years since, and particularly now that he is a presidential candidate, Perry has taken pains to disavow his past support for Gore, saying that he did not know about the future vice president’s views on the environment. But Perry has continued to use the Strategic Defense Initiative as justification for his endorsement more than 20 years ago.
The Perry campaign declined to comment.
Best Commencement Speeches of 2012 
Joe Biden Recalls Death of Wife, Daughter
Rick Perry looks like just another phony politician willing to say anything, do anything, and try anything to win. I can’t believe the positions he has held, like seceding from the union, his belief that we should not allow citizens to elect senators, his belief that we should not have ANY income tax, his threat to try the Fed Chairman for treason, and the list goes on.
These are far out positions that can’t be what he truly believes but are merely red meat topics for his base.
If he really believes these things he’s too looney to sit in the Oval Office!
Posted by: Nick Balandiat | August 31, 2011, 8:30 pm 8:30 pm
I agree. Just another politician. I’ll write in a candidate before I’d vote for either him or Obama.
Posted by: newcountryman | September 1, 2011, 8:48 am 8:48 am
If in 2008 ABC, et al. had subjected Mr. Obama to the same level of nitpicking scrutiny they are now giving Perry, Obama might not be president now. The truth is, the big boys of the media weren’t the least bit interested in digging more deeply than Obama’s books.
Posted by: Tim T. | September 1, 2011, 10:30 am 10:30 am
Nick, I do believe that you’ve misrepresented Perry’s position on every topic you listed.
Just as a single example: the 17th amendment undid one of the major pillars of the separation of powers found in the Constitution. Originally, the states were supposed to have enough power to balance federal power — to keep the fedgov from spinning out of control. The Senate was designed to give the states *as states* a say in how the fedgov was run. The House of Reps was meant to be the voice of the common folks like us. The Constitution intended the House, the Senate and the Presidency to represent competing interests that would keep one another in check. The 17th Amendment upset that balance, essentially stripping states of their ability to act as a check on federal power grabs. Is this a good thing? That’s what Perry is railing against.
Posted by: Tim T. | September 1, 2011, 10:39 am 10:39 am
Told ya so…so if Gore was really already on record as not supporting SDI, why did Perry like him so much to be his campaign chairman in Texas? And the far-right wants to annoint this guy over the pragmatic Romney??? Clue GOP. If you want the White House back, nominate Romney. If you want to stand for your damned “conservative principles” then nominate anyone else. You will force all the moderates in the blue and purple states to vote for Obama and you will get him for a second term. I’m betting that will happen, and since I did predict all 50-states right on the electoral map last time, I’m going to bet that way again at this juncture.
Posted by: Troy Wood | September 1, 2011, 5:58 pm 5:58 pm
He also supported forced vaccines, the trans texas corridor, HillaryCare, and doubled Texas’s spending.
Posted by: Ron | September 1, 2011, 7:42 pm 7:42 pm
Seriously, the only candidate that I am supporting who has a CONSISTENT voting record for the past 30 years is Congressman Ron Paul. He is for the PEOPLE. Stop voting for established candidates like Perry. LOOK AT THE OTHER REPUBLICANS VOTING RECORDS. The other Republican candidates only serve the special interest groups. WAKE UP PEOPLE. RON PAUL 2012.
Posted by: ben | September 2, 2011, 1:38 pm 1:38 pm
“The Perry campaign declined to comment.” Perry is declining comments on most of his history.
Posted by: newz4i | September 3, 2011, 11:07 am 11:07 am
As with Bachmann Perry Talks the talk but takes the stimulus money. He cannot erase his damage he has done by shooting of his mouth over Texas seccession or his support of Al Gore.
Outside of the voluntarily uninformed whose only qualification requirements would be “cowboy essense” there needs to be a nation of voters concerned not just with defeating Obama, but with repairing the damage to america and restoring the faith in washington
Ron Paul in 2012
Posted by: ruff karver | September 5, 2011, 8:11 am 8:11 am
This just another one of many attempts to take Rick Perry down in feigned deferrence to Romney. The left (this absolutely includes the MSM who, no matter how bad a president Obama is, still believe in the Big Brother agenda) believes Romney will be easier to beat than Perry. Everything should be analyzed with that pretext in mind.
Posted by: VRWC1 | September 6, 2011, 1:40 pm 1:40 pm
TO: Tim T.
RE: “Nick, I do believe that you’ve misrepresented Perry’s position on every topic you listed”
I was referring to positions that Perry spelled out in his book. Perry will tell folks on the campaign trail to “READ MY BOOK” when asked about his positions.
As for directly electing Senators. Well I suppose you are a Republican and as of this momment Republicans CONTROL more state government so if the 17th amendment were gone Republicans would control more seats in the Senate.
So it doesn’t surprise me you would support this (if you’re a Republican – which I strongly suspect).
As it stands altering the constitution is tough…for good reasons. But hey you want to change things go right ahead.
I don’t think you’ll have much luck in the long term.
Now back to Perry.
If you think I “Nick, I do believe that you’ve misrepresented Perry’s position on every topic you listed”
Then read Perry’s book.
Posted by: Nick Balandiat | September 18, 2011, 8:54 pm 8:54 pm