E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSCOLUMBIA, S.C. -- Anita Perry said today that she could sympathize with unemployed people because her son Griffin had to resign his job at a bank in order to campaign for his father, Texas Gov. Rick Perry.
Mrs. Perry’s words came in response to David Von Schmittou, 45, who said he had lost a high-paying job during the recession and now worked odd jobs as a handyman to make ends meet.
“I’m just sympathizing. Let me tell you. Our son has resigned his job because of the federal regulations Washington has put on us,” she said. “He resigned his job two weeks ago. Because he can’t go out and campaign for his father because of SEC regulations. He’s got a wife; he’s got a job. He’s trying to start up a business. So I empathize with you."
New “pay-to-play” rules, enacted in July of 2010, prohibit financial advisors from “providing advisory services for compensation,” directly or through investments, “for two years, if the adviser or certain of its executives or employees make a political contribution to an elected official who is in a position to influence the selection of the adviser.”
According to the Perry campaign, Griffin’s position as a Deutsche Bank advisor would have banned the bank from “certain business in the state of Texas” had he been simultaneously working for his father’s campaign.
Perry spokesman Ray Sullivan confirmed that Griffin resigned from the bank a few weeks ago “ as a result of new Obama Administration policy.”
“It was impossible for him to be personally active in his father’s presidential campaign and remain employed at the bank,” Sullivan said in an email.
This isn’t the first time Griffin Perry’s employment at a financial firm has come under scrutiny.
In 2007, he was hired by UBS, one of two firms who were at the time consulting Perry’s office over the possible sale of the Texas lottery. At the time, Griffin was hired to work in the bank’s Dallas office, UBS and Morgan Stanley were both providing advice to the governor’s office, but neither had been hired to broker the sale, according to an AP report at the time
Leave a Comment:
Typically snarky First Read headline. Liberal MSNBC headline writer at work.
First of all , the person Mrs Perry was talking to was underemployed, not unemployed.
Mrs Perry did not say her condition was as bad as the underemployed person. She also used the term "empathize" as wll as sympathize.
She is right that overregulation kills jobs, whether her son's ability to keep his, or the underemployed person
Waiting till hell freezes over for snarky headlines here about the President....
Griffen should look into credit unions.
And, apply for a new identity.
Bob, were there no jobs when these corporations were regulated?
Pat, dont ask stupid questions...my native state of Moonbat achusetts is full of empty headed progressives like you.
A once great state is exporting hardworking taxpayers and importing illegal Obama relatives on the dole...
Bob, nice reply. You didn't answer my question though. Were there no jobs when these companies were regulated?
I'll answer it for you. Yes, as a matter of fact, there were all kinds of jobs, good paying jobs actually, with laws to protect the employees and consumers and the environment. After all this is America, not some third world country.
Now these corporations have you convinced that regulations hurt hiring? Nice.
Next up - voter suppression.
"Typical snarky" and "empty headed" conservative assumption that the underemployed guy lost the job due to over-regulation when their is nothing in the article to assume that is the case. What is unreasonable is to compare someone who lost their job to the un-similar situation faced by a son who has to change jobs to campaign for a presidential candidate father, which for all we know, is getting paid for those efforts through those superpac funds.
This such a crock of BS she is spouting. He resigned, he made a choice to work on his father's campaign where he will be more than amply compensated and no one will know by how much exactly....just like the Palins.
A classic example of GOP hypocrisy. Who in their right (pun intended) mind would want this whiny woman in the WH, good grief it would be a soap opera for the tabloids. Way to go Anita, showing us, it is all about you and yours
More BS finger pointing from Mrs. Perry...
First is was the big bad meanies who are picking on her dipstick of a husband, now it's a fully grown son who makes HIS own decisions in life...
Isn't this ironic coming from the party who claims to be ALL about personal responsibility?
I suppose next we'll here from her on how it's the Presidents FAULT the family dog got fleas...
Pull up your big girl panties Mrs. Perry and GIVE IT A REST!
What Ms Perry's comments prove is that the regulations are actually working as intended! The rule is that one cannot advise a financial institution AND a campaign for President of the United States. I'd say that is a good thing!
Was it not true, Bob?
I'm just sympathizing. Let me tell you. Our son has resigned his job because of the federal regulations Washington has put on us," she said. "He resigned his job two weeks ago. Because he can't go out and campaign for his father because of SEC regulations. He's got a wife; he's got a job. He's trying to start up a business. So I empathize with you."
This is the most arrogant, asinine comment. This woman is just as ignorant as her husband. They are trying to pull the Sarah Palin on us. Watch this people starting a web site to support his son. AMAZING the extent to what this people would go to suck money from people.....
What else are these as***s blame President Obama for?
The operative word is that he quit his job. That means it was a choice. Not many eople have that choice these days.
Their son was excited to quit his job to work for his father's campaign. So why are they blaming President Obama? Their son WANTED to quit his job.
This sounds like Scott Brown's excuse for his website - it's the summer intern's fault for screwing up my website - in FEBRUARY.
Well that's what he said. Where's all this personal responsibility we hear so much about from the Republicans?
______________
Jody, I couldn't get on the thread where your question was asked. The ad kept screwing me up when I tried to comment. I was curious when I read Mark & Domenico's reply. As well as Rachel Maddow this evening.
Rachel said the GOP establishment isn't in Romney's corner. She mentioned Limbaugh and Barbour, who are not supporting him. I guess I would have to ask - who are Rove and GW Bush? Aren't they and their money people "the establishment?" They're supporting Mitt. That to me is the GOP establishment.
Unless Limbaugh is considered "the establishment".?
Nah, couldn't be. Not possible.
Interesting enough whatever Limbaugh says becomes faux daily talking points. So far faux claims no connection, coincidence only.
Pat,
When you reference Rachel its the same as me referencing Limbaugh. It just doesn't wash, both of them are just to extreme.
thetotas, I guess what Rachel was reporting was that money doesn't equal votes. Money Rove and GWB could get easily. However, Mitt's poll numbers don't seem to be going anywhere. But I don't see Perry or Cain overtaking Mitt in the primaries, despite where his numbers are today.
It's just my perspective of course. And perhaps Limbaugh could sway his audience to vote for Cain or Perry. I'm just not so sure about that.
If anyone were to beat Romney, I would guess it would be Perry. But he's been badly damaged these last few weeks as has been reported here.
At the end of the day Mitt will be the nominee, despite his numbers. If not, it will be as shocking to me as the Phillies being knocked out in the first round of the playoffs. I never saw that coming.
Totas, Rachael is hardly extreme unless you consider the truth just too much for your sensitive conservative mind.
American First,
Right back at ya. They both are extreme, at least I am willing to admit it.
Limbaugh lies (and never admits when he gets it wrong), Rachael tells the truth (and admits when she gets something wrong), but since they are both 'extreme', in thetotas opinion, then they are the same.
Yeah, right, that makes a whole lot of sense.
the toe the party line -- UH NO! Limpballs is an entertainer who is not subjected to any journalistic standards whatsoever. Shock Jocks are paid according to how outrageous they can be, thus the term Shock Jock (or drama queen hams in the case of Glenn Beck, or talk slut, etc.)
That MSNBC actually investigates stories, would fire an anchor if they sponsor a Tea Party rally as conflict of interest as well as even contribute to campaigns, is something FAUX News doesn't even do. Reporters like Rachel make retractions on air whenever they make a mistake, and most of all use FACTS -- a huge difference.
But then you can't see this because you are just as ignorant as all the other ditto heads out there in the right-wing echo chamber and cone of silence.
Thet hing is, Rachel actually know what she is talking about and can prove her statements.
Limbaugh just spews his opinions.
Anita Perry is a whiner putting on an act(or not) that makes her a hypocrite as her husband openly courted the Evangelical preachers and votes while secreting Taxation Eradication Anarchists(TEA) party's votes! All this and Perry coloring his hair to look younger! Looking at his face shows an aged career politician in the pockets of the Texas super elite!
Hold on here --- Rick Perry wants us the Believe that Texas is this job mecca. So why can't his little boy find a job???
I guess you don't understand what the headline relates.
Guess you don't understand reality Doug. Perry's son wanted to draw a big salary from the bank and also draw a big salary from Perry's donors. evidently the campaign donors paid a higher salary than the bank. But don't worry about poor little Griffin if he has to live on at least a 150,000 salary. He'll get a cushy job in his daddy's Texas administration after his father loses.
poor mo can't comprehend what the article above says. LOL! Poor, poor mo just doesn't comprehend what the regs referenced above says either. lmao!
Poor mo must not be from the "show me" state.
Mo is an example of "everyone's a winner! Yay!".
Doe's she expect us to believe this was a sincere effort on her part? Everyone knows dam well he quit his job so he could ride on his fathers wealthy coat tails .He probably gets over 35K from his dad for a do nothing job ..
I couldn't agreed more! Oh, poor "Grif." You just don't quit jobs like that unless there is something much bigger waiting for you in the background. H*ll, his daddy is governor!
"Everyone knows dam well he quit his job so he could ride on his fathers wealthy coat tails."
That's how W got to the White House. It must be a Texas tradition.
Really? Another non-story. Which office is Anita Perry running for? On a scale of 1-10; how does this compare to,"for the first time in my life I am proud of my country"?
Now here's an informative and useful story:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/1011/Obama_administration_appeals_ruling_on_White_House_visitor_logs.html
So Doug--it's OK to excuse Anita Perry's remarks (which are not thoughtful but who cares--par for the course for Republicans) by saying, "Which office is Anita Perry running for?" and then post something Michelle Obama said--out of context--when her husband was running for president? Sounds like a double standard to me.
You're quote is not correct, which I am sure you're aware of.
You're right.....the actual quote is much worse when you put it in context. And you didn't answer my question bedwetting Obot.....which office is Anita Perry running for? Her comment was factual Bethie, if you knew anything about business you may begin to garner an inkling of understanding of what she meant. But it's obvious that you don't.
Thanks Bailey for helping me clear that up.
Any comment on the Politico story concerning "the most transparent administration in history" appealing a judge's ruling that they are violating the law by not being "transparent"?
What of this:http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/14/us-usa-security-iran-plot-idUSTRE79D6H420111014
That pretty much says the Big O administration is undoubtedly lying. Considering his track record...I believe it.
If you notice, everyone who says that quote from the right always, always, always leaves out the "really" part. At a certain point you have to wonder why, but it's not that hard to do.
You can be proud of your children all the time, but be really proud when they win the spelling bee. You can be proud of your country all the time, but be really proud when people stand up in the numbers that they did for change. People in the 30s and 40s were proud of their country before WWII, but really proud after the Allies defeated the Nazis. Everyone has a baseline, but you need somewhere to go up from when something amazing happens.
And in response to the inevitable "durr nitpicking" response, ask yourself why conservative sites always seem to leave that word out? It's not cutting it off too short on either end, it's literally removing the same word from the middle of the quote each time. You got played by your conservative media, Doug. Here's hoping you actually walk the walk from defending someone you think was slimed and recognize it's not only one side that does it.
Doug, you still didn't answer MY question: Why is it OK for you to defend Anita Perry by asking "Which office is she running for?" Obviously, NONE. Duh. AND, neither was Michelle Obama four years ago. Yet, you criticized her for a comment she made when she was NOT running for office. Do you get it now?
Answer (to my question since you persist in ignoring it): It's not OK in either instance. Spouses should really be left alone; we need to focus our attention on the candidates and their beliefs, experience, records, etc. Perry can sink himself just fine without Anita's help.
According to another article I read (CNN), Anita Perry actually told the unemployed man that Obama is the reason why her son "lost" his job. Aside from the absurdity of that, I'm more troubled by her lack of true empathy for the man. He's lost his job! He didn't quit his current job to go work for Daddy's campaign.
How tone deaf to say that to someone who once had a high paying job and now is trying to get by. Reminds me of Romney saying he, too, was unemployed. They just don't get it that people don't choose to be unemployed.
Mrs. Perry recent crying jags and desperate comparisons are indicative of a Texas tragedy. A badly run campaign, that believed that their candidate would slide through primaries with empty rhetoric and charm. Her husband is exposed as a mediocre candidate at best, neither he nor his wife are ready for the national spotlight.
Perry's not even mediocre southernMays. Him and his wife are just bad. All they've got is working for the sympathy vote. Whining about their poor little boy quieting his job.
How can this be a surprise to them? This is what politics in our country is today.
Am I surprised she said something so assinine? Nope. They actually are that out of touch.
Anita Perry is acting like a typical teapublican -- following in the footsteps of Sarah Palin ---- poor me -- I'm a victim --- you mean, nasty liberals just hate me.
Whining and sympathy might have worked for you in Texas Mr. and Mrs. Perry, but now you're on the big stage, where nobody cares how pathetic you are.
Anita is a good wife and she is showing it. However, some distinctions need to be made here regarding the son Griffin.
1. There is a difference between resigning from a job and fired from one. The former is voluntary while the latter is NOT.
2. Her son left his Bank position to his father's presidential campaign and we know that he's going to be compensated one way or the other.
This type of opportunity is not available to the millions out there that are jobless. This is where I disagree with Anita.
That woman is a nut case,,,,what a stupid thing to say. But at least it exposed her for what she is: a looney toony!!
The comment by Anita Perry again shows how out of touch with reality such privileged politicians and their families are. There is a big difference between losing a job and inability to get one because of the economic collapse, on the one hand, and choosing to quit a job in order to take another position as campaign adviser on the other. You can bet that Perry's campaign will be paying the son for his efforts. No doubt his family connections were a major factor in young Perry getting the bank job in the first place.
It is like saying that I understand the plight of the poor because I chose to skip breakfast this morning.
I know she's just the spouse... but that's so nuts it can actually have an effect of adding more to the pile on Perry's shoulders right now.
Note to Perry campaign: don't let the wife near a microphone again.
The problem didn't start with bailing out banks and that isn't the whole of it by any means – even while it is a disgusting flagrant example of the problem. The USA has been going through cycles of crisis for decades, always of the same make-up and this time with a government bailout for the perpetrators. While it can be legitimately argued that without the bailouts things for everyone could have been more severe and even catastrophic, still the underlying problem needs to be recognized and accepted and then demanded to be addressed. We have seen this problem, much like the "illegal pyramid schemes" always with the few gaining substantially and everyone else loosing, over an over again with Savings-and loans, banks, dot.coms, financial, investment and mortgage industries. The consistent characteristics are scheming insiders, exaggerated appeal to the public, aggressive exploitation and a co-responsible permissive government. The promise for a growing economy provided by "open markets", "deregulation", lax-enforcement and a congenial government is attractive ... but what is likely to be produced (because of human nature) is run away greed, dishonesty and self indulgence with the repeated results we have seen. We really want and need to stimulate the economy but while a non-responsible government may encourage political support it also is neglecting its responsibility to the people – mainly to protect the majority from exploitation by the powerful few. There are those who take advantage and who are now trying to sell a return to "more of the same" – that is really what the people must see, understand, fight and prevent.
Ya going love this www.occupyfoxnews.com
I am all for a wife defending her husband, as she should, but this woman has me double over. She should get her own comedy hour. Earlier this week she commented that her husband was being singled out and maligned by the media.
Now i did not see her come out when his poll numbers were up and he was deemed the front runner.
But she had me when responding to a question, she commented she is not sure that 40 years would be enough to get "us" out the mess Obama has gotten us into.
WHAT???
From one Christian to another, where was the Mrs. when "W" pushed us over the cliff. This exercise is nothing more than self serving.
Now it's Obama's fault her son quit, i did say quit, his job. Many were not given an option.
I thank God for the spirit of discernment. You will know them by their fruit.
Time to get money out of politics on both sides of the aisle, sign the petition at getmoneyout.com and tell everyone you know.
getmoneyout.com/
dylanratigan.com/2011/08/09/dylan-ratigan-mad-as-hell-his-epic-network-moment/
Are you kidding me! He quit his job and I am suppose to feel sorry for him! Please tell me this is a joke!
It is a joke. The whole Perry campaign is a joke.
Mrs. Perry seems to be living in a bubble of Republican talking points. Not a good sign and not good for our country.
I remember a few years ago Mrs Perry was looking for support when she made a statement about how hard a time they were having paying for College for their children on a Governors salary. Attempting to compare themselves to the average middle class parents struggling with College tuition. PaaaaLEASE!!!!!
Jobs are not coming back! Jobs went overseas for cheap wages. We can not compete with china wages of 10 cents per hour. This is not a republican or Democrat fault,we have a global economy. Too many people not enough to go around. An still people continue to breed like rats.
What a joke this "Gross Odd Person" (GOP) is to spew her fictional story of economic suffering. "Scary Perry" has no idea of what true economic suffering really is. Her husband is so economically covered in oil money. That the crazy notion that this group can even dare to claim economic hardship is just insulting America. Mrs. Perry is just rude to think that her economic suffering even compares to the GOP/RNC destruction of the Midde Class, the Working Poor, the elderly, and the disabled. That is fact!