Posted on 08/19/2011 7:30:37 AM PDT by onyx
Posted on August 19 2011 - 9:14 AM - Posted by: Stacy Drake
After his announcement last weekend, Rick Perry’s record has come under considerable scrutiny from the media and the blogs. One of the most notable items of discussion has been about an executive order that Perry signed, mandating young girls to receive the HPV vaccine known as Gardasil. It was so controversial that the Texas State Legislature stepped in and repealed the law just weeks after Perry had pushed it through.
Tuesday evening, Michelle Malkin published a very detailed column about Perry’s Gardasil mandate. She wrote:
In February 2007, Texas Gov. Rick Perry signed a shocking executive order forcing every sixth-grade girl to submit to a three-jab regimen of the Gardasil vaccine. He also forced state health officials to make the vaccine available “free” to girls ages 9 to 18. The drug, promoted by manufacturer Merck as an effective shield against the sexually transmitted human papillomavirus (HPV) and genital warts, as well as cervical cancer, had only been approved by the Food and Drug Administration eight months prior to Perry’s edict.
Gardasil’s wear-off time and long-term side effects have yet to be determined. “Serious questions” remain about its “overall effectiveness,” according to the Journal of the American Medical Association. Even the chair of the federal panel that recommended Gardasil for children opposes mandating it as a condition of school enrollment. Young girls and boys are simply not at an increased risk of contracting HPV in the classroom the way they are at risk of contracting measles or other school-age communicable diseases.
Perry defenders pointed to a bogus “opt-out” provision in his mandate “to protect the right of parents to be the final authority on their children’s health care.” But requiring parents to seek the government’s permission to keep an untested drug out of their kids’ veins is a plain usurpation of their authority. Translation: Ask your bureaucratic overlord to determine if a Gardasil waiver is right for you.
Libertarians and social conservatives alike slammed Perry’s reckless disregard for parental rights and individual liberty. The Republican-dominated legislature also balked. In May 2007, both chambers passed bills overturning the governor’s unilaterally imposed health order.
Fast-forward five years. After announcing his 2012 presidential bid this weekend, Perry now admits he “didn’t do my research well enough” on the Gardasil vaccine before stuffing his bad medicine down Texans’ throats. On Monday, he added: “That particular issue is one that I readily stand up and say I made a mistake on. I listened to the legislature … and I agreed with their decision.”
Perry downplayed his underhanded maneuver as an aberrational “error,” and then — gobsmackingly — he spun the debacle as a display of his great character: “One of the things I do pride myself on, I listen. When the electorate says, ‘Hey, that’s not what we want to do,’ we backed up, took a look at what we did.”
Are these non-apology apologies enough to quell the concerns of voters looking for a presidential candidate who will provide a clear, unmistakable contrast to Barack Obama? Not by a long shot.
There is a ton of information in Malkin’s piece and she went to great lengths to link all of her research. I strongly recommend reading the entire column if you have not so already.
While Rick Perry’s executive order to mandate vaccines for children is raising eyebrows in the Republican party, I think it would serve us to take a look at what Governor Palin has said on the record about a state government taking such action.
Located within the mountain of emails that were released months ago from Governor Palin’s time in office, is a small quote from her that sums up her philosophy about the government’s role in such matters. She wrote this in response to an email from her staff in 2008 about chicken-pox immunization regulations:
“I would not propose govt mandating anything like shots for our kids.”
I never questioned for a moment whether or not Governor Palin would have done something akin to what Perry did in Texas with Gardasil. That’s the luxury of being a Palin supporter. We know her philosophy and we know she’s remained steady in her belief of limited government. We also know that she never governed for the benefit of any cronies.
The more I read about Rick Perry, the more I see in him what Governor Palin fought so hard against in Alaska. The Gardasil issue is just one instance in many that it appears Rick Perry put the interests of his financial backers above those of his constituents.
Timothy Carney wrote an eye-opening article for the Washington Examiner called “The cowboy corporatist rides to the rescue.” In it, he details some of the other recipients of Perry’s ‘assistance’ after donating money to his political operation. Carney writes:
In his next State of the State address, Perry pushed the Legislature to create the Texas Enterprise Fund, giving the governor, lieutenant governor and House speaker the power to hand out multimillion-dollar grants to businesses seeking to relocate to or expand within the state. Two years later, Perry and the Legislature created another subsidy bank, called the Texas Emerging Technology Fund, using taxpayer money to invest in high-tech companies. Perry made government a venture capital fund.
Muckrakers at the Los Angeles Times and the Austin American Statesman have shown a strong correlation between Perry’s biggest campaign contributors and the money handled by these funds and Perry’s other public-private partnership. Almost half of Perry’s “mega-donors,” according to the Times, have received profitable favors from the Texas government. Poultry magnate Joe Sanderson, for instance, gave Perry’s campaign $165,000 and received $500,000 from the Texas Enterprise Fund to open a facility in Waco, the Times reports.
The Austin paper documents the unsavory case of $80,000 Perry donor David Nance winning a $4.5 million grant from the Texas Emerging Technology Fund. A regional board had denied the grant to Nance’s Convergen LifeSciences, but Perry intervened and ushered the grant through.
And just as President Obama uses renewable energy as an excuse for steering taxpayer money to big business, Perry also loves green corporate welfare. Perry was a featured speaker at the national wind lobby’s 2008 conference, where he touted his 2005 law requiring Texans to purchase wind and solar energy — all in the name of “job creation” and business growth. If you force people to buy a product, of course the businesses selling that product will grow.
How the conservative establishment plans on selling this guy as a bridge between the Tea Party and the GOP establishment, through the duration of the primary campaign is beyond me. Rick Perry’s views on the role of government and corporate welfare fly in the face of Tea Party values. Padding one’s political piggy bank with the money of people and entities who expect a much larger return on their “investment” is an abuse of the system. The idea that taxpayers go into debt paying out large sums to these “investors” to keep elected officials in their seats of power, is not the sort of behavior you will find any Tea Party activist supporting.
Governor Palin’s history of service stands in direct contrast to most politicians, including Rick Perry’s. She went against the grain of the deep-rooted corruption in Alaska, and even in her own party. She was independent enough to call out those who were abusing the system, and taking a strong stand against them. The only “interests” that Governor Palin focused on, were those of her constituents. That includes respecting their personal liberty by not “mandating anything like shots” for their children.
For everyone’s consideration.
I love Palin and agree with everything in this article.
That said, she has been so vilified she (like Herman Cain) would have a very difficult time winning.
Not fair, just an observation.
As a born and bred Texan who still lives here, Perry is not my first choice for President. If he gets the nomination, I will hold my nose and vote for him-—anybody but obammy!
Run Sarah, run!
ditto.
I just wish that my fellow conservatives would realize that, just because a guy is a ‘cowboy’, does *not* mean that he’s another Reagan.
A good head-to-head debate between Obama and either one of them would turn the tied.
so expect more of the same....and without effect.
I think Michelle just wants her candidate to win and does not like Perry..To bad girl it looks like he has a very good chance..Now if Sarah gets into the race will you be finding something wrong with her?
I will say it again:
Only Palin truly satisfies, and I will vote for her.
I would follow her into the gates of Hell if she would lead. If we are to die, let us die with our boots on.
I agree. But Sarah needs to declare.....one way or another. It’s getting to the point that she is just messing things up and becoming a side show. It needs to get settled before people get tired of hearing about her without knowing what her plans are. People are going to make a choice fairly soon. They are getting tired of the politics. Once they make a choice, they will throw their support behind one person or the other with their donations. When that happens, it’s tough to change your mind.
I never questioned for a moment whether or not Governor Palin would have done something akin to what Perry did in Texas with Gardasil. That’s the luxury of being a Palin supporter. We know her philosophy and we know she’s remained steady in her belief of limited government. We also know that she never governed for the benefit of any cronies.
Word.
Good post!
Michelle got that wrong - there was always an opt-out. No girls would have been "forced."
In fact, the order itself included language to make it easier for parents to out of ALL vaccinations.
If we're going to overblow the gardasil debacle (and it was a debacle) we should at least have our facts straight.
Most of us on this board would hold our nose and vote for Governor Quid Pro Quo if it meant getting rid of Obie. But in terms for the long term health of the Republic, he looks like the same ole, same ole that takes us in the same general direction we are already going. Albeit at a little slower pace.
Next.
Exactly.
RP65 – Relating to the immunization of young women from the cancer-causing Human Papillomavirus.
http://governor.state.tx.us/news/executive-order/3455/
...
The Department of State Health Services will, in order to protect the right of parents to be the final authority on their children’s health care, modify the current process in order to allow parents to submit a request for a conscientious objection affidavit form via the Internet while maintaining privacy safeguards under current law.
My personal opinion is that Palin is going to run. She can afford to wait, due to her name recognition and the incredible support she already has with the grass-roots. As soon as she formally announces her candidacy, I think we will be amazed at how many "regular people" come out of the woodwork to support her campaign, both financially and as volunteers.
I've been hearing a lot lately about why Palin needs to get in the race now, otherwise she'll lose out on the big-money backers and the other establishment resources. Well guess what? Palin is not going to run that kind of a campaign. She's not going to have $10,000-a-plate rubber chicken dinners with establishment party bigwigs and she's not going to be hanging out on Martha's Vineyard with the beautiful people.
Instead, Palin will take her campaign direct to the people. All she has to do it put up a website and collect ten or fifteen bucks a pop from a few million people and she'll have all the money she needs to run a first-rate campaign against the Republican establishment.
I don't doubt for a minute she can raise $100m and more in a very short amount of time in this manner and she'll owe nothing to anybody.
Palin is a game changer and if she gets into this campaign, as I believe she will, she will change forever the way we elect our leaders.
I’ve been trying to see if anyone is willing to show me where this analysis is wrong. No takers yet. It seems to cover all of Perry’s warts that people are pointing at.
Seventeen (17) things that critics are saying about Rick Perry
http://peskytruth.wordpress.com/2011/07/19/rick-perrys-negatives/
The Gardasil issue is one thing. What’s potentially more troubling to me is his leanings toward illegal-aliens, likely stemming from his terms as Texas Agriculture Commissioner, and his family’s background in ranching. I suspect he favors ranchers and farmers who cry for low-wage immigrant labor. People here will debate the Texas Dream Act, in-state tuition benefits for illegals, and such, but what with yesterday’s administration announcement on the curtailing of deportations in lieu of work permits, we don’t need anyone in the conservative movement who’s even remotely open to such garbage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.