[Cincinatus' Wife]

.....>>>"VAN SUSTEREN: Well, there's a big difference, though, at least in my mind, whether you do it because you really believe it's the right and you're just flat out wrong or you shouldn't have done it or whatever, and the other difference is whether you did it because you wanted a campaign contribution. And I'm curious which you think was the one here with the governor.

BACHMANN: Well, of course, I don't know the thoughts and the intents of the governor's heart. I have no idea what they are, nor would I speculate."<<<.... SOURCE

Reasons for HPV vaccine

[indianrightwinger]

Bachmann is pathetic in claiming “she would not speculate”. If so, why did she try to connect Merck campaign contribution to Perry’s EO decision?

[shield]

Perry Ping....

IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.

IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.

[slowhandluke]

Michelle blew it here. The correct answer is that if it's a good idea, Perry could have used his office to promote it, without requiring it. Regardless of campaign contributions, it was a bad idea to try to force it by having only opt-out, not opt-in.

The opt-out was a bad idea, regardless of whether it was to benefit Merck, or merely because Perry believes the end justifies the means.