(Vanity) Thoughts on Perry

grey_whiskers | Aug. 16, 2011 | grey_whiskers

[grey_whiskers]

This is a brief discussion of some of the controversies brought up in conjunction with the candidacy of Gov. Rick Perry, together with observations on polling data and his base of support.

Gardasil


Gardasil is a drug from Merck & Co. developed as a vaccine for certain types of cervical cancer, which was only effective if administered before exposure to certain STDs. Those who attack Perry point out that Perry issued an executive order in February 2007 mandating that all Texas girls be vaccinated with Gardasil before admission to the sixth grade. His chief-of-staff from 2002-2004 had become a lobbyist for Merck; Merck also donated $6,000 to Perry’s re-election campaign.


Perry’s defenders counter with two points: first, that the Executive Order was not truly mandatory, as there was an opt-out clause for parents; and second, that Perry had received $24 million that year for his re-election campaign, so that $6,000 was merely a drop in the bucket.

But all of this seems to me to miss the main point. With all of the furor over Obamacare and mandatory payments, why is it a good thing to order mandatory vaccines for something which is picked up through *voluntary* behaviour? If we are interested in conservatism, and part of conservatism is sexual morality, why was Perry implicitly “throwing in the towel” by ordering a mandatory vaccine for STDs, with only an opt-out? Doesn’t this undermine the moral authority of the parents? This sounds more like a Romney-type stunt than the behaviour of a true conservative!

Trans-Texas Corridor

This was supposed to be a superhighway going from the Texas border to Oklahoma, with branches running all over the state, at a cost of $175 billion dollars. It was introduced by Governor Rick Perry in 2001. It would have set up multiple-lane highways (up to almost a quarter of a mile wide!) for six car lanes, 4 truck lanes, and two tracks each for various rail (high-speed rail, commuter rail, and freight rail), together with rights-of-way for underground cable and utility lines.

The road would be financed and operated by Cintra, a Spanish firm, which would not *own* the highway, but collect toll revenue.

Civil libertarians, concerned over misuse of eminent domain, were up in arms. In addition, other people were concerned over what would have amounted to “double taxation” -- having to pay tolls for the TTC, and yet having to pay gasoline taxes for state roads.

And of course, one of the “selling points” of the project was that it was needed to accomodate increased MEXICAN truck traffic following passage of NAFTA.

Those who support Perry are very proud of pointing out that the TTC is dead, and that even references to it have been removed from State Law. However, the Houston Chronicle pointed out in a 2009 article that the state

“...will move forward with a serious of individual project that had been considered part of the Trans-Texas Corridor plan...[the] renewed effort now will operate under the name ‘Innovative Connectivity in Texas’ to usher in a new method of operation.”

This doesn’t sound like Perry and the backers of the TTC got the message. Kind of like Boehner and his supposed $100 billion in cuts at the beginning of 2011...

And come to think of it, what kind of a conservative goes around pushing transportation infrastructure jobs as a keynote effort? Especially when it includes tolls going to a foreign company instead of an American company? Something does not compute, here, if he’s talking about restoring the American economy. Aren’t we sending enough money overseas for oil, without adding tolls?

And, what’s with the, *ahem*, high-speed rail? Sounds awfully “green” to me. Thomas Friedman would no doubt approve Perry’s acting like China. And speaking of green jobs...

Perry ran Al Gore’s campaign in Texas in 1988

While some people claim that Gore was much more centrist back then (he opposed federal funding for abortion, and agreed on funding of the Nicaraguan Contras, for example), he was still a moonbat when it came Global Warming: according to The Guardian(U.K.) he held congressional hearings on Climate Change back in 1976 and began writing a book on environmental conservation in 1988.


Those who defend Perry claim that it was a long time ago, and that people are allowed to change their minds. But think back to 1988. Who was finishing as President back then? Oh, *that’s* right. Ronald Reagan. What a perfect time to back a Democrat, if you’re *really* conservative.

And, by the way, Perry endorsed Rudy Guiliani for President in 2008. Does anyone remember what Free Republic did to Guiliani supporters? Do the words "bug-zapper" mean anything to you? Colour me unbelieving.


Perry supports the Dream Act


This allows illegal aliens to pay in-state tuition at college provided that they have lived in Texas for three years and graduated from high school -- and they apply for citizenship.

While this *sounds* good at first blush, it is really amnesty light for young illegals: and once they are citizens, they will likely try to bring their extended family to live with them, with predictable long-term results (“Heartless, racist Republicans want to split up families.”)
Trying to cut down on the number of illegal immigrants by rewarding their long-standing residence is like trying to scare ants away from a picnic by leaving a trail of crumbs on the ground.

Perry is as tough as marshmallows on illegal immigration

In addition to the Trans Texas Corridor and the Dream Act, Rick Perry has opposed the idea that Texas should adopt Arizona’s immigration law, since he does not want law enforcement to be REQUIRED to determine immigration status. He wants it to be voluntary. In addition, despite all of the noise about Perry being against Sanctuary Cities, and with the issue being introduced in a special session, somehow it managed to not get passed. Liberal blogger brainsandeggs mentions some of the gyrations the bill went through before failing:


”Recall also that during the regular session, the “sanctuary cities” legislation was approved by the House on a 100-to-47 party-line vote, only to be blocked by Democrats in the Senate on a 12-to-19 party-line vote. But during the special session, essentially the same legislation was approved by the Senate on a 19-to-12 party-line vote (the two-thirds rule was not in force during the special session) — only to fail to make it out of the House State Affairs committee, the same committee which in early May had heartily endorsed it on a 9-to-3 party-line vote.”

So it looks like Perry gets to have his Taco and eat it too: he can posture about being against sanctuary cities, while in the real world, a bill abolishing sanctuary cities fails with the Governor’s backing.


Creative incompetence.

Incidentally, this is an excerpt from a speech which Perry gave in 2001. Tell me if this sounds like someone who is tough on illegal immigration, or someone who will continue pandering to illegals in the hope of votes to come, as quoted in The Washington Post:

"We don’t care where you come from, but where you are going, and we are going to do everything we can to help you get there. And that vision must include the children of undocumented workers. The doors of higher education must be open to them. The message is simple: educacion es el futuro, y si se puede [education is the future, and yes, we can]"

Soft on Islam

Everyone by now has gotten tired of hearing the mantra enforced from on high that Islam is a "Religion of Peace" -- with some going so far as to mock the phrase by calling it a "Religion of Pieces" (a macabre reference to suicide bombers and beheadings favored by jihadists).

And Rick Perry seems to be continuing in the same vein.

Here's a speech of Perry's from 2008.

In which he quotes the Koran, knowingly:

"The Quran says: Truly those who believe, and those who are Jews, and Christians, and Sabeans – whoever believes in God and the Last Day and is virtuous – surely their reward is with their Lord, and no fear shall come upon them, neither shall they grieve.”"

Gee, why does this make the hair on the back of my neck stand up? Haven't we had enough of Ramadan Greetings and the Muslim call to prayer with Barack Hussein Obama?

What is ironic is that it was yet another Texan, George W. Bush, who seemed to push for the "ROP" meme. Too bad this idiocy didn't get squelched in time to stop Maj. Hassan at Fort Hood.

For more on Perry and Islamicists, see here.


 With that list completed, it is time to move on to political metaphysics -- observations which do not fit neatly in one category or another of the above, but help place these factors into focus, or interpret the landscape in the early days after Perry’s declaration.

Changes in polling data

Rasmussen now shows him at 29%, with Romney at 18% ,Bachmann at 13%, Ron Paul at 9%, Cain at 6% and Gingrich at 5% -- 72 hours after declaring.

Several important points here.

What was Perry’s popularity in polls before he declared?


Rasmussen performed a telephone survey of likely Iowa caucus participants on August 8, less than a week before his announcement. Perry got 12% compared to Bachmann’s 22% and Romney’s 21%, Ron Paul’s 16%, and Tim Pawlenty’s 11%.

And yet, no breathless specials, no major speeches during that time frame.

He did call Bernanke treasonous on August 16: but that is *after* the data for the polls had been collected. His support must have come from somewhere else. Where cold that be?

Look at the poll again. Tim Pawlenty has dropped out of the race. And according to Rasmussen, 16% of primary voters *remain* undecided: so T-Paw’s supporters did not disappear into the noise.

Could it be that Perry may have just picked up most of Pawlenty’s support, together with a small slice of Romney, Bachmann, and Paul’s support? And if that is true, does it really argue for a massive groundswell among the Tea Party, or for the substitution of one lukewarm RINO for another?

Note : Compare this to the actual Ames straw poll results from Free Republic:

1. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (4823, 28.55%)

2. Congressman Ron Paul (4671, 27.65%)

3. Governor Tim Pawlenty (2293, 13.57%)

4. Senator Rick Santorum (1657, 9.81%)

5. Herman Cain (1456, 8.62%)

6. Governor Rick Perry (718, 3.62%) write-in

7. Governor Mitt Romney (567, 3.36%)

8. Speaker Newt Gingrich (385, 2.28%)

9. Governor Jon Huntsman (69, 0.41%)

10. Congressman Thad McCotter (35, 0.21%)

The straw poll is by definition “self selection” and not random, i.e. liable to shenanigans).

If one includes the straw poll, one has to account for Romney placing below even Cain and Santorum; which is sure to skew the results, given that conventional wisdom has Perry and Romney as the front-runners among declared candidates.

2) The GOP astroturf factor

The LA Times reports that Perry’s Texas donors are doing quite well in Texas, hinting at a combination of class envy and a tu quoque argument about the kind of “pay to play” environment long enforced by Democrats. But there is a more significant fact contained within this article:

”Perry has received a total of $37 million over the last decade from just 150 individuals and couples”

--which works out to $240,000 from each of these donors. This is not the kind of grass-roots, $20-at-a-time donations characteristic of a true populist.


And when one looks at a “spontaneous” outpouring of articles at places ranging from RedState.com (which inspired this piece) to The Weekly Standard, including personal attacks on detractors of Perry -- and thoughtful lists of talking points all ready to go, “spontaneously” ?

Usually it takes time to come up with such things, particularly for a brand new campaign.


Having the fawning articles (such as the publicity that Perry won in the Alabama State Republican Executive Committee Summer Meeting Straw Poll, with 101 votes out of a total of 205 cast!) appear from all points of the compass at once, makes it look like strings are being pulled.

A further curious phenomenon is seen in Real Clear Politics.


In the latest polly, Perry jumps to 29% on Rasmussen Reports form 8-15: but for all other polls from 8-2 to 8-9, Perry tops out at 18%. Either this is a bump from the announcement, or Perry is drawing someone else?

Here’s a hint: according to Real Clear Politics, Perry never showed up in Rasmussen’s results until mid-June. Then all of a sudden, his numbers started climbing, even though he hadn’t declared.

Here’s another hint: Rasmussen does not include Palin among the possible candidates.


Is Perry merely the latest establishment candidate designed to stave off a Palin candidacy, given that Romney was not catching fire with the base?

[The Bronze Titan]

Ditto to everything u said. When we first arrived in Miami in’62, it was saturated with exiles, the only job my dad was able to get was picking berries in Opa Locka (he was an office mgr for Intl Harvester in La Conchita, Cuba, we were only about 30 min from where 2506 got as far to). Mom n dad passed away in ‘96 and ‘08 in Philadelphia, outlasted by those two scumbags in Cuba, never to see Cuba again like many others. It was always too hard for them to return. They lost way more than material things, they lost a ‘way of life’, something the current crop has never had, which is why it’s not hard for them to return. My family and I was back in Miami last year to vac and visit those family still around. The only way things will change in Cuba is by force, there will not be a ‘velvet Revolution’ Cuba.

[Lazlo in PA]

Perry had an interview where he stated that he was friends with the Bush clan and had called W for advice over the presidential run. It's very clear Perry considers they have a close relationship and he values it.

Andrea Tanteros, the right wing operative, on Red Eye last night let slip that the all insiders know that Bush and Perry hate each other. She said that all the Bush Admin people who we all hate are going to go after Perry. Just look at what Rove and Perino have already said of Perry already.

Having Perry say this is a no brainer. Why would he focus the media attention on his campaign to some feud he is having with a former GOP President.

[Lakeshark]

Did you see the interview? It was pretty convincing, it came straight from Perry, it’s the second clip on this blog: http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/08/rick-perrys-unannouncement-announcement/

[BuckeyeTexan]

Here are some links about his pro-life votes:
http://www.gargaro.com/lifequotes.html
http://www.debatethis.org/gore/abortion/

Here are some links about his pro-gun votes:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,996052,00.html
http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Al_Gore_Gun_Control.htm (For 1988 see section titled “Voted against some gun limitations while in Congress.”)
http://www.kc3.com/news/july6_knox.htm (Start at paragraph 11)

Here are some links about his pro-defense positions:
http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=122730
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1987-11-22/news/8702070578_1_pro-defense-key-votes-voting-records
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=33148 (Paragrah 9 under section titled “More Evasions From the Left on the War”)

Here are some links about his overall pro-life, pro-gun, pro-defense positions in 1988:
http://diplomatdc.wordpress.com/2010/06/04/1988-when-al-gore-battled-the-liberal-democrats-by-gregory-hilton/
http://www.hookersandbooze.com/

[floozy22]

You ask why Perry mandated the Gardasil vaccine for voluntary behavior. The answer is that insurance companies wouldn’t pay for the $380 vaccine unless it was mandatory. The vaccine had been shown to be nearly 100% effective. To give access to the vaccine to those who couldn’t afford it for the price of a copay, he went with an Executive Order to make it mandatory. Ultimately, the voters, through their representatives, exercised their will by overturning the EO.

It's for the children! Politics and personal agendas had nothing to do with it.

I understand you REALLY LIKE Rick Perry. But don't misrepresent the facts.

from realclearpolitics.com/ Tom Bevan / June 4, 2011

"In January 2007, Gardasil was put on the "recommended" immunization schedule issued by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control. Merck immediately mounted a massive lobbying effort of state legislatures around the country to get Gardasil added to their respective lists of state-mandated vaccines...

But in Texas, Gov. Perry chose to bypass the legislature and on Feb. 2, 2007, he issued an executive order making Texas the first state in the country requiring all sixth-grade girls to receive the three-shot vaccination series (which cost about $120 per shot)...

The controversy over Perry's decision deepened as it came to light that his former chief of staff was a lobbyist for Merck and that his chief of staff's mother-in-law, Rep. Dianne White Delisi, was the state director of an advocacy group bankrolled by Merck to push legislatures across the country to put forward bills mandating the Gardasil vaccine for preteen girls...

In response, the sponsor of HB 1098, Republican state Rep. Dennis Bonnen, blasted Perry for "using cancer victims as his backdrop for an issue that he has grossly misjudged..."

"Just because you don't want to offer up 165,000 11-year-old girls to be Merck's study group doesn't mean you don't care about women's health, doesn't mean you don't care about young girls," Bonnen added..."

And, in fact, two years later the National Vaccine Information Center issued a report raising serious questions over the harmful side effects of the drug. A few months after that, an editorial on Gardasil in the Journal of the American Medical Association declared that "serious questions regarding the overall effectiveness of the vaccine" needed to be answered and that more long-term studies were called for.

[floozy22]

Yes I know that 120 x 3 = 380. But the rest of the post stands. Perry’s ties to Merck are highly suspect.

[Lakeshark]

Much appreciated. It appears he was pro-life as a congresscritter, but he changed once he became a senator and went national.

I'm not convinced of his defense creds either.

I'm shocked he was relatively pro 2nd amendment.

[DRey]

blather, blather. Apparently you don’t listen to anyone. Perry has made plenty of mistakes. He’s also done more for Texas than any governor in recent history. I know he’s a conservative. I know he’s a Christian. And I know he loves this country. I also know his accomplishments, and I know he LISTENS to the people. I also know he’s going to be our next president. Get on board or get ready to shed some tears.

[Lazlo in PA]

Well I will take the man at his word. I do notice that he specifically cites Bush and Bush II as being congenial to him and side steps everyone else in the clan i.e.; Rove et al. No one ever considered the two Bushes as anything but congenial and gentlemen so this could be right. I guess we will see how it goes as far as the Bushies continuing to slam this guy for everything as they have recently done. Rove looks to be a Romney sycophant to me.

[BuckeyeTexan]

(Courtesy ping to shield for citing information he provided on another thread.)

I understand you REALLY LIKE Rick Perry. But don't misrepresent the facts.

Whether or not I support Perry is not the issue. Misinformation and one-sided information is. This vanity is wholly one-sided in its presentation of Perry's records/decisions. FReepers cannot make an informed decision without having balanced information about the issues presented herein. I did not misrepresent any facts.

(which cost about $120 per shot)

The Gardasil vaccine is a series of three shots at $120 each for a total of $360.

... an editorial on Gardasil in the Journal of the American Medical Association declared that "serious questions regarding the overall effectiveness of the vaccine"

Gardasil was believed to be a way to stop certain types of cancer among young women. Studies appearing in The New England Journal of Medicine in 2007 found that Gardasil was nearly 100 percent effective in preventing precancerous cervical lesions caused by the the strains that Gardasil protects against. Gardasil’s effectiveness increased when given to girls and young women before they become sexually active. Gardasil was found to be extremely effective in preventing several (but not all) of the strains of HPV known to cause cervical cancer and genital warts.

The CDC has been following Gardasil since its licensing and some current facts follow.

• "As of June 22, 2011, approximately 35 million doses of Gardasil® have been distributed in the U.S. and the safety monitoring system (VAERS) received a total of 18,727 reports of adverse events following Gardasil® vaccination. As with all VAERS reports, serious events may or may not have been caused by the vaccine.”
• “Of the total number of VAERS reports following Gardasil®, 92% were considered to be non-serious, and 8% were considered serious. Out of 35,000,000 doses distributed, there were 1,498 occasions of serious complications; that equates to a .0000428 chance that a dose will cause a serious adverse reaction.

The controversy over Perry's decision deepened as it came to light that his former chief of staff was a lobbyist for Merck and that his chief of staff's mother-in-law, Rep. Dianne White Delisi, was the state director of an advocacy group bankrolled by Merck to push legislatures across the country to put forward bills mandating the Gardasil vaccine for preteen girls ...

In Gardasil, Merck believed that they had a credible, FDA-approved, CDC recommended, fact-based case for vaccinating young women and lobbied state officials to do so.

Perry maintains that the justification for his executive order making the shot mandatory was twofold:

• that the vaccine offered a chance to save lives that might have otherwise been taken away by cervical cancer
• that insurance companies wouldn’t cover the $360 cost of the vaccine ($120 for each of a 3-shot regimen) when it was simply an optional “recommended” vaccine. That put it out of the reach for most low-income Texans.

While you did not specifically mention Merck's contribution to Perry's re-election campaign, grey_whiskers did. The following provides some perspective about that aspect of the Gardasil issue.

Merck contributed a grand total of $6,000 to Perry’s reelection campaign. That Merck contribution amounted to .00025 of the $24 million dollar campaign funds that he received that year - hardly enough to buy Governor Perry's influence with an Executive Order.

[BuckeyeTexan]

You’re welcome. My goal isn’t to convince you about Gore’s “conservative” credentials in 1988. He wasn’t conservative by Republican standards. He was conservative by Democratic standards in 1988.

I think it’s important to provide balanced information so FReepers can come to informed conclusions. For me, Perry’s support of Gore in 1988 is not an issue. For other FReepers, it is.

[shield]

RICK PERRY'S NEW AD!

[BuckeyeTexan]

I’ve received some FReepmails asking me if I would vaccinate my own children with Gardasil. So, I’ll address that here for those who asked.

As a Christian, conservative Texan with a pre-teen daughter, I was angry about Perry’s 2007 Executive Order. My daughter’s pediatrician recommend Gardasil in 2007. I ignored his recommendation for four years.

My daughter is now 15. I had her vaccinated with the first dose of Gardasil last month. For four years I reviewed the Gardasil studies and CDC reports of its side effects. The benefits far out weigh the risks, IMO. She did not have any negative reactions to Gardasil.

Yes, I preach abstinence to her. She is a very conservative young lady who gives her liberal teachers hell in the classroom when they spew liberal talking points. She plans to practice abstinence. But if she has a lapse in judgment, as teenagers are apt to do, I will have done my best to protect her from HPV and cervical cancer.

My son is 10. When he reaches the recommended age, I will also have him vaccinated because the studies now show that Gardasil is effective in preventing oral, throat, penile, and anal cancer caused by HPV. Does that mean I endorse promiscuous or homosexual behavior? No way.

[floozy22]

You make legitimate points in your posts.

Yet the fact remains that Perry as governor embraced the idea of the state taking control of a child's body. Of course they believed they were doing the right thing. The people behind Obamacare think the same thing. Similar reasoning is used for both. The Gardasil"opt-out" was meaningless. The correct way to do it would have been an "opt-in." He basically gave the state, not parents, all control of the issue. Isn't that why we bash liberals?

The cornerstone of American life is individual liberty. Rick Perry, for just a moment, forgot that fact. Yes, he has walked back his decision. But it's troubling that he at one time mandated allowing the state to hijack the personal healthcare decisions of Texas citizens. His EO bypassed the elected legislature. One of Malkin's posters commented that if a Democrat governor had done this, a lot of pro-Perry people would have had a huge problem with it. I agree.

The vaccine was untested at the time this occurred, and it will still take years to study its long-term effects. I don't have children, but if I did, they would never get anywhere near Gardasil.

[don-o]

Wonder if Perry ran off to Wideawakes too then...?

ZING!! I LOL'ed!

[SUSSA]

Good job.

[don-o]

Heck, if Reagan were to enter the race today, he would have neen eviscerated on this forum, former Democrat, moderate, Amnesty supporter, etc,,,.

You forgot pro-abort / anti-life. One thing I have not seen is that Perry EVER supported the legalized murder of unborn children.

[BuckeyeTexan]

Agreed. Perry’s decision on Gardasil was wrong. Thankfully, Texans were able to prevent the consequences of that decision. Perry realizes that. I think he learned a lot from the incident.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks grey_whiskers. Just for fun, I’ve got one — “you put the ass in asbestos!”

[CitizenUSA]

DRey: “Apparently you don’t listen to anyone.”

I’m not the first FReeper to mention your one-sided selling of all things Perry, but you’re oblivious. You have an excuse for everything he does that some of us find questionable. At least you finally admitted he’s mortal. That’s encouraging.