Posted on 06/19/2011 1:02:01 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Hmmmm...I don’t understand the point. Because the media would hate him, he should shirk from running? What logic is that?
I posted this thread, to what, hide the HPV issue? No.
I posted it to discuss it.
Post your other Perry issues.
Let's get it out there.
That is rigth on. Vetting Governor Perry on this issue is absolutely the right thing to do. In fact, like I said in my other posts, he erred on this issue and should simply say so.
Then it goes on....
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, a mandate is "a clear instruction, authorization or direction." Perry says the executive order wasn't mandatory, which, according to Webster, means "demanded or required."
When they pull out the dictionary MestaMachine, you have to get a bit skeptical about their purpose.
Old News?
I did not realize there was a statute of limitations on poor political decisions.
So, according to you, any decision an elected official made prior to 2008 should not be discussed?
Texas occupies a very unique place in this country. It’s almost a world of its own. It’s a great state and it is full of great people, but outside of Texas, what is unique to Texas is really not in the public awareness. No one really pays that much attention to perry, per se. That would change if he was to run for national office and perry is as unique to Texas as Texas is to the rest of the US. GWB got some scrutiny, but not nearly what he would have if poppi bush wasn’t his daddy. Perry does not have that luxury or that backup and perry is not without warts, idiosyncrasies, and big money ties that would not sit well with a lot of people. He looks good from far away.
Why should any governor be issuing executive orders for HPV vaccination?
Shouldn’t that be the parent’s/child’s choice?
I want far less government in my life. I don’t want the do-gooders forcing on me what they think is best for me.
Oh, I AM skeptical about THEIR purpose, but I also wonder how an executive order that is a MANDATE is not mandatory for the reason stated in my original post.
From your LINK:
“...Gov. Rick Perry may not be the spider, but he certainly has become one of the strands in the web of international conspiracy for those who see a stealth plan to merge the United States with Canada and Mexico...”
From my brain:
Get a grip.
If a person can opt out, then it is voluntary. Whether the Governor issued an exec order is a matter of record. He did. That means the system is geared toward delivering the vaccination (as it is with any vaccination). If, however, one can opt out of vaccinations, and they can, then one cannot claim to have been forced to receive a vaccination.
Remind me again, who would Perry be running against?
We are talking primaries here. Let’s get through those first.
If you had chosen not to have this for your daughter, it would be your choice.
As for less government, look at Perry's record. He is for getting the Feds off our backs.
It's spelled out in the thread text at the beginning of this thread.
That's right.
BS. It was initially MANDATORY but thousands of parents , including my self were NEVER going to give my girls that stupid vaccine. My question was “why not make it mandatory for boys since they are the vector for the virus?”.
Perry WAS a democrat. Look at who he supported in the past. Look at what kind of cr@p he tried to pull with toll roads, vaccines and non enforcement of our border.
He got conservative when his hair started matching Romney’s
Do you think this was a conspiracy toward girls? Please explain. Also, how was the Gov going to make ALL TX girls have this shot? How was that going to happen? (clue -- it wasn't).
Perry WAS a democrat. Look at who he supported in the past. Look at what kind of cr@p he tried to pull with toll roads, vaccines and non enforcement of our border.
So was Ronald Reagan.
He got conservative when his hair started matching Romney’s
It's good to see you have a sense of humor.
yeah, I don’t want to jump on board with that article, but I thought that one part was really quite something, since it had Paul v Perry and it was 4 years ago.
The question of Bilderberg which Perry attended is not one that’s going to go away.
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.