Posted on 08/19/2011 12:25:11 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Earlier this week, Michelle Malkin went after Rick Perry over the human papillomavirus vaccine mandates he authorized as governor. Two days later, she followed up with a second scorching post, this time saying Perry was “soft on illegal immigration,” “prone to crony capitalism” — and that he “demonstrated Nanny State tendencies that are anathema to Tea Party core principles.”
(By the way, two months ago, I predicted Perry would face many of the questions that are now being raised by Malkin).
Some conservatives, of course, weren’t happy with Malkin’s criticism. When it comes to covering conservative primary candidates, some people think conservative writers should just turn a blind eye — or solely focus on attacking Obama. (A common criticism is: “You’re doing the left’s work for them!”).
On this, I side with Malkin. It is healthy for center-right journalists and conservative bloggers (there is a major distinction between the two — but time doesn’t allow one to address every nuance) to vet candidates. Skepticism is good. As The Jim Antle Doctrine advises conservatives: “A political alliance isn’t a marriage. You don’t have to take a presidential candidate for better or worse. Only when they’re right.”
Others, however, like Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin, seem to believe center-right media should function simply as “team players” or cheerleaders for conservative politicians. (Note: They get to decide who is “conservative” at the given moment).
For this reason, my well-documented column about Rep. Michele Bachmann’s penchant for earmarks (and farm subsidies, etc.), led Limbaugh and Levin to attack me. Limbaugh actually accused me of being too concerned about purity. He then defended Bachmann’s earmarks, saying: “I have never been one to base my entire view of a politician on whether or not they supported earmarks — ’cause it’s not that much money.”
Levin also had some choice words for me.
(No word yet on whether or not Limbaugh or Levin will attack Michelle Malkin for her criticism of Rick Perry…)
Conservative activists are understandably annoyed when journalists and bloggers (again, I’m conflating the two) begin to remove the facade of perfection carefully crafted by Republican politicians and their handlers. This is understandable, but the truth is that, in the long run, center-right journalists and bloggers don’t do the conservative movement any favors when they give Republican politicians a pass. Nor is it Malkin’s job (nor mine) to help Republican politicians get elected. Conservative activists must sooner or later understand that.
While I am 100 percent in agreement with Malkin that it is appropriate (and indeed necessary) for conservative writers to raise questions about GOP presidential candidates — I am still curious about the intensity for which she has gone after Perry. After all, the lingering questions about Perry are no more concerning than the questions about Bachmann’s record — and they are certainly no more concerning than questions about Mitt Romney’s. Until or unless more information comes forward about Perry, my take is that his past peccadilloes shouldn’t be a deal breaker for conservatives.
Bachmann and Cain have pretty much the same stance on all those issues.
Without the big question marks on immigration and the like.
I still haven’t heard Perry supporters answer any of these charges, they just keep calling me names.
Not he's not. Perry says what ever he needs to say to get conservatives to vote for him, like calling out the traitors at the Federal Reserve, and then governs like the big government RINO Globalist he really is. Its very simple and I can't believe how people fall for this schtick. No wonder this country is going down the tubes. People have absolutely no discernment.
“I’m looking for “old-school”, crazy, elmininate whole departments, turn the nation back to God.”
ME TOO!
Nonsense. The straw poll is absolutely meaningless. All of a sudden, though, he was ahead nationally among likely Republican voters. Sometimes swagger works.
Swagger? What swagger?
In Texas, that’s called walking.
Malkin is hardcore on illegal Immigration, that ‘s why.
I'm a long-term member of the GOP and have worked many a convention. Perry has too. We're 'birds of a feather' (I was born in TX too) and at this point in time, I don't think for a minute that he will have any real competition for the nomination - nor do I think that any negative found so far will cost him votes in that convention.
The only thing that might hurt him could be what he might say in the coming months. He's very outspoken - born of his upbringing and his faith, so hang on - this is going to be a real American knock-down drag-out that will be great fun to watch, simply because Perry is not some phoney 'insider.'
I’m glad for him to be challenged now to explain, defend or recant the few issues she has mentioned. That is exactly why we have primaries.
So-called conservatives like Malkin and Coulter support candidates like Christie and Romney.
///
“so-called” ?
you would support a pro-Amnesty candidate who increases government spending, quotes the Quran, and refuses to admit his own religious beliefs to a child?
(Palin admits PROUDLY in her book, she is a Creationist!
Both her and Bachmann, have the COURAGE of their convictions. and neither of them praise the religion our troops are killed in the name of.)
MARK LEVIN has problems with Perry!!!
...go ahead, trash him too, as a “so-called” conservative.
people put Bachmann, Cain, and others, under a microscope, yet if repected people like Mark Levin dare to criticise Perry, it’s THEY who are making the mistake.
because Perry, like Obama, is “AWESOME” and above criticism.
...what a great way to vett and select a U.S. President.
“The HPV mandatory vaccination that he shoved through was Obamacare writ small. “
Of course, that implies Obamacare has an opt-out, which it doesn’t.
i think a conservative, should
be for cutting spending, and shrinking government.
( A+ - Paul Ryan. Michelle Bachmann )
be for SECURING THE BORDER.
( NO candidates get an “A” here. )
be strong for America, and UNDERSTAND that 99% of our danger internationally is from ISLAM.
( how many Perry supporters, rightly condemned Ron Paul for his insane remarks about Iran having a nuclear weapon,
yet IGNORE Perry’s fondness for “the Religion of Peace” ? )
It most certainly does. Lots of Democrat entities were exempted from Obamacare.
Oh, so as long as any overreaching legislation Perry arbitrarily shoves through has an imaginary double-super-secret "opt-out" clause, he can do anything he wants.
That makes sense.
</sarcasm>
I love MM, but she does seem to be on a mission.
Some of the issues are substantive and backed up...some are more vague. The solid concerns are enough to see him stay in Texas a while longer, he seems to be doing some good things, finding his way in others. God bless him, let him do good.
Does not win my confidence for POTUS though he may be destined for great things in the future...
My guess is that it goes back to 1988, when Perry supported Al Gore (barf) when G. H. W. Bush was running.
Gee, we’ve done really well as a nation when our Presidents had “real executive experience in governing,” haven’t we? Carter, Clinton, Bush II... /s
The answer is simple. For the same reason so many here at FR have been going after Perry. He's not a conservative.
Reagan.....
The others are unproven, they are a crapshoot, hit and miss. Just because they talk the talk does not mean they are going to walk the walk. Talk is cheap, very cheap. If I was interviewing candidates for a CEO position, I certainly would not choose the one with the least experience.
Its going to be Palin or Perry.
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.