"Blind worship is when...", in the context you're using, has no apparent meaning other than "I don't agree with it when..."
It's just not fair or intellectually honest to assert that people you disagree with are religious zealots in blind worship of a random politician who only went national like a month ago.
Perry's in his fourth term in office, 11+ years as governor, 10-0 electoral record, undefeated at 61 years of age, running a state in considerably better shape than the rest of the Union.
That's not blind worship. It's chiseled-in-stone fact.
To say that he's not qualified to be President compared to, say, Barack Obama, George Bush, Bill Clinton, GHWB, Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter ... well, I don't know how far back you'd have to go before you found someone who's more qualified. He seems to be either ahead of or equal to the pack so far.
Perry's pro-life, pro-gun and pro-business, but he's also got a number of things in his long record that are bad. The only people that don't have bad things in their records are people with short ones. While that may seem an attractive route, remember that America just blew 4 years of our life on Barack Hussien OmyGod-this-guy-has-no-idea-what-he's-doing-what-were-we-thinking-hiring-him-as-President?! They're not going to do that again twice in a row. Like it or not, Obama's now the 'safe bet' compared to, say, Herman Cain, as far as independents are concerned. At least he's experienced.
While it might be a big deal in our corner of the blogosphere, the fact that Perry supported a toll road that never got built isn't even going to move the needle on 95% of the electorate's 'give a crap' meter. Neither is most of the 'similarities to Obama' that you posted. He's weak on immigration, insofar as he's pretty much the same as any other Republican, just more exposed to the problem by virtue of his location. Otherwise, he's categorically better than Obama in any quantifiable way.
Bush had his problems, but he gave us Roberts and Alito on the Supreme Court. Obama gave us the quasi-commie appointees of Sotomayor and Kagan. The next President will probably get two more, which will change the face of the nation for decades. That alone makes defeating Obama non-negotiable.
So, between a relatively sure thing in a so-so Perry, a longshot in awesome Palin, or certain doom in meta-awful Obama, it's no contest. First down over Hail Mary. That's not blind worship. It's just business.
I noted that you were not engaging in blind worship of Perry, since you noted his faults, evaluated them, and compared them to his strengths.
There are other posters, however, who don't do that: on various threads, they simply post a mocking list of his faults, as though it is self-evident that the faults are insignficant, and that listing the faults in advance of his detractors is sufficient refutation of them.
I've seen what you list as his strengths: the problem is that you are suggesting that mere tenure and prior electoral success is itself sufficient guarantee. I disagree. FDR was elected four times (one of his oppenents had the memorable slogan "Third Term means Dictatorship") and his domestic policies were an unspeakable disaster (and one of the root causes of today's problems).
The state being in considerably better shape than the rest of the Union is not entirely due to Perry, no matter his claims. Some of his major policy initiatives (Trans Texas Corridor) were defeated by popular uprising; some of his "health care" ideas (Gardasil) were put down by the legislature -- even though he claimed that the legislature did not have the authority to overrule an Exective Order -- and to make it worse, after he was overridden, he later went around claiming that "he listened to the people" when he had done no such thing. This reveals a dangerous tendency towards command-and-control. Then there is the problem of crony capitalism (TEF); ridiculous claims are made that in some cases the state investment resulted in at > 10,000% return! (But looking at the fine print in the footnotes, the return is an estimate by a third party firm and includes direct, indirect, and (IIRC) *anticipated* economic growth.)
And then you have his stance on judges: he pushed Rodriguez (a pro-abort judge), and supported the opponent of Stephen Wayne Smith, who won the Hopwood case invovling racial preferences.
NOT to mention that Perry ran the Gore campaign in Texas in 1988: a long time ago, but this was while REAGAN was *finishing* his 2nd term, and everyone on the planet could see how successful he had been economically. What on earth would ANY "conservative" be doing supporting the Dem candidate rather than Reagan's VP at that point?
And he pushed pro-abort Rudy Guiliani in 2008.
Finally after pandering for years to the illegal alien / big business crowd, now when the national spotlight is on him he is "talking tough" on the border.
Finger-in-the-wind opportunist.
And in areas such as education, public health, etc.: Texas is not in considerably better shape than the rest of the Union. Can you tell me for example, what provisions Perry has made for drought relief for farmers?
While that may seem an attractive route, remember that America just blew 4 years of our life on Barack Hussien OmyGod-this-guy-has-no-idea-what-he's-doing-what-were-we-thinking-hiring-him-as-President?! They're not going to do that again twice in a row. Like it or not, Obama's now the 'safe bet' compared to, say, Herman Cain, as far as independents are concerned. At least he's experienced.
Most of the country is saying "ANYONE but Obama." The Democrat party is reeling from an epic 60-year defeat at the polls last November, and Obama is the weakest Dem since Carter, maybe since LBJ (there is open talk in Dem circles of primarying him). What better opportunity will we ever have of putting in a movement conservative (with solid CONSERVATIVE -- Tea Party, not "Republican") majorities in the House and Senate? We tried a populist Texan with George Bush and we couldn't even get the Supreme Court.
With a REAL conservative, we can dismantle the left's legacy all the way back to the sixties.
But you want to go with a squishy RINO. If you do that, the GOP is FINISHED. And with it, when the pendulum swings again in repugnance, the republic is FINISHED.
NO cheers, unfortunately.
That's the deal. It's really not that hard to figure out, either.