Posted on 09/16/2011 4:22:40 PM PDT by smoothsailing
Bryan Preston
September 16, 2011
Something about Michele Bachmann’s video has been bugging me (and Matt Lewis too) ever since I posted it earlier today. Aside from the irresponsible lunacy of issuing a blanket opposition to “any governor or president who mandates a family’s healthcare choices and violates the rights of parents on these issues” and scaremongering about a vaccine known to be safe, there’s a word she should use in the video but never does. See if you can spot it:
“Whether its Obamacare or Perrycare I oppose any governor or president who mandates a family’s healthcare choices and violates the rights of parents on these issues – especially if the decision-making process occurs behind closed doors, bypassing legislative action, and favors campaign contributors over families.”
Which GOP candidate has had his state-run health care program linked with ObamaCare? Not Perry, since Texas doesn’t have anything like ObamaCare. No, that would be Mitt Romney. But Bachmann doesn’t use “RomneyCare.” Why? Has she allowed herself to become a stalking horse for Romney? If so, on what grounds?
And then there’s the crony capitalist problem. Bachmann has taken a lot of money from pharma companies. One company stands out.
Meanwhile, Bachman has taken somewhere north of $140,000 from pharmaceutical companies. Those donors include Abbott Labs, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Eli Lilly and Bayer. Yet, not a dollar of all that pharma money, from such a wide range of the world’s largest drugmakers, came from Merck. Might Bachmann be going after Merck on behalf of that company’s competitors who also happen to be Bachmann donors?
Why bold GlaxoSmithKline? Because they make the only other viable HPV vaccine on the market, Cervarix.
If it’s fair to levy the “crony capitalism” charge at Perry, then it’s fair to levy the exact same charge at Bachmann, especially after her attacks on Perry.
For the record, I know the “crony capitalism” charge doesn’t apply to Perry and I don’t believe it applies to Bachmann. The stalking horse possibility is definitely in play, though.
That PDS addition is hurting your thought patterns.
I see that the concensus of replies to you say you don’t know butt from third base.
Dude, #25 was your post!
Here's the path: #25->#35->#29
Connect the dots!
And, with all due respect, getting to third base involves getting yo' head out yo' a$$.
I know the “crony capitalism” charge doesn’t apply to Perry
________________________________________________________
The author must be kidding? or totally in the tank for Perry
That is one of my concerns about the Governor as well.
That he believes that, once elected, he could think that he could make a decision about people's children, whatever his motivations were (whether altruistic or political), without a thought about what citizens want or believe, raises a giant red flag about his character, his motivations, and his respect for the nature of our Constitution.
What is the difference between a man who believes that he has the power to mandate what the government injects into our daughters, and a man who believes that he has the right to mandate how our doctors treat our illnesses?
I will not give up that right.
That is not my only concern.
Are you not concerned with the highway from Mexico through Texas?
How much land should we be willing to surrender to Governor Perry?
Were you in favor of the Kelo Decision in the Supreme Court?
If he becomes President, will he respect your property rights?
There are lots of questions that this man has to answer.
He doesn't deserve to be annointed, just yet, in my mind.
I don’t think he’s kidding, he refers to this...
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/09/16/video-heather-burcham-and-gov-rick-perry/
Rick Perry Exclusive: The GOP’s Fiery Front-Runner on His Rise, Record and Rhetoric
I saw your remark earlier before I needed to leave but wanted to come back and let you know I think you hit the nail right on its head.
Even though Michele Bachmann (and I'm sure other politicians as well) got campaign donations from some of the same companies that would have benefited from Minnesota's federally-tax-funded Gardasil program at that time... and from the Gardasil immunization programs that were popping up all over the country during that time period, that does not appear to be the problem she is facing or that even appears to be concerning enough to look at. Her problems stem from her obvious alliance with Mitt Romney and her self-imploding campaign.
I think it's good to know Minnesota and all the other states during that era were in the process of including Gardasil into their state's health departments and clinics, many of them, as in Minnesota and Alaska, on tax payer dollars. That needs to be understood so that no one politician or state is scrutinized without the overall historical picture of the time. And minus information that donations were in fact done unethically or illegally, it's hard for politicians to accept donations without SOMEHOW touching a part of life in which that politician lives.
But it's FAR different when desperation (or something else) reveals character traits that just won't do for someone holding the position of President of the United States.
Thanks for sharing your wisdom!
Rep. Bachmann is still on the top of my list.
Okay.
I don't need a Weatherman, to see which way the way the wind blows.
Do You?
That’s why we have elections!
Nope.
The info I provided is for historical and contextual purposes only, including the federal implementation of Gardasil programs all over the country at that time, many on the tax payer’s dollar, and the almost-unavoidable association a politician will have with some segment of his or her life when accepting political contributions. If interested, please see post #66 of this thread for more infomration.
Forgive me for that use of an incorrect word. In that last post, in lieu of "federal implementation", I meant "NATIONAL implementation", or better yet "NATION-WIDE implementation" of Gardasil programs (many using federal tax payer funds).
I thought I should come back and clarify that so as not to give the impression I was trying to represent it as a federal program.
Did you also know that Rep. Bachmann was elected in November of 2006 to the United States House of Representatives, and that she had nothing to do with the Minnesota Legislature's decision to approve of injecting minor children of their citizens with Gardasil in 2007, as she was not a member of that body?
I do not expect that these facts would change your opinion of Rep. Bachmann, but I might expect you to apologize to her for your implication of impropriety during her time in the Minnesota Legislature.
But I may be wrong.
That is comforting.
Bless your heart.
Why thank you, that is most kind.
You are most welcome.
Hey that was great of Perry to visit the young girl! I said that in another thread as well. Good for him.
That was not the thread or story I was responding to...The thread I was referring to was titled DOES BACHMANN HAVE A CRONY PROBLEM TOO
I know the “crony capitalism” charge doesn’t apply to Perry
and you asked:
The author must be kidding? or totally in the tank for Perry
The answer was the statement itself, it was linked to the story about the girl. That's why the author doesn't think the "crony capitalism" charge applies to Perry, so the author wasn't kidding, he meant it.
Let's get beyond the article.
I'm a supporter of Rep. Bachmann.
You support Gov. Perry.
Am I correct?
If so, let's hash this out.
There’s nothing to hash out. Best of luck with your candidate.
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.