No case? Malkin offers multiple ways in which Perry's administration acted similarly to Obama's. Read the article and you'll, for example, find she details the following three ways in which Perry acted akin to Obama:
1.Trampling the deliberative process.
2. Human shield demagoguery.
3. Cronyism
Malkin makes a convincing case for each. And while you may not agree, I do and think many others will also.
I have no problem with calling Perry to task for the way the Gardisil EO was pushed through, but it's the ridiculous hyperbole that is being used here on a whole host of Perry issues which demonstrates the bad faith with which Malkin, and ostensibly you, are using.
I'm seeing all over FR, that because Rick Perry once met with a businessman who was an Islamic leader, that that is not simpy putting business above other considerations, but it's proof that he's a Shariah sympathizer. I'm seeing that because he doesn't support a 1200 mile border fence, and instead wants targeted enforcement along the worst areas with boots on the ground, isn't just a weakness on border issues that should be strengthened, but that he actually supports "Open Borders". Because he pushed a Gardisil EO through in a manner not consistent with the normal process, he is actually acting "Obama-like".
It's the reaching hyperbole and false equivalencies that are the issue, and I'll continue to point them out.
I have no problem with him being taken to task over this, but if you're grinding your axe against Perry for the reason I suspect you are, I don't think it serves you or your cause well to use the exact same false tactics that use silly over the top comparisons. It's obvious you haven't looked at the very thorough narratives that have explained the true context of the Gardisil decision, so I'd ask that you step back from the false hyperbole and look at the issue in an honest manner.