To: DoughtyOne
I believe that the mandate was so that the insurance companies would pay for the vaccine.
If it was an opt-in then the insurance co would not pay for the vaccine.
Not sure why he does not mention this.
Still a mistake by him, was corrected within months and never went into effect, and he has owned up to it.
I was upset with him when he did this but I forgave him for it because I do not believe for one minute he did it for money or for bad motive. I sincerely believe he did it because he thought he would be helping young Texan girls avoid cancer.
I did not hear the Bachman and Palin interview, but if the two of them were implying the motive was for money - then I would never ever vote for either one of them and am disappointed especially in Palin. Bachman using these tactics don’t surprise me but Palin?
The Governor (Perry) is a self made millionaire by good investments he made in real estate purchases. And that is out in the open clearly documented/public.
Why would he even consider ruining his career over a measly $5k donation?
I agree with him, anyone even hinting at that is offensive.
128 posted on
09/12/2011 8:31:09 PM PDT by
TexMom7
To: TexMom7
130 posted on
09/12/2011 8:32:51 PM PDT by
Diogenesis
("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
To: TexMom7
“The Governor (Perry) is a self made millionaire by good investments he made in real estate purchases. And that is out in the open cleary documented/public.”
As are all the hundreds of thousands of dollars in free vacations, bowl trips and other things he received from supporters, some of whom received appointments or grants in exchange.
135 posted on
09/12/2011 8:36:44 PM PDT by
bwc2221
To: TexMom7
I believe that the mandate was so that the insurance companies would pay for the vaccine. I don't believe that is accurate. Parents, insurance companies, and taxpayers would have had to foot the bill.
If it was an opt-in then the insurance co would not pay for the vaccine. The important thing here is the protection of individual choice. You do not set something this personal up, so that you have to go through hoops to opt out. When it comes to personal matters like this, you provide access, and then allow people to opt in. It's a personal matter. It IS NOT a state matter. Young girls would have not say in this at all, the way Perry set it up. The state and parents would get the final say. When it comes to dying, I think a kid should have a choice in the matter too.
Not sure why he does not mention this. Because there was no justification for what he did, whatsoever.
How would you have liked to have been forced to take a medication that would have exposed you to death, severe immune difficiency problems, or severe long term allergic reactions before you could have entered the sixth grade. And how would you have liked it if you couldn't personally have had a say in that decision making process. The state, and your parents would have the final say. You couldn't opt out without their consent. This is not the sort of decision a benevolent man makes on behalf of innocent young girls. It's the decision an ill-informed dictator makes. It expresses no consideration for the rights of the child in the process.
Still a mistake by him, was corrected within months and never went into effect, and he has owned up to it.
You say this as if it was some sort of a small dent on the right front fender of a car, that was pounded out and made good as new. Girls died from taking this medication, over 100 of them. Thousands of girls got long term immuno deficiencies from take this medication. Still thousands more got some form of allergic reaction, that caused them to have to take medication once or more every day to counter the effects.
Perry did not correct this mistake. The state legislature stepped in three months later, and corrected it. By the grace of God, it may be true that no Texas girls were forced into taking this medication against their will, but it's certainly no thanks to Perry. If I knew nothing more about the man, this one thing would disqualify him as a person I would back to hold public office. It wreaks of being Hillary Clintoneske.
I was upset with him when he did this but I forgave him for it because I do not believe for one minute he did it for money or for bad motive. I sincerely believe he did it because he thought he would be helping young Texan girls avoid cancer. IT DOES NOT MATTER what his motive was. It does not matter if he profited personally. This was dictatorial in nature, and a serverly flawed decision making process. Where does the rights of the child figure into this?
I did not hear the Bachman and Palin interview, but if the two of them were implying the motive was for money - then I would never ever vote for either one of them and am disappointed especially in Palin. Bachman using these tactics dont surprise me but Palin? I didn't hear the interview either. I don't necessarily agree with some of the things said, if reports are accurate. As for Bachmann being some sort of person you supposedly knew could do something bad, spare me. You thought better of Palin, but knew Bachmann could be unfair? That's downright comical. Perry endangers girls lives, and Bachmann and Palin are the only two you can find problem with. Wow.
The Governor (Perry) is a self made millionaire by good investments he made in real estate purchases. And that is out in the open clearly documented/public.
He is also a man that issued an Excutive Order forcing young girls to endure an injection regimine completely out of their own control. Rick Perry and parents were the only ones who needed to be consulted. To hell with the ten or eleven year old kid who would face death, immuno deficiencies, or long term allergic reactions of some sort. This is a guy that grasps the problems women face? I'm about the farthest thing from a feminist, and this actually makes me angry.
This is documented and out in the open too. What the hell is wrong with you, that you could explain this action away to yourself enough, to defend this jackass on this issue.
Why would he even consider ruining his career over a measly $5k donation?
I don't believe he would, but that really is pulling people off message. I don't care if he made this decision for free, which I believe him to have done. It was a despicable decision. It was loathesome, totally unacceptable.
I agree with him, anyone even hinting at that is offensive.
What Perry actually said was something to the effect that he found it unreasoned for someone to think he could be bought for that amount of money. Unwittingly, and I also think unfoundedly, it sounded as if he was saying it would take a lot more money than that to buy him. I did get a chuckle out of the sound of it, none the less.
267 posted on
09/13/2011 10:15:45 AM PDT by
DoughtyOne
(McCain 5 yrs Left/1 year right "BAD!" - Republicans 3 yrs Right 1 year Left to elect RINOs. "Good?")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson