Skip to comments.Rick Perry: A Texan’s ‘exceptionalism’
Posted on 06/25/2011 12:11:49 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
In the 1850s, on the steps of the Waco courthouse, Wallace Jeffersons great-great-great-grandfather was sold. Today, Jefferson is chief justice of Texass Supreme Court. The governor who nominated him also nominated the states first Latina justice. Rick Perry, 61, the longest-serving governor in Texas history and, in his 11th year, currently the nations senior governor, says these nominations are two of his proudest accomplishments.
French cuffs and cowboy boots are, like sauerkraut ice cream, an eclectic combination, but Perry, who wears both, is a potentially potent candidate for the Republican presidential nomination because his political creed is uneclectic, matching that of the Republican nominating electorate. He was a 10th Amendment conservative (The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people) before the Tea Party appeared. And before Barack Obamas statism especially Obamacares individual mandate catalyzed concern for the American project of limited government.
Social issues, especially abortion, are gateways to the Republican nominating electorate: In todays climate of economic fear, a candidates positions on social issues will not be decisive with his electorate but they can be disqualifying. Perry an evangelical Christian, like most Republican participants in Iowas caucuses and the South Carolina primary emphatically qualifies.
The Republican contest probably will become a binary choice Romney and the Not Romney candidate. If Perry becomes the latter, he will do so by his visceral appeal to social conservatives, and by trumping Romneys economic expertise with Texas exceptionalism:.....
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Still waiting to hear from the Perry haters what we should make of Sarah’s wholehearted endorsement and support of Perry as a true conservative.
That's no more accurate than saying Perry made Guardasil mandatory. At no time did he do that, although the accusation has been repeated so many times that there are inevitably some people who actually believe it.
I've seen that word mandatory used by both supporters and non-supporters of Rick Perry.
I've always thought mandatory properly defined meant obligatory; compulsory: permitting no option. It seems to me that the word has been misused in it's application to what happened with Guardasil.
Perry's unilateral executive order was boneheaded, although arguably well-intentioned. He probably wishes he'd never heard of Guardasil. At the time, parents had a full 18 months to decide what they wanted to do. The order was issued February 2007, and parents had until September 2008 to either comply or opt out. The option to refuse vaccinations under a state law approved and signed by Perry is a loophole large enough to drive a Mack truck through. Only the most incompetent of parents would have been unable to act in the 18 month time frame, and I would certainly fear for any child stuck in such a home.
"Perry's order directs the Health and Human Services Commission to adopt rules for the requirement, which is effective in September 2008.
Parents would be allowed to opt their daughters out for medical, philosophical, religious or moral reasons, as they can do now for other required vaccines.
A 3-year-old state law broadened parents' ability to refuse vaccinations." Read more: Perry orders cancer vaccine for young girls
Mitt Romney, the Republican front-runner, might be easier to elect than to nominate. The reverse might be true of Perry.George Will shows his abysmal stupidity with this remark.
He really thinks Magic Panties has a chance against the DemoMedia Attack Machine? What a fool.
"Forced Gardasil" isn't true, even if it's in all-caps. There was an opt-out provision for anyone who wanted out.
Then you need to stay at home with that attitude
Were you fooled by Trump also? Perry is bought and paid for and is not going to save you.
The “Supremacy Clause” says:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
TSA patdowns/nude scanners are not a law made pursuant to the Constitution, so the Supremacy Clause does not apply in this case. That doesn’t mean the Federal government with the aiding of the Federal judiciary won’t try to declare Texas’s proposed statute unconstitutional, but unless the Constitution was a willful surrender to the whim of Federal bureaucrats, that doesn’t even pass the laugh test.
I, among many Texans, know Perry is imperfect.
We also know that all, all without exception, are imperfect.
Those who infect these threads with their venomous fear and loathing of a particular imperfect candidate obviously have an ax to grind, either against that one or for a different imperfect one, or both.
People will tell you that Perry is not a statesman but a typical politician. I will tell you that he is a politician but not in the worst sense of that word, but in the traditionally acceptable sense of that word. As to whether he can rise to a level of statesmanship, that remains to be seen. Often times, the times make the man (or woman). And these are terribly bad times for America.
We must defeat Obama and hold the House and take the Senate.
Let me repeat: we must defeat Obama and hold the House and take the Senate.
I am interested in the most conservative leader - and they must have strong leadership qualities - who has at the same time the ability to defeat Obama and the Democrats and the Media.
That leader might be Rick Perry. Right now, I don’t know who else meets those criteria as well as potentially he does, who at the same time is either announced or on the cusp of it.
Despite his imperfections, the fact that Perry is a politician has its good side. The fact is, he has Tea Party credentials. The Tea Party is not monolithic, so some Tea Partiers love Perry and some hate him. I suspect some haven’t made up their minds yet, and are willing to give him a chance. The politician in Perry will absolutely have to pay attention to the Tea Party. Only the stupid believe that Perry is trying to get in so he can reprise the radical leftism of algore.
Over and over, they say since he once was a Democrat and once supported algore, he’s toast.
It’s like time stopped for them way back when. No, actually time moved on 25 years and situations changed and evolved. Just as it did with the great Ronaldus Magnus. Not only did algore change into a radical leftist when long ago he was not one, but Rick Perry finally let go of his family’s historical Texas Democrat roots and switched parties.
Was he perfect after that? Nope. Neither was Reagan after he switched.
But against Obama and the Dems of today, if it comes down to it, I would pull that lever for Rick Perry.
Or else, goodby America.
Perry has a few good points, and quite a few bad points. But in terms of the credence I give to the byline, George Will outed himself as an elitist, beltway scum, and I’m still hoping an errant baseball will find its way to his forehead.
And Perry was endorsed by Palin.
Sort that one out.
patriot08 made a GREAT post, about true patriots like Rush and Palin praising Perry.
we ALL need to agree, that NO candidate will be perfect!
i am VERY concerned about illegal immigration. it’s a BIG issue to me. but, Perry is still a million times better than Romney!
but i am tired of everyone making their favorite, “walk on water”, and REFUSING to admit they are human, and make mistakes.
We NEED to secure the Border. i hope Perry understand this.
and, spending TAX PAYER money, on Gardasil, was WRONG.
i can still vote for Perry, but he and his supporters need to understand this.
(and, the “opt out” was NOT permanent. it had to be notarized and repeated every 2 years. NOT a good faith option, for parents who weren’t worried about their teens being sexually active, which is the ONLY dubious reason for this vaccine, which possibly killed more girls than it “allegedly” saved !)
Gardasil was a huge mistake!!!
to require MULTIPLE injections, at a HUGE HUGE cost.
I studied this issue years ago, look before i ever heard of Perry.
this doctor, was one of the DEVELOPERS of Gardasil:
...Dr.Diane Harper, lead researcher in the development of two human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccines and director of the Gynecologic Cancer Prevention Research Group
HERSELF came out against Gardasil.
Even many LIBERALS now admit Gardasil was a very bad idea.
here is just one TINY example (of MANY) from CBS:
At a cost of $360 dollars for the full 3-shot course of vaccine, that comes to about $900,000,000 to prevent one death.
(and side effects killed more girls in USA and Britain, than that!)
Gardasil is intended to protect againist FOUR types of HPV. But there are over 120 different strains of HPV.
Gardrasil offers NO benefit for a girl unless she is sexually active. (and those are minimal.)
It offers very REAL dangers and side-effects, for ALL girls who take it.
i respectfully suggest, that Perry supporters, simply admit this is one flaw on an otherwise fine conservative candidate.
Thank you for one of the most thoughtful posts I’ve read on FR in a long time.
Another Texan by way of GA (wish Zell Miller would have followed suit) Phil Gramm, was a democrat who joined the Republican Party.
Smart people don’t turn good people away or insult them for their past associations (we’re not talking Chicago here folks).
Yes Palin endorsed McCain. He was worthless. Her endorsements are not always good.
“Let me repeat: we must defeat Obama and hold the House and take the Senate.”
And let me say if for a third time: we must defeat Obama and hold the House and take the Senate.
Sarah did not endorse Rudy.
Rick did endorse Rudy.
And Rick ran Gore’s 1988 presidential campaign in Texas.
I doubt Sarah worked for Gore.
Millions of illegal aliens wandering around Texas agree!
The thing that really burned me on Perry (speaking as a long-time Texan) is that during the election before last, when the problem with the illegals became a front-burner issue, Perry made a big production out of putting video-cameras on the border, talking and acting all tough on the issue. Just a few days after he won his re-election, the cameras were quietly turned off, and never mentioned again.
I’d pretty much vowed never to vote for him again, but when Kay Bailey was being pushed by Bush/Rove in the primaries, I admittedly found Perry a preferable option. But that incident with the border cameras still grates me. He has some good points, but damn, I just can’t trust him.