Skip to comments.Rick Perry Pushes Their Buttons
Posted on 08/20/2011 8:56:05 PM PDT by smoothsailing
Gov. Rick Perry, pressed for his views on evolution, characterized it as “a theory” with “some gaps” in it. He went on to say that, in Texas, both conventional evolution and creationism are taught. He told a boy whose mother asked him about the subject: “In Texas, we teach both creationism and evolution in our public schools — because I figure you’re smart enough to figure out which one is right.”
This is the sort of thing that drives a certain kind of person nuts. Likewise, Perry’s joking about secession after being asked a question about it — and explaining that “when we came into the nation in 1845, we were a republic . . . and one of the deals was, we can leave anytime we want” — has caught on as a kind of shorthand for all of the cultural friction that is going to make Perry a tough sell to suburban moderates.
I’ll get into the question of tossing around these kinds of cultural hand grenades in a second, but first, let me note something that in my view is more important: Neither of Perry’s statements is true. Texas does not, as a matter of statewide policy, teach creationism alongside evolution. The state board of education has rejected creationist materials and adopted a rather conventional curriculum on the subject. And Texas did not retain a legal right to secede from the Union in 1845, though there is a cherished myth to the contrary. Texas’s annexation was a slightly complicated affair: An annexation treaty was proposed, and the secession myth is usually traced back to it. The treaty did not in fact contain such a provision, and, in any case, it was rejected by the U.S. Senate, and Texas was brought into the Union by a joint resolution of Congress (which seems kind of flimsy to me, but it’s worked out alright). Before the governor goes wading into such troubled waters, he ought to be in full command of the facts.
The broader question, however, is: Why would anybody ask a politician about his views on a scientific question? Nobody ever asks what Sarah Palin thinks about dark matter, or what John Boehner thinks about quantum entanglement. (For that matter, I’ve never heard Keith Ellison pressed for his views on evolution.) There are lots of good reasons not to wonder what Rick Perry thinks about scientific questions, foremost amongst them that there are probably fewer than 10,000 people in the United States whose views on disputed questions regarding evolution are worth consulting, and they are not politicians; they are scientists. In reality, of course, the progressive types who want to know politicians’ views on evolution are not asking a scientific question; they are asking a religious and political question, demanding a profession of faith in a particular materialist-secularist worldview.
Take the question of global warming: Jon Huntsman was quick to declare his faith in the scientific consensus on global warming, and Rick Perry has been openly skeptical of it. Again keeping in mind that nobody really ought to care what either Huntsman or Perry thinks about the relevant science, both are making an error, and a grave one, in conceding that the question at hand is scientific at all. It is not; it is political. One might be convinced that anthropogenic global warming is a real and problematic phenomenon, and still not be convinced that the policies being pushed by Al Gore et al. are wise and intelligent. (Some more thoughts on that here.)
Progressives like to cloak their policy preferences in the mantle of science, but they do not in fact give a fig about science, which for them is only a vehicle to be ridden to the precise extent that it is convenient. This is why they will ask what makes Rick Perry qualified to disagree with the scientific establishment, but never ask the equally relevant question of what makes Jon Huntsman qualified to agree with it. So long as they are getting the policies they want, they don’t care. If you want to see how dedicated a progressive is to dispassionate science, spend two minutes talking about the heritability of intelligence. You’ll be up to your neck in witchcraft and superstition and evasion in no time at all. (If you want to test a progressive’s faith in rigorous scholarship more broadly, ask him about gains from trade and comparative advantage, realities that are as solid as anything social science has to offer.)
Perry is making an error by approaching these questions as though they were scientific disputes and not political ones. The real question about global warming isn’t whether one computer simulation or another is the better indicator of what our climate will be like a century hence, it is whether such policies as envisioned by the environmentalist-anti-capitalist green coalition are wise. They are not. Evolution is a public question not because politicians have anything intelligent to say about the science, but because the question provides a handy cudgel to those who wish to beat the Judeo-Christian moral tradition into submission in the service of managerial progressivism. Perry should talk about that, not about alleged “gaps” in the scientific evidence, about which neither he nor his questioners nor the great majority of his critics nor the great majority of his supporters knows the first thing.
— Kevin D. Williamson is a deputy managing editor of National Review.
I’m so excited, I can’t wait for Perry to get elected so that I can immediately go down to the local doctor’s office to have a Port-A-Cath implanted for the forthcoming forced vaccinations.
Similar to what John Travolta said at Jack Rabbit Slim’s in Pulp Fiction, Perry is like oslama with a pulse.
I don’t like his looks.
Just to be clear, I’m so excited because, just like the 11-year-old girls Perry wanted to vaccinate with Gardisil, I’ve always wondered what it would like for someone to force me to take something that would kill me way before my natural sell-by date.
Oh brother. I hear Prozac works wonder for PDS, give it a try.
Now that’s really funny...what FORCED vaccinations? In 2003 (the autism scare) Perry supported and signed into law a bill that gave parents an opt out, either ‘conscience’ or ‘conscientious objector’ status for ANY VACCINATIONS they deemed dangerous to their children. That was FOUR YEARS before the USDA approved Gardasil. And of course he gave parents an opt out for Gardasil.
So EXACTLY whom do you think is going to FORCE you to install an immunizations catheter? The only one that can do that in Texas is YOU!
Sorry for the multiple postings, but, all you have to know about Perry is summed up in two letters, GG.
Gardasil and Gore
Throw in the fact that he’s an Aggie and you get:
Anybody But Obama 2012 (OBA2012)
For all of you typical FDA, medical establishment Rick Perry sycophants who deny what he did:
“Bypassing the Legislature altogether, Republican Gov. Rick Perry issued an order Friday making Texas the first state to require that schoolgirls get vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer.
By employing an executive order, Perry sidestepped opposition in the Legislature from conservatives and parents rights groups who fear such a requirement would condone premarital sex and interfere with the way Texans raise their children.
Beginning in September 2008, girls entering the sixth grade meaning, generally, girls ages 11 and 12 will have to receive Gardasil, Merck & Co.s new vaccine against strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV.”
And he will kill your kittens and puppies just for the fun of it too.
So far he does. The dumb-ass in chief is on vaca and needs his sweet time alone with moochelle.
You Perry apologists will say anything to try and defend the indefensible.
Posted on Friday, July 01, 2011 10:13:29 AM by Jim Robinson
..... if Palin does not run but Perry does, hed probably suck all the air out of the race. Either way, ..... Perry would all be excellent alternatives to Obama the commie. Anyone but RINO Romney the big government chief architect of CommieCare! Posted on Friday, July 01, 2011 10:13:29 AM by Jim Robinson
I’m sure Perry will force me to take it.
While he’s at it, hopefully he forces you to take Haldol.
I’m sure Perry will force me to take it.
While he’s at it, hopefully he forces you to take Haldol.
It’s a tough one coming up next year. Let the FR nation what you have so far. :^)
They should, that is why there was an opt out. Still, I agree that the gardisil mandate was a big mistake, even with the opt out. Perry agrees. I thought Reagan's amnesty was a big mistake too, and so did he.
When was the last time we had a president who was “pure”? Don’t say Reagan, we know he was not.
You’re making our case with that quote. Perry isn’t a first choice candidate for conservatives. Thanks for posting.
LOL! Oooh, the big scary Perryman is going to get me, yikes!
Are you a Ron Paulbot?
Your hyperbole is astounding.
I don’t want or need ‘pure’. I just don’t want pro-open borders, pro-illegal alien, pro-amnesty Mitt Perry.
And? He is so much BETTER than O or mittens that the vitriol poured against him mazes the mind.
Knowledge is the beginning of wisdom!
We just finished 8 years with a President from Texas. Why in the crap do we need to return to the same well again?
Astounding is a good description. Certifiable works too.
I have no idea what that means.
One thing you can say for woose, is he’s still got some imagination after following ronpaul around the funny-farm.
Compare with the Doofus in Chief:
Well, Reagan was horrible on every single immigration/border issue. I know that doesn’t help.
I just wanna get rid of our golfer-in-chief!
Why in the world would you care where somebody is from.....That my FRiend is completely stupid.
Sarah and Rick riding into DC on Harleys, now that would be something! The moonbats would explode!
Reagan's amnesty had nothing to do with forcing an unproven drug into young girls' veins.
Rick Perry stole my jar of bacon bits (made with real bacon!), my margarita mix and my toenail clipper.
Then, he snuck into my house while I was asleep and injected me with a tetanus shot.
He is better than the Marxist Kenyan. But that doesn’t mean we should settle for just ‘better’.
Can you name one person that can win ... with the possible exception of Romney?
Sounds better than an IRS lawyer from MN or a mormon from MA
What planet you just come from? Try getting your kid into any publix skool without a slough of vaccinations, which ARE mandatory and ain’t a one of them Gardisil, fool.
See now the high minded moderates who demand and required those so called 'single' issues voters, 'pro-lifers' to vote for their chosen candidates had to come up with a new pejorative to call the hicks from the sticks.
The pejorative 'purists' came about back when President Bush was pushing his compassionate conservative theology over amnesty. So rather than just be liberal about calling US that are against open borders for the gated communities they settled on the term of 'purists' to put us down and in our place.
It is probable that the trails, paths and superhighways of spreading communications since the epithet was born that many have as the majority tends to do taken up using the pejorative as their only means to feel like they have put somebody that disagrees with them under foot.
We all agree that we need to rid this nation of the Kenyan. But it’s far too early in the primary to settle on a less than desirable candidate.
Rick Perry TPd my house and shaved my cats.
LOL, who is “better” in your mind?
Rick Perry defeats rock, paper AND scissors