Yes, your points are good ones. Perry has done a reasonably good job with regard to the things that an political executive can do. And, let’s be honest, there have been some classic “sleazy” political deals in there as well (Guardasil vaccine—it’s not a deal killer for me, but it was a little sleazy). Making sleazy deals is part of the nature of the political beast. It’s good that we are being reminded that even our guys have to be watched like hawks. We can’t any longer just pull the lever in the voting booth and assume that “our guy” will automatically do the right thing. Politicians are inherently untrustworthy; this is a perennial truth, and one that we should have learned well after Dubya.
Perry is also very sincerely pro-life. I think he will nominate very good judges to the federal bench. And let’s not forget that when we elect an executive nowadays, we are de facto electing a judiciary. The country simply cannot survive another 4 years of judges appointed by Obama. We may well have to impeach a couple of them. Impeaching judges may be the next major task of the Tea Party. Electing legislatures no longer seems to suffice.
So, there will come a day when we Tea Party hobbits have to raise Hell about some damn fool proposal that a President Perry comes up with (think back to Dubya and Harriet Miers and the amnesty), but I can live with that. I’m confident that with the rise of the Tea Party we now have a “Fifth Branch of Government” (namely, We the People). It won’t let things get by without raising hell.
Most importantly, Perry loves this country. He is on it’s side in principle.
ONe more thing: we have to conduct a review of the way we conduct commerce with foreign powers (mostly China). Hollowing out our industrial base is not just a trade issue, it’s got national security implications. But that’s a whole other thread.
Gardasil Cervical Cancer Vaccine/Merck
CW: Most people do not think like you and the few others who hit every Perry thread trying to elevate this to a "sticking" point.
I'm not a mind reader but it strikes me that Gov. Rick Perry truly believed the HPV vaccine would have helped a lot of Texans who otherwise would not have gotten this protection against cervical cancer (it was to help with 3 strains of the human papilloma virus HPV).
Rick Perry's wife Anita Perry was a nurse for 17 years and still is involved in health care as First Lady of Texas, so I imagine health care is something this governor is more aware of than maybe your "average" governor and understood this to be a vaccine that would combat cervical cancer and cut heath care costs.
Then too Rick Perry grew up hard scrabble with little luxury as many have, yet vaccines traditionally have been made available to all.
Instead of applying the worst motives to Rick Perry, perhaps his critics could consider that his motives were good ones.
Another FReeper had some thoughts on this issue.
However, there are some here on FR who prefer to apply the worst motives to Rick Perry.
The most "vocal" either won't name a candidate they would support; say they would vote for Huntsman or Romney over Perry; say they would rather Obama stay in the White House than vote for Rick Perry.
The HPV vaccine was always Opt-Out. And according to below report had been changed to Opt-In, before being dropped entirely.
90 days after his EO, Gov. Rick Perry let stand legislation undoing the EO.
UPDATE from Aug 8, 2011: -- CW: Perry’s been laying tracks and he’s moving down the line.
Perry can’t seem to make a wrong step.
I swear, the cervical cancer vaccine EO will turn out to show Perry was on the right track.
The TTC has already been shown to be lied about by environmentalists and opportunists to push light rail and block Texas infrastructure. They still have people believing half of Texas was going to be paved over to allow Mexico to invade. They don’t need a road because the federal government won’t secure 1250 miles of Texas’ INTERNATIONAL border with Mexico — and what lies south.
I laugh when they say Perry is lucky. He’s sets goals and works to meet them.
Gov. Rick Perry has prepared himself for this, and now that opportunity knocks, he’s stepping forward.
FReeper comment: You really said that? On a site for conservatives? There are a lot of reasons to like Gov. Perry - but this isn't one of them.
CW: Yes. I said it. There is an increase in oral cancer and a lot of it comes from oral sex the kids are having from the wonderful illustration Hillary Clinton's husband Bill Clinton so casually advertised for the world and children to see, where his sycophants in the media and education lapped it up. So I am not going to say Rick Perry was awful to want to protect women and young girls if it was possible to prevent this cancer (any strains of it - and oral or cervical). There is going to be an explosion of health care costs and this cancer will be among them. His idea to do good was at odds with what was politically correct but the legislature blocked his EO. They're responsible for not having the vaccine available. Was it the right thing to do? Time will tell.
FReeper 2 comment: IIf he stood on principles, we wouldn't have to wait for 'time'. He would know today that it wasn't the right thing to do. I can agree with you about the Clinton's and the impact of the original man-child President, but I don't want the state's (or the nation's) executive making decisions like this. Sorry, not what a conservative would have done.
CW: Perhaps that Gov. Perry let the legislature override his EO — let them make the final call for their constituents (he’d made his decision) was where he took his stand. Perry isn’t king or emperor or dictator. He used the tools he had available and then the people’s representatives used the tools they had.
The vaccine had been “opt-out,” was changed to “opt-in,” the legislature still stopped it, and before it started and now it is not at all. It was never “mandated.”