Rick Perry “Walks Back” to His Conservative Base
Aug 17th, 2011 | 44 responses
GOP presidential candidate Rick Perry reversed himself—some say “walked back, I say “ran back””—on an executive order he issued as Texas governor in Feb. 2007, mandating that young girls receive the expensive HPV (human papillomavirus ) vaccine Gardasil, a vaccine against some strains of a sexually transmitted virus that can cause cervical cancer.
A measure that, until last week, he had “staunchly defended … casting it as a ‘pro-life’ attempt to protect women’s health and disparaging objections from social conservatives…” according to the Washington Post.
When Perry issued the order, religious conservatives in Texas were appalled at a measure that they felt would encourage promiscuity among young girls.
After heavy criticism from social conservatives, including a lawsuit attempting to block the order, in May 2007, the Texas Legislature overturned Perry’s executive order, upon which Perry, “[A]t a defiant news conference… chastised legislators for overturning the order… flanked by several women who had contracted the virus, including one who had been raped.”
The question is why did Perry, who claims to be deeply religious, who has such conservative views on issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage and who wants government out of our lives, issue this order?
If he did it to protect the health of young girls, then why is he flip-flopping—calling it “a mistake”— now that he is running for president?
Perhaps some of the answers can be found in a Washington Post article that examines Perry’s close relationship at the time to a lobbyist, Mike Tooney, who was pushing the vaccine and who worked for the vaccine’s manufacturer, Merck, which, according to the Post (quoting Texas news reports):
gave Perry a $6,000 contribution when the issue was being discussed in the governor’s mansion, and it supported a women’s legislators group that pushed for the vaccine as well…
And what is Toomey doing now? Well, he is now “co-founder of the Make Us Great Again super PAC, formed this month to collect and spend unlimited money in support of Perry’s campaign.”
Call it a tempest in a teapot, find some nuances and rationalizations and remind me that “they all do it.” To me this one sorry episode —ignoring all the other reports coming out, all his recent stupid utterances and all my first hand experiences with the governor of my state—speaks volumes of the character of this man and about his competency and qualifications to be President.
44 Responses to “Rick Perry “Walks Back” to His Conservative Base”
OMG once again conservative voters punish a GOP candidate for doing something that is clearly in the public’s best interests. Literally protecting girls from a very common disease that causes cancer. Life’s complicated, things happen, but what the hell, lets punish young girls who make mistakes. I mean, its what Jesus would do I’m sure.
If the point is to criticize Perry, then sure he’s a hypocrite. Whether to make Gardasil mandatory is another matter. It isn’t mandatory in most states, it’s very expensive, and it was lobbied hard by Big Pharma which appears to be the reason Perry pushed for it in the first place.
The Jesus arguments shouldn’t be a factor in the decision and I don’t have a clue what Jesus would think anyway.
I am pretty sure Jesus has no problem with vaccinations of any kind.
The thing I take away from this article is:
“A politician admitted he made a mistake.”
That alone scores points with me.
“I am pretty sure Jesus has no problem with vaccinations of any kind.”
Considering how very long he’d been dead at the time of the advent of vaccines, I’d say you’re probably right.
We can’t have two candidates appealing to the center eh? And we know the one who does can’t be a republican. The mere suggestion would be blasphemy!
roro, you say He’s dead, but you can’t prove it.
Interestingly, I got this link from a fellow Tea Party member:
Rick Perry’s Bad Medicine
The biggest problem that I’m hearing is the fact that it was mandated, unless the parents explicitly requested to opt-out. There are big differences between offering it, supplementing it, and mandating it.
I can’t prove there’s no Santy Claus neither…I suppose that means I should base my morality on whether 4 year olds Santa-aficionados think I’m naughty or nice. Yes?
ETA: I wonder what Mrs. Claus thinks of the HPV vaccine? That must be important…
Roro, never underestimate the power of superstition on the right. Maybe Logan can open a channel and tell us what Jesus really thinks of vaccinations.
Well, remember, Perry wasn’t retracting something he did that most consider in the public (health) interest, and he might have argued so himself. A closer look shows a tie to the Big Pharma producer of the vaccine.
Just so you know. [chuckle]
For those who don’t recall that Merck story:
(that link should have been provided in the previous posting)
http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/5546651.html
Look at the bright side — now you know how possibly a new President Perry might improve Medicare Part D after taking office.
[chuckling deliberately more loudly this time]
I heard Jesus was going to say “Blessed are the vaccinated” at the Sermon on the Mount but did a last minute re-write.
Prof. — just a side note, “opt-out” is reasonable if something is in the public interest. We need “presumed consent” for cadaver organ donations in this country the way it is done in other countries (that are better in this regard than we are, I won’t hesitate to say). There is a huge organ shortage.
The only serious issue that arises is that if more and more things might be sought by activists also to be “opt-out,” and then where do you draw the reasonable lines or set the reasonable limits? It is by democratic decision-making, which can be arbitrary or obviously subject to cultural (therefore, eventually, political) preferences and norma, for example?
Side-issue food for thought
(The issue that comes up with public health issues involving children’s health and medical concerns, including contraception and abortion and related matters, is that obviously with minors parental notification and consent are requisites with opting out if this is reasonable by parents, who would be making the decision about this, if opting-out is part of the related [should be only] state and local laws. This happens also to separate the normal and truly realistic from the zealous out-of-touch extremists.)
Quit whining about Logan, when not only is the Left so often hateful (and the hateful) element in politics, but also hypocritical in truly misusing “hate” to try to smear and suppress their hated opposition.
Logan, if you knew anything about me you would have to realize that all of your descriptions: bigot, hater, bully, or troll are not only incorrect, but utterly absurd. That you would think this can only be a reflection on yourself. I suggest you stop assuming the worst about people and take a look inward now and then.
Haha, Logan, you’re too funny. Hate and bigotry? Too funny. You’re the one who’s trying to dictate what Jesus thinks. I was pointing out how ridiculous that is.
@DLS
I wouldn’t be so quick to go to the opt-out method. It’s very easy to “publish” the fact that you need to opt-out in a way that few will see.
If it’s a good idea, it usually isn’t that hard to get people to agree to it.
This particular instance just seems too much like a kickback.
“The behavior I see every day from you and Allen and Absalon and roro is disgusting. It is pure hate and bigotry and I will not hold back in calling it that.”
So you don’t think there are several of your fellow Christians who apparently think Jesus wants whores and sluts to get horrible (and expensive) diseases for sleeping around?
Listen, Christianity, like all religions, sucks. But some Christians are OK. Perry’s kind of Christian is not OK. They are my enemy, and you have to respect that. Don’t assume I am attacking all Christians because I hate some of them. That’s just willful outrage, not real outrage.
When some Christians act like animals, other Christians can either a) Openly declare these self-declared Christians NON-CHRISTIANS or b) Keep calling themselves Christians along with the fundies and zygote-huggers and homophobes or c) Stop being Christians.
Or they can turn the other cheek and stop blubbering.
Their choice. They have more power over the word “Christian” than I do, since they ARE Christians.
Logan:
You are the first one, and second, and third in this thread to specifically insult :
“Then again, if your purpose is just to indulge your own infantile emotional desire to hate certain groups of people regardless of what effects that has on them or on your ability to be effective, you are doing perfectly well already and I have no suggestions for any improvements in your method.”
…call bigots:
“Like most bigots, you make the error of assuming that everyone who defends your target group must be a member of it.”
…and bigots–again—and bullies:
“And I see a lot of it from you and your fellow bigots and bullies that troll these threads trying to exterminate the expression of any beliefs that disagree with yours. The behavior I see every day from you and Allen and Absalon and roro is disgusting. It is pure hate and bigotry and I will not hold back in calling it that.”
…your fellow commenters. So please don’t come whining to me about “slamming them down.”
There is some misinformation about the response to mandating the HPV vaccine. While there was of course some uproar about vaccinations for an STD and people getting upset the uproar was not just from Conservative Christians but from across the political spectrum. Perry may have meant well but he inserted Govt into peoples houses. He was substituting government decisions for family choices. Not only that but it wasn’t even a law passed by our reps but a executive order which struck many people as an even bigger issue. Then there was the extremely high cost which concerned many fiscally Conservative people. There was even talk from the ultra left Hippy crowd about big brother. It was far from just ultra right Christians who had issues with that. The donation came up and I thought then that it really just wasn’t enough cash for Perry to care about. Portraying this as some partisan demolition derby is absurd and not even close to what was happening in Texas at the time.
My initial frustration was that it appeared the religious conservatives were against the vaccinations because they thought it was promoting promiscuity, which is silly. And that those same people appeared to have enough clout that Perry felt the need to do an about face to cover himself politically with those people. That is a very likely scenario, and I’m irritated by the group of people that are very vocal about removing information and services to teenagers on the grounds of promoting some kind of chastity.
Well on top of everything else it seems that Rick Perry believes global warming to be a hoax. Just what we need, another science-challenged republican in the White House. (I put that as nicely as I could.)
EEllis –
What you say is definitely true. There are a lot on the left who do not vaccinate their children on principle, and because they think it will harm their kids. I do think it funny when those who often complain of nanny-state seem to want to criticize the left for nanny-state complaints, but hey.
I’m not seeing anyone bash lefties for it now and lets face it it is a issue with both far left and right which is why portraying this as a Christian right issue is BS. This happens way to often and is just intellectually dishonest.
Thanks for your (first set of)comments, EEllis.
You are correct that people from across the political spectrum were upset with Perry’s mandate, for their “own reasons.” If I didn’t point that out, I should have.
However that does not take away from the core issue: Perry’s sudden and recent flip-flopping on an issue that was so close to his heart and conscience —and to his pocket, some say.
I pointed out his staunch support until very recently. In addition to his May 2007 defiant news conference “chastising legislators for overturning the order… flanked by several women who had contracted the virus, including one who had been raped,” the Austin American Statesman recalls:
(http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-politics/perry-calls-hpv-vaccine-mandate-a-mistake-1748535.html)
“Perry wasn’t so quick to stand up and admit error last year when U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison was hammering him on the issue during the gubernatorial campaign.”
And
“I stand proudly by my pro-life position,” the governor said in response to a question about the HPV mandate during a GOP gubernatorial debate in 2010.”
As to “Portraying this as some partisan demolition derby is absurd and not even close to what was happening in Texas at the time”, I don’t think I did portray it as such and, to the best of my memory as an Austin resident and–at the time–an avid reader of the Statesman (a left-leaning newspaper some will say), I do remember that it was a rather important issue in Texas.
Thanks again.
Oh yes Perry is a politian. I do think he has changed his stance because he needs the support of certain groups on the right. I think trashing those groups for their position on this issue without mentioning all the left leaning types who were just as vocal is dishonest. The thread became not about Perry but an insult fest on one group who spoke against the order. I don’t have some warm fuzzy feeling for Perry myself. I do think he is more likely to make choices that coincide with my beliefs and wishes more often than Obama will and I’m waiting to see how the rest of the country will recieve him and if he has the best chance to beat Obama.
By the way the demo derby comment wasn’t directed at you rather at others who seem to use every issue, even when it dosent fit, as some partisan gotcha.
We are religious at all, so we take malaria pills, even though only the female feasts, and Hepatitis A&B and various other stuff. If people want to be schmucks and opt out of a proven vaccine against whatever, go for it. I don’t like Perry, and I hope he did not push the vaccine for dollars. Either way, I hope it saved some people from a problem. On the other issue, it is very hard to forget a grudge and not append it on current debates, but it would be a good idea. If I were religious, I would say turn the other cheek and cast no NEW aspersions. In other words, don’t be so sensitive, emotional outbursts suck.
Well our national birth rate has dropped 10% since 2007. I wonder if sex education had anything to do with that?
@dduck
According to the one article (I haven’t researched beyond that), the vaccine is rather new. I don’t know how effective it is, and often new drugs have side effects that don’t show up until much later.
“lets face it it is a issue with both far left and right which is why portraying this as a Christian right issue is BS”
Well, I’m pretty sure that Perry isn’t changing his decision on this issue to curry favor with the “ultra left Hippies”, which may or may not be a particularly good descriptor of those on the left who aren’t vaccinating their kids. This is an article about Perry and how/why he changed his decision, right?
ETA: It should also be noted that the reasons that the different groups have for disliking the mandate about the vaccine show that the groups are, well, different.
Hi, Prof. Cadaver organs as one medical example of the ocean of ethical and moral issues associated with asset allocation (rationing) certainly have other potential problems, like “marketizing” and the buying and selling of organs, pressure on the poor to sell, et cetera, or devices such as getting access to an organ for transplantation or being put ahead on the waiting list if one agrees to be a donor, etc.
Allen wrote:
Would you care to think about something? What has happened since 2007? Think: perhaps the economic slump, just maybe-maybe?
As was said about the life in the uber-leftist paradise, the Warsaw Pact nations, “the best contraceptive is having to move into and share with in-laws a tiny, already-cramped apartment.”
Actually, Perry has attended a multi-racial-and-ethnic anti-abortion rally before (I posted about it when it happened), and was speaking about eradicating (the horridly evil practice and scourge of) abortion, or at least Roe v. Wade, from this fair land.
Here is the story again, guys ‘n’ gals. Don’t y’all remember this?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/13/us-perry-abortion-idUSTRE75C0BJ20110613
Here’s more (even mentions the foregoing rally and group doing it)
http://www.sba-list.org/suzy-b-blog/gov-rick-perry-rocks-pro-life-rally
More later, perhaps. For example, one religious right author I’ve seen writing currently about Perry has a multi-part work about the man that may be of additional interest (filling in more holes) once it’s completed.
Well sure but it seems a bit off to give “the hippies” a pass and foam at the mouth (not saying you in paticular) over the “evil christians” when we are talking about the same stance on the same issue.
Hopefully, we can all agree that making blanket generalizations of entire groups of people or resorting to ad hominem attacks is no way to have a rational discussion or debate.
Those of us who are TMV veterans can best teach TMV newcomers by living by example. What TMV veterans certainly should not be doing is defending blanket generalizations and ad hominem attacks made by TMV newcomers or retaliating in kind.
I’ve already received word from the TMV staff that we’re going to have to settle our own disputes. There are always going to be those commenters who insist upon resorting to blanket generalizations and ad hominem attacks. Perhaps if we ignore these people long enough, they will leave TMV and find another blog.
DLS-
I don’t know DLS, Africa is as poor as a church house mouse and they pop’em out like kettle corn.
Naw, no money means there nothing else to do but popcorn.
Hi there, I’m going to post notice here once: if commenters choose to set aside the topic of the post instead of discussing it, if one decides to call others names, attempts to cheap diagnose others, attempts to make the site the center of one’s ill mood comments, tries to dominate the entire comments area, if one leaves long comments instead of giving links as is stated in TMV rules, if one repeatedly attacks others whether one is a writer or not, it no longer holds water: the rules of civility apply to all writers and all commenters. If one cant follow the very simple rules, comments will be removed and put on moderation.
We have new tools given by Tyrone. And TMV was never set up to be the place for anyone to take out one’s persistent daily bad mood about others who are not oneself. The quality of comments has gone downhill here in the last many weeks, and we have heard about it from many.
Thus, I’m sorry but the time of warning again and again is over. We’re all adults. The comments area is a courtesy space TMV pays for and devotes bandwidth to, for CIVIL discussion of the topics.
I’m not mom, but… like mom… I dont care what others are doing, thinking, being allowed to do elsewhere. I will appreciate always those who are decent during times when others are not.
I suggest once in a while, since we all at TMV work for free and only three of us contribute real dollars to paying the bills and for upgrades here at TMV in order to provide venue for writers and commenters, that it would be sweet to our hearts to be acknowledged once in a while only in this way… use some restraint and use the comments area the way it was meant to be used.
I and many others especially appreciate reading comments when I learn something, and when arguments have some shape to them, rather than just an emotional splat. I’d like to see no repetitive screed-rant which convinces no one, adds zero other than displaying an unlanced boil of chronic peeve. I wish we could make all person’s lives as they want them to be. But we cannot. We can only be decent to each other, as each soul finds their way in outer life. We all have our luchas, struggles, believe me. But/ and… I know Originality is born into each of us. I see it here all the time, but/and here readers ought not have to shovel through layers of personal pique over and over to get at the interesting thoughts, discussions and debates here, of which there are many.
Thanks
archangel/ dr.e
Nick and Dr. E,
I agree with all you have said and intend to comply with all your suggestions.
I do have one question, Nick, in the spirit of assessing and improving my own actions.
You say:
“What TMV veterans certainly should not be doing is defending blanket generalizations and ad hominem attacks made by TMV newcomers..”
Have any of us “veterans” been guilty of this?
Thanks
from where I sit, in our perfectly imperfect world Dorian, all is well and will be well. Carry on sir.
Dorian said:
Yes, though by “veterans”, I am referring to long-time TMV commenters and not necessarily TMV staff.
I don’t wish to divert any more attention away from the original topic than I already have. But I will be happy to discuss whatever concerns any TMV writer or commenter might have via email.
Sincerely,
Nick Rivera
nicrivera2002@yahoo.com
Dr. E., Thanks for the reassurance.
Nick, thanks for the clarification. No need to e-mail, my mailbox is already overflowing.
no prob dorian