Pay Careful Attention to Rick Perry, Governor of Texas – Texas, the “Religious Right” and Influence over Presidential Politics

Palin Endorsement of Governor Rick Perry in 2010, a potential "merger" - image LA Times

Governor Rick Perry of Texas has, in recent weeks, become the most talked about GOP potential Presidential Candidate. He has been given that moniker for several reasons: he's a fiscal conservative who has run one of the largest states in the Union with fiscal sanity; they are working in Texas. In addition he's an avowed evangelical, causing a bit of a stir in liberal circles (the press), and it is fairly certain according to those same sources that he will announce his candidacy in a few short weeks. The brouhaha is his Christianity - refer to the Washington Post quotes below - and the fact that he has all but been given the Presidency prior to even entering the national spotlight.

From 10 a.m to 5 p.m., attendees are expected to pray, abstain from eating and listen to a series of speakers at Reliant Stadium. Organizers said Friday that Perry will address the crowd, as will major Christian conservative figures such as Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council and James Dobson of Focus on the Family.

Back in April of 2008, this blogs Headline read: a Republican President in 2008 against all odds” based on the following premise:
Evangelical leaders such as James Dobson of Focus on the Family were refusing to back any Republican running for the office, to the point where, they were actually “hoping” for (a Democrat) Obama to be the next president.

The reasoning was stunning, simple, and beautifully executed – elect someone like (Hillary) Obama, things would get so bad that the nation would overall reject not only that man, but anyone who was remotely like him. It was an interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News – Hannity was begging, cajoling and basically close to tears, as he, better than anyone behind a news desk, fully understands the power of over twenty million voting evangelicals and what they can do to an election. The video is below: These individuals met in Colorado and made those decisions, they were leaders of the various churches.

Watch here:



Meeting with Christian Leaders is, in and of itself, nothing new – both Democrats and Republicans tout faith as part of their personal “identity politics”, from Barack Obama’s Christian Roots, Richard Nixon’s Mormon roots, and John F. Kennedy’s Catholic Roots; the bigger the voting bloc, the better. It is why Congressional Leaders such as Nancy Pelosi (D-CA8) and Senator John Kerry are often seen entering churches (Catholics) with news crews in tow, to insure the “Catholic Vote”. (Which, the majority of Catholics, tend to vote Democrat regardless – with some exceptions in national elections?

However, the “Religious Right” and Rick Perry – is summed up quite nicely in a TIME piece (with obvious left leaning, “run it’s a Christian” adjectives) : ”Behind the Scene Christian Right Leaders Rally Behind Rick Perry read it, the date: July 5th, 2011.

However, Perry is not the first to meet these influential Church Leaders: from the Examiner: October 10, 2010 “Sarah Palin Meets with 50 National Conservative Leaders….”

Among the conservatives in attendance, president of Americans for Tax Reform Grover Norquist and Evangelical Christian activist Ralph Reed.

The assumption continues that Palin is running for President (being a tad more moderate than Perry, and well, this blog’s Title gives reason for obvious bias), however, if Perry has the nod from the so-called Religious Right, this early in the game, then it is a given that he will be the nominee, regardless of who the Beltway Republicans (see Mitt Romney) think will be the nominee.

Although at this moment all is speculation, but, within the coming weeks, as Perry announces, watch for specific endorsements from those very same “beltway Republicans” that would, in effect seal that deal.

At this point, it is all speculation, but what this nation needs at this point is leadership that will inspire, not frighten, and leadership that has experience in running a microcosm of the Federal Government, regardless is that State is Rhode Island! Therefore we welcome the Governor of Texas to the debate table, and it is hoped that Governor Palin will join her Texans counterpart - it would bring the best of what the GOP can offer to the debate arena.

RE: Rick Perry, from this perspective, one can appreciate the fact that he carries a firearm, shoots coyotes and protects his dog. On the other hand, one would like an explanation prior to offering even minimal support, on Rick Perry’s decision as Governor to mandate that all female teens be inoculated with the controversial Gardasil Vaccine: From Real Clear Politics:

In January 2007, Gardasil was put on the "recommended" immunization schedule issued by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control. Merck immediately mounted a massive lobbying effort of state legislatures around the country to get Gardasil added to their respective lists of state-mandated vaccines.
But in Texas, Gov. Perry chose to bypass the legislature and on Feb. 2, 2007, he issued an executive order making Texas the first state in the country requiring all sixth-grade girls to receive the three-shot vaccination series (which cost about $120 per shot). The move generated a fierce public debate. Conservatives slammed Perry for promoting what they saw as an intrusion by the state into private health decisions of parents and their children. Some also complained that the mandate would encourage promiscuity among teenagers.
Many doctors, including Bill Hinchey, the president of the Texas Medical Association at the time, questioned the wisdom of rushing to mandate a drug that had been on the market for less than a year.
"We support physicians being able to provide the vaccine, but we don't support a state mandate at this time," Hinchey told the Houston Chronicle. "There are issues, such as liability and cost, that need to be vetted first."
The controversy over Perry's decision deepened as it came to light that his former chief of staff was a lobbyist for Merck and that his chief of staff's mother-in-law, Rep. Dianne White Delisi, was the state director of an advocacy group bankrolled by Merck to push legislatures across the country to put forward bills mandating the Gardasil vaccine for preteen girls.

Therefore, to this mind, the Governor has some “explaining to do” – as to why he would mandate in the first place (regardless of what the mandate was medical mandates are contrary to personal liberty, and against most Conservative principles.

That said Mitt Romney mandated Health Care for all Massachusetts Residents.

Palin as Governor, mandates agasint personal liberty.....anyone?

Although: The LA Times sees things a bit differently making the case for a Perry Palin ticket in 2012, which is a ticket that at this point in time, would sweep in all but possibly 10 states.

Abortion Not Likely A factor In Catholic Vote in 2010, Despite Church Inclusion in Health Care Reform Debate

A recent article in Politico suggested that the Democrat Party may lose the “Catholic Vote” in 2010 should abortion be included in the Health Care Reform plan that has gone to the Senate – the argument: that Catholic Bishops will play a factor in how the rank and file votes in upcoming elections should the Bill include abortion has never been tested.

The Catholic Identity versus the Political Identity of Catholics has, in the past, resulted in a run to the Party and away from Church Teachings. The 2008 elections were a testament to that fact, despite the increased efforts from Rome to educate Catholics on politics and abortion. Additionally, In the 11th hour of the 2008 Presidential Campaign, the Church began to make mention of abortion and the vote as it related to those Catholics who held political office and their pro-abortion stance. High profile Democrats: John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi openly espouse their “Catholic Identity" in an effort to sway their constituents, while being endorsed by abortion activists as being leaders of the pro-abortion movement in the United States (2008 List here). Several Catholic Priests, who openly opposed pro-abortion candidates, were quickly rebuked by both the press and the Church. As far as Barak Obama, the candidate, was concerned, he made no pretense of the fact that he was clearly pro-abortion; his support for late-term abortions was, for the most part, public knowledge.

The Catholic “excuse” at the time (2008) was – “war”. In an effort to assuage their “Catholic Identity”, Obama, the candidate of “peace”, was chosen over McCain, the candidate of “war”. The real motivator however, had little to do with religion – it was, and it remains – the economy. Fear that the Republican Party, seen as been “in control of the economy for eight years, despite the fact that Congress was, for two of those years, a Democrat majority, pushed the Catholic Vote towards the Democrat who was going to fix the economy, and a host of other issues – abortion was simply not a factor. In the month before the campaign ended polls supported an Obama win, based solely on the economy.

Although the Catholic Bishops, appeared to have some say in the Stupak Amendment, it remains doubtful that a social issue will be the driving force against Health Care Reform. What will drive this particular vote is economics. The rank and file Catholic is well aware of the cost of the bill and the current state of the economy. It is a question of what will happen when it comes time to pay for additional government programs that will be the driving factor – this time, abortion will be the “excuse.”

Although a poll by Gallop in May of this year, suggests that more American’s consider themselves pro-life, since that pollster began asking the question in 1995, recent polls suggest the economy and health care reform are top on the minds of most Americans. In fact a recent survey by Rasmussen, shows 85% of the respondents chose the economy as the top issue.

Therefore, the probablity exists that those that are attempting to drive the conversation away from the economic factors of Health Care Reform, though “fear of Rome and the Catholic Church in general”, are missing the mark. The evangelical Christians, who decided to sit out the election in 2008, as there were no acceptable Republican candidates. As early as 2007, James Dobson and a host of evangelical leaders decided they would not support any Republican nominee (Video here. He went further, in 2008, Dobson specifically stated that he would not support McCain (see James Dobson on not voting for McCain in 2008 here). The loss of the evangelical vote propelled Obama into office, and maintained the Democrat majority in the House and Senate. Therefore, moving the conversation away from the economy to the abortion issue, is doing nothing more than announcing to those Catholics who do follow the Church’s teachings, that they will be joining the ranks of those millions of evangelical social issue voters who will come roaring back to the polls in 2010 and 2010.

New York’s 23rd District, Doug Hoffman takes Lead in Latest Poll – Pawlenty Endorses. The Nation Trends Conservative - Analysis

Doug Hoffman, New York 23rd Conservative Candidate - image Madison County Courier

Doug Hoffman, Conservative Candidate for the New York 23rd Congressional District, has now taken the lead according to a poll conducted by the Conservative Club for Growth. Hoffman receives 31% of the vote, with Democrat candidate Owens at 27% and the Republican Candidate, Dede Scozzafava at 20%, the balance of those polled remain undecided with just over a week until the election. Tim Pawlenty has become the latest in a string of Republican heavy hitters, to endorse Hoffman. Pawlenty, who is considered a considered a potential candidate for the 2012 Republican Presidential race, gave Hoffman his endorsement on Monday. Pawlenty joins Sarah Palin, Steve Forbes, Rick Santorum, Fred Thompson who have endorsed Hoffman over the Republican Candidate, Dede Scozzafava, who is considered to be too moderate. Former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich has endorsed Scozzafava – Gingrich is once again, considered to be a possible candidate for the 2012 Republican ticket.

Why the split?

As happens in the two major political parties in the United States, there are various sub-factions within each party, all holding several basic tenants, but at the same time, disagreeing on many – neither party is, as of this writing, cohesive. The Democrat Party includes progressives, and moderates, as well as the newly minted “Blue Dog” Democrats, which are, from all intents and purposes, Republicans. The Republican Party has the moderate or Beltway Republicans and then the more focused conservatives, both fiscally and socially, that drive the vote. In addition there are several up and coming parties, including the Libertarian and American Conservative Party, all of which are drawing new members from both major political parties. Hoffman is a candidate of the New York Conservative Party, a separate entity, which was founded in 1962, after members of the Republican Party in New York, felt disenfranchised, and formed their own entity. The New York Conservative Party has been influential in races in New York State, electing James Buckley to the Senate in in 1970. (An extensive overview of the New York Conservative Partycan be found here at the University at Albany.

The Political Landscape

There has been a shift in the political think of the American populace, to the right – according to a recent Gallop Poll

“Forty percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 36% as moderate, and 20% as liberal. This marks a shift from 2005 through 2008, when moderates were tied with conservatives as the most prevalent group.”

Gallop explains that the reason the shift is significant is that independents, are weighing in as holding more Conservative views, a 29% shift towards conservatism since 2008. Given that independent voters, (which make up a significant part of the electorate, especially in certain states (see Massachusetts with over 50% of the electorate designated as unenrolleds), and that those voters generally choose a candidate based upon identity, not party affiliation, it would then follow that conservative leaning candidates will be given the nod in the 2010 and 2012 elections.

The Evangelical Factor

A leader of what is dubbed “the right-wing, Evangelical factor”, (often erroneously tied to the Republican Party although, often responsible for Republican Candidates wins or loses, for that matter), James Dobson, made a stunning argument, or one might say prediction of today’s political landscape in 2007 in discussion with Fox New Talk show host, Sean Hannity. In a nutshell, Dobson argued that if the evangelicals did not endorse any Republican political candidate, and a left-of-center Democrat were elected President, the backlash to liberal politics over a period of several years, would result in a sweep of conservatism in 2012.
As one looks as polls on races in 2009 and 2010, Real Clear Politics, it is apparent that the nation is trending conservative in their choices.

California to Massachusetts – Taxing Issues Herald Winds of Historical Political Change

Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan 1979 - MSNBC

On Tuesday, Californian’s rejected a ballot measure that would have introduced a round of tax increases in order to balance the State Budget – something that had occurred in 1978, when California voters approved Proposition 13, a measure to cap the states property tax rate. California’s Democrat controlled legislature, and the unforgiving California State Employees Union have consistently burdened the State taxpayers with entitlement programs, and increasing state employee demands that have spun out of control. California has lost a part of its taxpayer base to States with lower taxes, while coping with a high population of illegal immigrants seeking and receiving state services.

The Massachusetts Senate passed a round of tax increases on Tuesday, specifically an increase in the Commonwealth’s Sales Tax. The tax increases were designed to close a budget deficit fueled by excesses of a State Government identical to California’s. Additionally, Massachusetts has suffered an exodus of taxpayers as well,, leaving the burden of supporting entitlement programs and state employees’ salaries to those left behind. After Californians passed Proposition 13, in 1978, Massachusetts residents revolted and passed Proposition 2-1/2 (a cap on property taxes) in 1980.
Massachusetts legislatures may have a short memory, however, the era that produced Proposition 13 and Proposition 2-1/2, introduced sweeping changes on a national scale. Overburdened taxpayers sent Ronald Reagan to the White House (including those in Massachusetts), followed by an overhaul of the Congress and Senate that gave rise to a Republican Renaissance of sorts.

With the Congress and Senate Leaders, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, respectively, losing ground in both national and in Reid’s case, state polls, while Obama and his simpatico legislature pass one pricey program after the next (all potential Federal Tax Increases), the stage has been set for history to repeat itself. One has to wonder, if this had not been by design. In October of 2007, Dr. James Dobson, Focus on the Family, and a host of other Conservative Leaders agreed not to lend support to Republican candidates - the plan – to insure that a Democrat would be elected to the White House (at that time speculation candidates were Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani) – the theory – that the moral, ethical and fiscal decline under a Democrat administration would insure a resurgence for Conservative leaders in 2012. Apparently, Dobson and Company were betting on history and a candidate in the mold of Jimmy Carter taking the reigns of an already solid Progressive-Democrat Congress and Senate. Only time will tell if Dobson and his ilk were correct in playing Russian roulette with the 2008 election, however, historical data does suggest that as the pieces fall into place, and Massachusetts Taxpayers speak in 2010, the conservative, anti-tax, state’s rights, Christian Conservative candidate that has not yet emerged, will be the President in 2012, with the advantage of a House and Senate in concert by 2014.