In 2006, Sarah Palin was elected governor of the great state of Alaska. In June of 2007, Alaska accepted federal funding to boost access to Gardasil, the HPV vaccine.
( Juneau, Alaska) ─ The Alaska Department of Health and Social Services announced today that an increase in federal funding will make it possible for all Alaska girls ages 9 through 18 to receive Gardasil ®, the vaccine to prevent cervical cancer, at no cost.
At no direct cost, perhaps. But being federally funded, it had a cost. Millions of Americans outside Alaska bore that cost, involuntarily.
Earlier this spring, the department had said it could provide free Gardasil only to Alaska girls who met certain eligibility requirements. Since then, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provided additional funds for Alaska to obtain more vaccine. This boost in federal aid will enable more Alaska girls to receive Gardasil. Distribution of this vaccine to providers is just beginning, so state health officials suggest calling providers before visiting local clinics to find out if the vaccine is available.
“We are thrilled that this unanticipated funding will allow us to provide the vaccine for all eligible girls,” said Laurel Wood, Alaska’s immunization program manager. “Although we have no guarantee that this funding will be available in future years, we hope to immunize as many Alaska girls as possible while we have this unique opportunity.”
The federal government approved Gardasil last summer to prevent certain types of human papillomavirus (HPV) known to cause cervical cancer. Gardasil is the most expensive vaccine recommended today, with a retail cost of at least $360 for three shots given over six months.
The CDC recommends the vaccine for girls and women 9 through 26 years old, but the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services only has funding to cover the vaccine for those ages 9 through 18. Women ages 19 through 26 may be able to receive some coverage through Medicaid, their health insurance companies or a special financial aid program set up by Merck & Co. Inc., the vaccine’s manufacturer.
The additional federal money for Alaska also means the department can expand availability of Menactra ®, the vaccine that protects against bacterial meningitis. Although the department previously provided Menactra only for limited age groups, it now will make the vaccine available at no cost for boys and girls ages 11 through 18.
Major thanks to commenter JAO for noting this.
This isn’t quite the same thing as mandating (and being overturned on, so it didn’t actually happen) a vaccination, but taking federal funds for Gardasil doesn’t quite square with Palin’s hot shots at Perry on Fox last night. I admire Sarah Palin quite a bit (and Bachmann too), but aligning herself with Bachmann’s precious bodily fluids gambit is a huge mistake on her part. Both of them are flaming their own credibility over an issue that, in the grand view of things, ought not to matter much. It hasn’t mattered much to some of the most conservative voters in America, over three gubernatorial elections running now. Both Palin and Bachmann are coming off as ill informed, unreasonable and desperate.
Here’s the thing. Barack Obama is an unmitigated disaster as president. His Save My Own Job Act is an expensive mess that will end up hurting the economy even more if it’s passed (which it won’t be, at least not in toto). The GOP primary should be about him and his failures. Credit to Newt Gingrich for consistently insisting that that be the focus of the GOP debate, not side chases down rabbit trails that have no impact on saving the nation from Obama. Discredit goes to those who risk turning the GOP primary into a freak show.
Update: Added a link to Palin’s comments on Fox, above.
Update: So this is a “stupid” x3 attack on Palin now? But it’s not stupid to ignore a pile of science and claim that Gardasil caused mental retardation in a 12-year-old on national TV, for the purposes of opportunistic political attacks?
Oooookay.
I’m also accused of accusing Palin of “crony capitalism,” though I never make that accusation at all.
Oooookay.
Funny thing. This post wasn’t even intended as an “attack” on Palin, whom I admire. Its intent is to point out that Gardasil isn’t quite the monster that Bachmann is making it out to be, and that when Palin had the power she in fact increased access to it. I thought that was clear in the post above, but evidently it wasn’t clear enough for some to grasp. It helps sometimes to leave the cup o’ rage on the table and take in a few facts first.
The crony capitalism charge against Perry strikes me as flimsy. It would’ve been ridiculous to have leveled it against Palin. But I didn’t do that.
Let’s be real– what was done in Alaska wasn’t a mandate. Also, everyone one of these people running– at one time or another– has accepted some federal funding. However, there are two men on the stage last night- who I’m sure this writer is pulling for due to the fact that they seem “the most electable” whatever that means– who did MANDATE programs and services to the citizens of their states they governed. That’s Romney & Perry. If the shoe was on the other foot and Alaska didn’t accept the federal funding for something health related I’m sure bloggers and supporters of Perry Romney or those who seem “more electable” than Palin or Bachmann would be screaming bloddy murder at how many deaths were caused by HPV due to underfunding. There is only one republican who is shaping this debate and that is Sarah Palin.
Huh, nice dodge into theoretical straw men. Either you’re for or against it. Seems like Palin’s for, then against. Bryan, you’re going to PO the Palindroids on this one.
No straw man argument you Ron Paul kook. Again, IT WAS NOT MANDATED AND GIVEN AS CHOICE TO THE PARENTS of the state. if the state didn’t accept the funding and kids began getting these diseases she would gotten the blame for anything that would have happened to them.
Ah yes, another straw man gambit. “Ron Paul kook”? Based on what non-existent evidence? Just like comment 1 based its argument on manufactured suppositions.
every idiot that supports him that i’ve confronted almost all have responded with “that’s the straw man argument”. why dont you try proving how your not a ron paul kook. ron paul kooks are also filthy liars as you’re trying to lie about Palin. I’ll say it again the state of Alaska OFFERED the hpv vaccination not forced it. How much pork has wrong Paul been taking from the federal government over the past 20-30 years?
“every idiot that supports him that i’ve confronted almost all have responded with “that’s the straw man argument”
So, anybody who used the phrase “straw man” must be a Paul supporter? Branding somebody for one small attribute makes you a bigot.
“why dont you try proving how your not a ron paul kook.”
Why don’t you try remembering that our legal standard is innocent until proven guilty? The burden of proof is on the accuser.
Not only a bigot, but a statist, too. Curious.
First for you people that seem incapable of grasping the meaning of Opt Out-it means the ultimate decision was with the parent. Also, what Gov Perry has not said & I am NOT sure why he hasn’t, probably because this is such a frigging ridiculous attack since NO child was EVER vaccinated under it (contrary to what the loon Bachmann tries to insinuate-and a FYI Bachmann used to be my 2nd choice, i would no longer vote for her for dog catcher) but what Gov Perry has not explained is the insurance issue.
Fact-I am a Texan, parent of 2 daughters, at this time one was 15 & the other 17. Fact I am employed & have insurance. Fact because the shot was “optional” the insurance company along with others in Texas would not cover it. It is a set of 3 shots at 150.00 each-that is 450.00 a child or would have cost me 900.00, as a single parent I could not afford that. Fact when Gov Perry did the executive order then the insurance companies started covering the shot & they then cost the 15.00 doctor visit, reducing my total costs to 90.00 for both girls. And yes I was SMART enough to listen to the CDC about this shot. Just like I do about polio, small pox, & all the other vaccines that prevent deadly diseases to my children.
Palin people are getting crazy-you can not talk about her record-which FYI is NOT that stellar. While she is mouthing about so-called croynism which did not exist, she gave a contract for drilling on north slope to a British-NOT American company, that employed her husband. Now, while the is not croynism IMO it is a serious ethical issue-first that she gave contract to non-American company & 2nd this is her husband’s employer. But I am sure that Palin supporters will attack this, just like they attack fact that she took a small town in the black & put it over 3 million in debt & embroiled it in a lawsuit.
So taking Alaskans money back from Uncle Sam to allow poor girls and families to get Gardasil IF THEY WANT TO is bad how???? I don’t even understand this nonsense. Are we saying as conservatives that any State Governor that accepts federal funds is a RINO or lib?
FEDERAL FUNDING= TAX PAYERS MONEY!
Do Alaskans pay federal taxes? Maybe we should let California have all our money?
Exactly. Any Republican ought to answer that whole “you took FedGov funds” by saying “As long as the Feds steal the money from my constituents, I’m going to get as much of it back for them as possible. If you don’t like that, stop the original theft.”
Right on dude. The FEDs have rigged the game and in order to get YOUR money back you have to play the game they way they rigged it. Palin is trying to change the game, it’s corrupt.
It’s the mandates that are the problem. Freedom is the right to choose. Ron Paul and his supporters get that. Ron Paul is against mandates, I heard him plainly state that.
It’s those who want to excuse and overlook the lack of judgement in Romney and Perry who attempt to say it is just accepting pork. NO, IT IS THE MANDATES…
Alaska has the 7th highest GDP per capita and the lowest tax burden of any state. Sounds like the good folks of Alaska are doing alright, huh?
Which begs the question: how? How on earth does a state support itself with no state sales tax, no state individual income tax, the lowest gas tax rate and little other rates?
Federal welfare and big oil.
In 2007, federal funding accounted for almost one-fifth of Alaska’s revenue. During the oil boom, federal funding accounted for nearly one-third of Alaska’s revenue. Most of the remainder came from oil-related sources.
How does that compare with other states? Alaska taxpayers do far better than the national average when in comes to federal dollars. Per capita, Alaska receives more federal funding than any other state in the country, an honor held since 1999. With respect to money received from the federal government versus tax paid, the state ranks 3rd highest nationally. (source)
Hey Molton,
the town I live in has 140% national cost of living, and it isn’t a bush town. The data look like we are all millionaires, but this state is vastly undeveloped, and the feds have unconstitutionally withheld our land and resources from us. Give us OUR land and resources and we won’t need any federal help with their restrictive strings attached. What is the percentage of land owned in the eastern states by the federal government? They were allowed to use their resources to develop and collect property taxes on property to help fund their government. Now imagine how those states would be paying their way if the largest landowner was the Fed, who owned 70% and didn’t pay any tax. You think that fair? In fact the eastern states have unconstitutionally restricted the western states so they don’t have to face the competition. Maybe you should read about the sagebrush rebellion and why it is going on, and by the way, it’s not over. Maybe you should try to walk in your fellow Americans shoes before telling all how great they have it an how they sponge off fellow Americans, when in fact the state of Alaska has been at a HUGE disadvantage in relation to almost ALL other states.
What Caused the “Sagebrush Rebellion?”
74. Shouldn’t all of the states have been admitted to the Union on an equal basis?
Yes. This was set forth by Congress in the Northwest Ordinance of 1787.
75. Which states were strong-armed into accepting statehood without being admitted on an equal footing?
All of the Western States and Alaska.
76. In what way were they forced to accept statehood unequally?
Large regions of these states were retained by the Federal Government for purposes not authorized by the Constitution in Article I, Section 8, Clause 17.
77. About how much of the land did the Federal Government usually withhold from these states?
The government retained around 50% of the land in most Western States, but 79% of Nevada and 96% of Alaska.
78. Are any of these states attempting to get this land back?
Yes. The press has labeled this effort the “Sagebrush Rebellion,” but it is not a rebellion. These states are simply following the legal and Constitutional procedures necessary to have this land turned back to them.
What About Locking Up State Territory As Wilderness Areas?
79. Does the Constitution authorize the President and the Secretary of the Interior to lock up large blocks of land within a state as a “wilderness reserve?”
No. This violates the express provisions of the Constitution but was upheld by the Supreme Court on extremely tenuous grounds.
80. Does the Constitution authorize the Federal Government to have a national forest within the confines of a state?
No. This is not included in the list of territories which the federal government is allowed to occupy with the consent of the state. (See Article I, Section 8, Clause 17) The Supreme Court had to distort the Constitution to justify it. Historically, the states have had fewer forest fires and have maintained the state forests on a higher level than the national forests.
81. Does the Constitution authorize the Federal Government to have national parks within the confines of a State?
No. For the same reasons as those cited above, the Supreme Court should have disallowed them. It has been observed that as a rule state parks are better maintained and provide better facilities than those operated by the Federal Government.
What About Federal Control of Energy Resources?
82. Does the Constitution authorize the government to control, regulate, or inhibit the production of energy resources within a state?
No.
Please read this, my source for this letter: NATIONAL CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL STUDIES http://www.nccs.net/101questions.html
No link to Palin’s comments? No quotes? Just a vague reference to “Palin’s hot shots at Perry on Fox last night”?
Disappointing.
Palin Calls Out Perry on HPV Vaccine
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/09/13/palin-calls-out-perry-on-hpv-vaccine/?mod=google_news_blog
Backed by Palin, Bachmann keeps up HPV attack on Perry
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-bachmann-perry-hpv-20110913,0,7587306.story
I count myself as a “Palinista” (though not the frothing “Don’t you dare say anything negative about her” type) and I think this is a fair issue to bring up, especially since I think she will be a candidate and thus should have to answer questions like these.
Anyway, I have one of my own, for Bryan: My understanding is that Sarah Palin criticized Governor Perry on ground of possible cronyism in relation to Gardasil, which isn’t necessarily aligning herself with Bachmann’s bizarre “causes retardation” comment. Has she said anything anywhere defending Bachmann’s apparent subscription to (Jenny)McCarthyism? (I haven’t seen any yet, but I haven’t been watching closely, either.)
Bryan,
You are being very loosey-goosey on facts. The feds also provided the polio vaccine for millions of kids as well. In Texas it was mandated, in Alaska, it was offered. Kind of like every year when the feds offer the states the flu vaccine. Is it wrong for the states to accept the flu vaccine from feds to offer to whomever wnats it?
exactly. there’s a big difference between offering and forcing.
It is also one thing to mandate a vaccine for a highly contagious and easily spread disease to school children to see that an epidemic is not spread to the population. As Sanatorum I believe said, didn’t think there was a high amount of ‘sexual contact” for the under 12 year old, AT SCHOOL, so it should never have been MANDATED. Also now the possibility of cronyism and favors, would explain why Perry would attempt to MANDATE this vaccination. Real POOR judgement, can we expect more of this kind of reasoning from him? Also a real crappy position on ILLEGAL migration and a history of wanting to reward this behavior. Perry is at the bottom of my list of candidates as he appears another “establishment” country club RINO.
“but aligning herself with Bachmann’s precious bodily fluids gambit is a huge mistake on her part”
Quotes or it didn’t happen.
Well, Rob, letting facts get in the way, that’s just not done, her criticism was with the appearance of a conflict with Merck
Ok, so the State Executive branch mandates vaccines; and that’s ok, right? (Measles, Mumps, Rubella, etc.. That is how things are… or is that evil too because Measles and Mumps are really fun?)
Perry adds a vaccine to the list… which he’s allowed to do. (That is an agency in the Executive branch that reports to him after all.)
People don’t like it, and the legislature passes a law overturning his action. (which is right, checks balances, etc.)
And he lets it die… and doesn’t try to do an end-around the legislature to enforce his will even if people don’t like it. (No court cases over conflicting powers of office, no veto attempt, to trying to say the legislature shouldn’t be allowed to intrude…)
So he used the authority he had to do what he thought was right (and useful); he was opposed by the people, and he let it go and backed down.
I agree, EVIL FASCIST DICTATOR… wait, what?
This. Well done. I am not stealing this – but I am going to “strategically cross-level” your comments.
You’re forgetting one small detail: he didn’t go to the legislature. They had to go after him.
About 60 pf Texas’ lawmakers requested Perry rescind the order.
His answer? “Uh, uh.”
Six weeks later he was rebuked by the Texas House which passed HB 1098 overturning the executive order.
by a vote of 119-21. The Senate followed up with a vote of 30-1.
Roughly 60 state lawmakers called on Perry to rescind the order. He refused. Just six weeks after Perry put pen to paper, the Texas House rebuked him on March 14, 2007, passing HB 1098, overturning his executive order by a vote of 119-21. The Senate followed suit the following month by a vote of 30-1.
Did he THEN utter a Mea Culpa? No. He seemingly had no designs on the white house. He didn’t suggest he should have gone through the legislature. what he did suggest during his press conference was that “the tenor of a debate that he asserted had been “hijacked by politics and posturing,”.
Debate?
There was none. Rick Perry doesn’t debate–unless it’s for the White House.
So, for those keeping score at home, Perry turned a deaf ear to the people representing the citizens of Texas who lawfully eight-sixed his executive order. He did not admit to making a poor decision by not going through the legislature, he did, however, lay the blame for those who would die of the disease at the feet of those who voted to rescind his order.
It’s amazing, isn’t it, how the right path seems so obvious when you decide to run for president.
It’s four years later, Perry is in Tampa running for president and yes, he does see he should have worked with the legislature.
Can I get an “Amen”?
Meanwhile guess what happened to the official who authorized this vaccine:
The Obama Administration did not keep Gerberding and she resigned from her post on January 20, 2009.[4] and is now the president of Merck’s Vaccine division.She is also Director of MSD Wellcome Trust Hilleman Laboratories Private Limited, a joint initiative between Merck and Wellcome Trust.
[edit]
4 things:
Where’s Palin’s mandate?
Where’s the conflict of interest?
Why is the Perry camp responding to an attack by Bachmann by attacking Palin?
What does Palin have to do with “any” of this? Last time I checked, she wasn’t in the race.
How is Palin “aligning herself with Bachmann’s precious bodily fluids gambit”? Isn’t the fact that she approved federal funding for free inoculation prove that she has no real problem with the vaccine itself?
Great questions.
I hope none provide an answer for as long as Bryan Preston keeps digging Perry into a Texas-sized hole after Perry admitted his mandate mistake then Perry will soon be jabbing his finger into Preston’s chest while saying “you don’t know what you’re talkin about, brother”
Keep digging that Texas-sized hole Bryan, you are performing wonders for Perry’s campaign.
I’m not gettin’ the “crony capitalism” charge.
How is a state governor lobbying for / accepting Federal funds for a state health program any different than, for example, lobbying for federal highway construction money?
Did Sarah Palin get campaign donations from the maker of Gardisil, in return for lobbying the Feds to fund the program in Alaska? THAT would be “crony capitalism”, and THAT is what Perry was charged with doing in Texas.
Where’s the quid pro quo here?
Face it, Tatler: you’re all over the place.
I can understand the disagreement over the ethics of the vaccine, but if Perry is right that Merck donated $5,000 to his campaign, then it’s an awfully thin reed to call it crony capitalism. If somebody wants to say that, then there are thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of examples of crony capitalism annually in the US. And if there are that many, it’s so imbedded than literally every politician, past, present and future is guilty. And if everybody is guilty, then it’s life, not a crime.
Bachmann showed her inexperience by bringing it up. You have to wonder, has any company ever made a donation to one of her campaigns and then made a deal in her state? Aha. Crony Capitalism.
– there was a big fight over the use of stem cells and Bush should or shouldn’t do this or that…then September 11, 2001 happened.
Face it Preston, you got pwned by the boss emmeritus. Man these Perrynoids sure are touchy on this subject.
I completely disagree. I like Michelle alot. I admire her work: she’s not just a good commentator, but pretty darned fine reporter. But Michelle is on the warpath here. Her comments on this issue, and all other issues related to Perry for that matter, partake of no balance, nor sense of perspective. She’s put on her “no holds barred, take no prisoners” attitude. And now it’s pure polemics. And no one, not even a former employee, will be spared her wrath.
I suspect the only reason for this bile and venom is an undisclosed bias: Michelle wants Sarah to run bad, it’s a hurtin’ jones, and she’ll slaughter every other potential nominee in hopes of clearing a path for mi’lady. I have no idea how Michelle will right herself when Palin refuses to run and some target of her vituperation emerges as the nominee. How’s she gonna support him or her? And who’s gonna clean up all the blood?
Baloney, Michelle Malkin rightly goes warpath on any politician who steps beyond the line of conservative values or at least her particular values. She even critized Palin last week. Preston used lousy info and didn’t research it. Now he should just move on, but he will double down with Ace’s BS on his crappy site.
Does Palin really want to go there on the crony capitalism issue? If you dig in her record, it appears she had no problem with plain old cronyism. Look up Dairygate for starters.
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/corporate-cronyism-palins-2011-version-death-panels
Cronyism isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It only becomes so when the friends of the corporate boss, or for that matter, the governor, happen to be crooks, liars or incompetents. Palin herself is really not one to be talking about cronyism, either, given her record in this regard. Government, which has more time and energy to vet people than business, is supposed to be a meritocracy in this country, and at least one branch of government — the U.S. military — has done a decent job seeing to that.
Palin as governor failed. The political definition of cronyism is “the practice of appointing friends to high-level posts regardless of their suitability,” and that is a description that in large part describes the administration of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. But that doesn’t matter. That was then and this is now.
Dude, a link to Medred, Really?
Sometimes they do hit the nail on the head. Is it a lie she appointed her friends to key positions even though they weren’t qualified?
Ah, yes, the totally left wing smear Alaska Dispatch. Go to google and find out who owns it, a former Jimmy Carter cabinet man… Yes totally unbiased….NOT.
So, can we get some clarification about Bryan Preston and any of his connections to Rick Perry or anyone associated with the Rick Perry campaign?
oh, gee….. guess what? Isn’t this interesting…. Bryan Preston, the author of this attempt to smear Sarah Palin was…. wait for it…
“was producer of the Laura Ingraham Show and, most recently before joining PJM, was Communications Director of the Republican Party of Texas”
Well, well.
Wow, you found the bio we publish right here! Good on ya! I also co-founded Hot Air, yet disagree with the former owner of that site.
Heh! I wanted to write a few things about this ridiculous reach by Byran Preston to smear Sarah Palin, but the absolute beatdown Bryan took at the hands of Michelle Malkin summed up everything perfectly.
Sorry Bryan, I know you wanted to be the hero of the day for all of the nervous Perry fans out there, but it seems it has backfired.
Are you going to update this ‘article’ with a few actual facts?
I do have one more question Bryan and it’s the same one I asked Ed Morrissey.
How do efforts like this blog post aimed to protect and defend Governor Perry from legitimate criticism by attacking and smearing others leave you looking like an impartial blogger?
It seems more like a blogger with an agenda or maybe just a little crush. The latter is fine and would be kind of cute. Which is it?
This is simply absurd. Bryan has never made any secret of the facts that he lives in Texas, he was communications director for the state’s GOP before taking on the PJM gig, that he likes and respects Rick Perry. So he’s inclined toward his candidacy, so what? There’s nothing, and I mean nothing, wrong with him making this limited, factual point.
Sarah is the one who decided to pile on. Now we can fully air out the issue. She thinks that the availability of the vaccine is a good thing, right? Otherwise, why solicit the federal help, then. If she’s gonna interject herself into this controversy, let her explain Alaska’s position under her administration. Let her justify the benefit of the vaccine. Let her explain the risk to girls and young women, from the vaccine and from HPV.
By the way, Sarah is more than capable of defending herself. She doesn’t need her rabid fans to come and pluck the eyes of every critic and feed on what flows forth. When she ends up pulling the rug out from under your fond and forlorn hopes for her candidacy, I want to hear no rending of garments or gnashing of teeth among you.
Palin does not oppose the vaccine. She…oh what’s the point.
Perry’s done.
Here, let me see if I can help you find the point. Palin must explain and defend her own remarks and own actions. Perhaps if she slowed down and gave some balanced consideration to this issue and spoke her actual mind instead of scoring points, it wouldn’t be blown out of all proportion.
It’s a big nothing burger compared to the many important issues. I don’t carry any brief for Perry, even though I’m favorably disposed toward his candidacy. But I was also favorably disposed towards Pawlenty and Cain (until his mouth fell down the stairs a few weeks ago). I like Bachmann, I think she’s a great spokesperson for grassroots conservatism, but find her Jenny McCarthy act simply offensive. I would like to see Sarah run. (But she won’t, and all the tears of her supporters will be enough to relieve Texas’ drought.)
If you want to criticize Perry, go after him where it really hurts, e.g., immigration. Ding him on not forcefully facing and rebutting his critics. I don’t think the crony capitalism charge will get much mileage. If it didn’t stick in any past statewide contests, how’s it gonna here. But give it a roll. Make him layout his entitlement reform plans. Good. Vet the pants off him. But “Ponzi scheme” and Gardasil, come on.
I’m not sure how Perry’s toast based on one debate. He’s leading the polls, raising tons of money, riding a swell of support, appears to unite grassroots conservatives across the spectrum, got a solid record, is a devilish tactical and strategic campaigner.
Chipper: “I would like to see Sarah run. (But she won’t, and all the tears of her supporters will be enough to relieve Texas’ drought.)”
Wow Chipper, you sound confident. I guess we will see how it plays out. I know one thing I won’t do is cry if Palin doesn’t run for president. Especially now that I know those tears will help save lives in Texas.
Thanks for the heads up.
Is having a lobbyist donating to your campaign fund “crony capitalism?” Or how about having that lobbyist as your running mate when you are running for governor of Alaska?
Sean Parnell, the current governor of Alaska, after Palin quit, was a lobbyist for the oil companies in Alaska while he ran as Palin’s personally selected running mate in the Alaska governor’s race. During that race, Parnell donated to Palin’s campaign, and did not resign his job with one of the nations largest lobbying firms until the day before he was sworn in as Lt. Governor of Alaska. Parnell was also part of the legal team that defended Exxon in the Exxon-Valdez oil spill case. So, was picking a lobbyist, and an oil company legal eagle, a case of “crony capitalism” on Palin’s part, or can the Palinists not see that there is not one politican that doesn’t have some warts?
OOPS!
Michelle Malkin totally shredded this false charge against Sarah Palin:
http://michellemalkin.com/2011/09/13/the-right-and-wrong-way-to-talk-about-gardasil/
What was the point of this exercise, Bryan, hypocrisy, well that doesn’t really apply, I mean if you an argument with the policy, take it up with the CDC, whose
head went to work for Merck’s Vaccine division, The contrast is clear, Palin opposed the major oil companies, as the AGIA and ACES legislation proved,
Bryan, I am embarrassed by your lack of distinction between Alaska and Texas on this matter. If I hadn’t read your work before I would accuse you of shining turds for Perry.
Please do a better job of research and background before writing. It could be just a matter of lazy journalism.
Bryan,
See what happens when you criticize The One?
Watch what happens when the One Worshipers are questioned about Perry’s free tuition for illegal immigrants?
I really lost a lot of respect for Bachmann last night. Perry said, loud and clear, any parent that didn’t want their kids to get the vaccine could opt out. Which leaves me with two questions:
1) Who in their right mind WOULD opt out? Even if the girl never had sex with anyone but her (eventual) husband, he could still infect her if he ever had had sex with anyone else — or what if she was raped?
2) The opt out was obviously for the kind of nut brains that think vaccines cause autism, or for religious crazies who would rather their kid dies of cancer than reducing the negative consequences of sex, in any way, shape or form. But there WAS an opt out. Which means there is NO ISSUE. So WHAT WAS BACHMANN’s problem?
You are missing the point because you are clearly uneducated about the legal and medical realities.
First, the legal status of vaccines is that they are “unavoidably unsafe.” Let that sink in for a moment. The implicartion is that a vaccine cannot be made safe for its “intended and ordinary use.” Since congress created the VICP program
(Vaccine Injury Compensation Program) in 1986 about $2,000,000,000 has been paid out to approximately 2,500 families whose children experienced injury or harm from vaccines.
As to your question, “Who in their right mind would opt out?” The answer is any rational parent who was aware that within 90 days after Perry isued his mandate, 13 cases of Guillain Barr’s syndrome (GBS) in association with the HPV vaccine (Gardasil) were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Guillain-Barre syndrome is a serious disorder that occurs when the body’s defense (immune) system mistakenly attacks part of the nervous system.
There were also more than 1,600 adverse events from the vaccion reported within the same time frame nationally.
Other rational and responsioble parents who would”opt out” might be those who had learned that the Journal of the American Medical association found “Serious questions” remain about its “overall effectiveness,” and even the chair of the federal panel that recommended Gardasil for children opposed mandating it as a condition of school enrollment–or perhaps those parents that had discovered, among others, the Texas Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, had issued statements saying it was too early to mandate the vaccine.
I’m fairly certain you’re not aware that if you wish people to make a certain choice–and this was proven with the issue of organ donation in Europe. The countries that had the highest number of inviduals agree to donate their organs were told that if they DID NOT wish to donate organs they could check a certain box on the back of their driver’slicense apllication. Most people, of course, have been conditioned to check if they wish to “opt-in” to something–a free subscription, a free sample, etc; they are not conditioned to check off something they don’t wish to
participate in. It’s diabolically clever and it works.
Finally, Perry admits he now should have gone through the legislature. No s#$%!– since by executing an executive order against the wishes of the legislature he usurped the power of the Texas State Legislature and turned a deaf ear to the appeal of 26 senators who were against the mandate.
What’s Bachman’s problem? How about Perry’s abuse of power, the asumption of gubernatorial powers and privileges that don’t exist, the fact that Merck was having a very bad year in 2007 and Glaxo Welcom was about to launch a competing vaccine and Perry had ties to Merck which was in a rush to get their product on the market.
This is going to be a lot worse for Perry than it will be for Bachman or Palin–especially when his opponents start connecting the dots and its revealed that Perry had numerous ties to Merck, the maker of the HPV vaccine, one being “Women in Government”, an activist group promoting the vaccine and which was led by the mother-in-law of Perry’s chief of Staff, a Merck lobbyist himself.
But Mr. Perry likens HPV infection to polio although HPV is transmitted via sex contact whereas polio infects people without requiring people to have any contact. Right groups say HPV is behaviorally avoidable and a state mandate is not warranted. But Perry says the cervical cancer vaccine is no different from the one that protects children against polio.
Here’s where it really gets to be Nixonian: in 2007 there were about 300,000 young girls who fit the criteria for getting the vaccine. Over a five-year period, Perry’s mandate would have put $126,000,000 in Merck’s pocket from sales in Texas alone.
What is Bachman’s problem? Probably voters like you who don’t do their homework.
The Gillian-Barr cases were studdied but never able to be linked to the vaccine. There is no known cause of GBS. As of 2008 Out of over 20 million doses of Gardasil given there had been only about 12 thousand adverse reactions noted, with the majority being such things as headaches and hives, with a few cases of vascular problems associated with the shot. At that time there were 32 known deaths following vaccination but out of those cases, where information could be obtained, all were found to be from other causes.
Merck makes a wide varity of drugs and vaccines. A minor relationship (many companies are full of ex-aids and such) with a past aid, nor a small campaign contribution centainly shouldn’t have any baring of the effectivness of these drugs and vaccines, and if another company had introduced this vaccine Parry most probably would have done the same.
Bachmann’s problem is she never has facts, talks out her ass. As for Palin-2 time loser, she will never be nominee unless every other candidate drops out. People would support Newt who at least can talk off talking points before they would palin
I am very disappointed with PJTV for the first time.
Am I the only one seeing the obvious thing here. WE as Americans are being set up for a fall. This is not supposed to be a campaign to elect the lesser of two evils, that is still evil. This is supposed to be an election about getting our country on the right track.
You have played very loose on the facts here. Federal funds are given to every state, and every governor. From implementing Food Stamps, to making sure Labor laws are being followed. To slam Sarah Palin in this pieced the way you did, is pure Ignorance on your part.
Let’s keep this in Mind, voting the Lesser of Two Evils is still EVIL. Anyone CAN BEAT OBAMA, ANYONE. we have to all work for it. But if your going to keep pushing Evil in the face of the people they will not support the Candidate.
I am not yelling when I type in Caps I am emphasizing to make my point.
Sarah took Federal Funds, but her emails CLEARLY SHOW that the SHOT WOULD BE OFFERED FOR FREE TO ANYONE WHO WANTS IT AND IT WOULD NOT BE MANDATED. HOW DARE YOU LIE ABOUT HER OR TWIST WHAT WAS GOING ON.
What is going on here with the Media that we thought told us the truth? What is going on that they only want us to Pick Between Perry and Romney? Are you all being paid or given funds from George Soros to set us up for a fall.
Taking federal funds, to use for PARENTS TO MAKE A CHOICE, and taking POLITICAL FUNDS TO HELP YOUR FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF AND MANDATING A VACCINE are two different things. Perry has more Problems than just this. CHECK OUT HIS CONNECTIONS WITH CHINA AND SPAIN.
PJTV if you want ANYMORE MONEY FROM ME, you better get your act together and I would RETRACT this piece and put in the facts. Because I am not liking what I am seeing and how you are all so quick to give the “Golden Boy” the nod, when he is NOT A CONSERVATIVE. He is someone who will destroy this country at a slow pace, but destroy it he will.
“This isn’t quite the same thing as mandating (and being overturned on, so it didn’t actually happen) a vaccination, but taking federal funds for Gardasil doesn’t quite square with Palin’s hot shots at Perry on Fox last night.”
Not “quite” the same? There’s no moral equivalency whatsoever, The issue was NOT the efficacy of the vaccine or frequency of potentialcomplications it was the state’s mandate to have the girl’s innoculated and the potential conflict of interest with Perry’smandate and having a subordinate affiliated with Merck.
This should be obvious to a middle-schooler.
Re: Karen. I agree with you that Rick Perry is dangerous but not for such an obvious reason. The guy’s interpretation of the 10th amendment suggests a constitutional illiteracy that is far more dangerous over the long haul than terrorists, joblessness, and a devalued dollar. Perry’s belief that competiton between states, for example is good, was discussed
and dismissed as a potential threat to the security of the country by Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers #’s 6 and 7. His defense last night, also, that one state has the right to choose how it will act towards illegal immigrants while another can choose to act differantly belies either his ignorance of, or indifferance to, the fact that immigration law is mandated by the federal government and not an issue for states to decide for themselves. Lincoln himself, on July 4, 1861, chastised those who believed in the dangerous constitutional fiction of many “rights” assumed by the states.
A president that believes each state is empowered by the constitution to act in its own interest rather than as subject to the will of the people with respect to the greater national good is a president that should frighten us.
I never imagined I would even think it until last night but Rick Perry’s staggering disregard for federal law as exemplified by his views on competition between states (which Hamilton argued was to risk violence and anarchy) and his belief the state should have the last word on the treatment of illegal immigrants is leading me to think that “The devil you know is better than the one you don’t.”
The right better hope Palin jumps in because as of now she may be the only one who could pop the bubble of the insane euphoria many conservatives are experiencing for Perry.
Sure a lot of libs here defending Perry’s VERY POOR judgement. Should tell most conservatives a lot. I’m waiting for this author to defend and excuse Perry’s position on illegal immigration, and helping them to receive government benefits for their illegal actions. The RINO Romney sounds a lot better than Perry, don’t want someone with this poor of judgement and lack of respect for our laws and doing the RIGHT thing, in charge of reforming our country or social security. He is toxic……
This whole vaccination argument is a deliberate overreaction to the situation in Texas by Michele Bachmann to damage the campaign of Rick Perry. It has nothing to do with finding the best Republican candidate to defeat Barack Obama in 2012 and beginning to reclaim our constitutional republic. There is nothing I have heard or read that indicates that Gardasil is not a safe and effective vaccine which could protect women from the spread of cervical cancer. If it is approved by the FDA and CDC for use in the United States and is in use in 40 states, the comments by Viper1 are disingenuous – Texas was far from the only state to follow the same reasoning to approve its use. The fact that Perry’s aide is connected to Merck and Merck stands to make money from the use of the vaccine in 40 states is irrelevant if the drug is safe and effective. A $5000 campaign contribution can hardly be called crony capitalism. Bachmann’s claim that “some woman came up to her and claimed that her daughter was mentally retarded as a result of the drug” without any scientific proof is a tactic one would expect from the Obama camp, but Bachmann has done their dirty work for them.
The losers in this tempest in a teapot are Rick Perry and all the other Republican candidates who are trying to convince voters of their credentials to run against Barack Obama; Michele Bachmann, who has damaged her credibility by going ballistic on a peripheral issue; and Sarah Palin, if she joins in this attempt to destroy another candidate with innuendo. The only winners are the Democrat Party and their failing President, who had nothing going for them but class warfare and blame Bush until Bachmann elevated this issue. If you had taken a poll last week before the debate on which issues were the most important to be addressed by the Republican candidates, the executive order on Gardasil (which had an opt out and was never implemented) would not even have been in the top 20! Now, with the help of a gleeful mainstream media that was looking for a way to damage the Republican front runners, it will be the only thing we hear about and the candidates will find it increasingly difficult to get any traction with the real issues separating them from Obama.
Ridiculous!!
This whole Gardasil thing has been blown waaayyyy out of proportion. It’s far from the first vaccine to be mandated and the cause of preventing Cancer and other viruses is a noble cause. Without those mandated vaccinations we’d still be fighting Polio, TB, German Measles, and the consequences and costs associated with them. There was an opt out provided for those that objected all along. Maybe it was misguided from the beginning, Perry did recinde his order, but I for one can’t blame him for wanting to end a horrible disease that kills many women every year. What are these people pointing fingers REALLY trying to tell us?
Sarah Palin was going to sign the Gardasil Mandate .. but then she quit.
You can find who Mike Toomey was lobbying for
before he before he became chief of staff for Gov. Perry in 2002…
http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/tedd/lobcon2002e.htm
and after…
http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/tedd/lobcon2004e.htm
and in 2007..
http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/tedd/lobcon2007e.htm
and in 2011…
http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/tedd/lobcon2011e.htm
and then the inner circle as reported by the Texas Tribune
http://www.texastribune.org/library/data/perrys-circle/
So, as a voter there’s more to learn and not just in Texas about these connections and what they mean…which was the gist of what I understood Gov. Palin to mean…when she said she wondered about Gov. Perry’s executive order related to Gardisal, and how that stacked up with limited government personna
Bogus article. Sarah Palin never signed an executive order mandating inoculations of the Gardasil drug. Rick Perry did and also received a kick back from the drug company. The state legislature overturned his decision that allowed parents to opt out. Maybe you should talk to the FDA about how safe the drug is.
Mary, I rarely call someone a FLAT out liar but you are one. Rick Perry did NOT receive a kickbach & you can NOT prove that. You Palin people are making people really really detest her. I am MUCH more concerned about a Governor that gives a contract to a company this SUPPLYING her husband a JOB-WHICH FYI is on record & was the 1st ETHICAL COMPLAINT against Palin-which was filed LONG before McCain even brought her to national attention. Want to compare the NUMBER Of ethical complaints filed against Rick Perry in 11 years vs the number of ethical complaints filed against Palin in the 2 year before she QUIT.
The term “Federal Funds” merits definition.
Congress can enact specific legislation with specific goals for specific amounts to be allocated for specific programs either nationally, certain states or municipalities (the term “earmaks” is not part of this discussion).
The Administration can propose legislation for broader expenditures of “Federal Funds,” allocating these amounts for enumerated programs, specific programs either nationally, statewide or municipalities.
So, as for the matter at hand, “Federal Funds” allocated for a specific national program either for a state to “incorporate” into their yearly budget cycle or not, are decisions resting with a states Department head, not the executive branch of any States government. Therefore, a Department Head, say, Health and Human Services in any State made a request for allocation of Funds and “availability of Federal Funds,” it becomes a part of overall statewide budgeting yearly cycle process.
Aside from this consideration, “Federal Funding” usually comes in “bundled” form. Say for example, if Federal Highway Funds are available for a statewide HOV lane and noise barrier wall improvement along a specific corridor in a specific area…the HOV lane “Federal Funds” would be inline with program parameters, but the noise barrier wall may not…and so forth.
Since each state must present a balanced budget every yearly budget cycle, accepting or not “Federal Funds” is a do or die decision in many cases…because the application and justification process ensues.
What is at issue here is how States manage their revenues and expenses during each yearly bugetary cycle, a States’ cost and responsibility AND COMPLIANCE.
Every “Federal Fund” comes to a State with strings attached…its usually not up to a State’s Executive, Legislative or Judiciary branches of State government to decide what to avail themselves of (from federal funds) or not.
Points to ponder while evaluating the 10th amendment and federal funds.
States Rights is the issue…not individual decision-making. Let’s get back on track, folks.