The idea of having Rick Perry represent the Republican Party as our presidential nominee, and ultimately becoming the president of the United States, is something you cannot consider in isolation. Politics is, and forever will be, the art of choosing the lesser of the evils.
We must consider Perry versus other potential candidates, even considering those who haven’t entered the race yet. After all, if they were ideal candidates, they could throw their hat into the ring and win the nomination.
First, the worst spot on Perry’s record is his mandate that all young girls in Texas be inoculated against Chlamydia. The more I learn about this, the more I realize that Rick Perry is unfit for the presidential office, or any executive office.
Next, is his former democrat ties. Notice that no one calls Romney a flip-flopper anymore? That’s because Perry is whatever Romney was times a million. He used to support the Democratic Party, not just within Texas but across the country.
Next, is the border issues. He is against building a fence, instead preferring to enforce border security in the communities well within our nation’s borders. He believes that building a fence is impossible and would be ineffective.
Next, is the fact that as a governor of Texas he earns a solid “Meh” from my brother living in Texas. I believe his exact words were “I guess he’d be an OK president.”
There are likely several other areas where I’d disagree with Perry strongly, but these are the ones that stand out the most.
As a campaigner, Rick Perry is pretty pathetic. His attack on Romney is that his jobs record is worse than Dukakis. Romney’s retort that Perry is worse than his predecessors should illustrate a few vital points that we tend to forget too rapidly. One, government cannot create jobs, nor create anything for that matter. Governments can only destroy. Two, The economic seasons shift, and just like a CEO can join a company and get patted on the back while the company fails to produce profit (because it would have been much worse otherwise), you cannot judge a leader based on the results when the results are largely determined by environmental factors. You have to judge them on their ability to lead and turn bad environments into positive things.
Rick Perry also fails to recognize the importance of the religion debate in today’s culture. When he was given a softball on the topic, he failed to swing at all. This shows that he either has tunnel vision or he doesn’t understand what kind of leader a president will be. How many other places will he fail to lead and set the tone of our culture? What other vital debates will he refuse to discuss at all, because it is hard and controversial?
The few things Rick Perry does have going for him is the fact that he’s been in politics for a large portion of his adult life. This has shaped him into the ideal politician. I don’t think Romney or many other potential candidates would be able to campaign like he would. I do question, of course, whether having someone steeped in the ways of government at the head of our government is a good idea.
If I had to choose between only two candidates, one of them being Perry, I would probably choose any other nominee ahead of Perry, except for Paul and most of the back-benchers we don’t all know about.
If you’re wondering, if I had to choose between any two combination of possible nominees I would choose Romney over all of them. Yes, he has negatives, but they aren’t nearly as severe as Perry’s. And for his parry of Perry’s attack in the debate, he’s earned a couple of gold stars. Doing that three or four times on the trail is enough to win the presidency.
Tags: Rick Perry