Speakin uh Texus – ayve got a great set a ideas: how bout #1 – y’all run a religiousy Governor from that state who aint well spoken 4yrs after Dubya. 2: have him be the guy who will fix Obama’s crazy-irresponsible entitlement program mess while he himself collects his pension despite still being a sitting governor, and 3:… well, I forget what 3 is… oops.
The better summary that I just got in an instant message about this story: Texas Gov. Rick Perry is collecting a salary and retirement benefits simultaneously … A report filed with the Federal Election Commission shows that Perry is collecting his $7,700 monthly state pension in addition to his nearly $133,000 annual salary as governor.
A friend cautioned me with the following: “Don’t hate the player, hate the game. Its not his fault… The system is obviously flawed and that’s what people should be upset with. Not Perry who is just using what he is allowed… I mean, it is fucked up, but he isn’t being corrupt about it.”
And he’s right of course. Perry isn’t doing anything illegal or even out of the ordinary. I should make it more clear that I’m just further spotlighting how he’s not a good candidate, not that he’s corrupt or even a hypocrite in this regard. it’s just so clearly NOT this dudes time that his candidacy urks me.
I probably wouldn’t like Perry as a candidate for anything beyond Texan elected office (he’s done fine as Governor, but that doesn’t justify a national promotion) but my point isn’t that Perry is a terrible and dishonorable person or even unfit for for any office. Just that he’s an unfit candidate at this time. My point is similar to the one made by Andrew C. McCarthy in National Review about GOP candidate Jon Huntsman (former Governor of Utah and former Ambassador to China under the Obama Administration). McCarthy notes that there may not be anything wrong with Huntsman to make him blocked out for consideration for president (I personally, like him) but for this election cycle, it just aint a good fit. Emphasis added by me below:
Here is the totality of their argument: “Governor Huntsman has a solid record, notwithstanding his sometimes glib foreign-policy pronouncements; his main weakness is his apparent inability, so far, to forge a connection with conservative voters outside Utah.”
Seriously? When you ask conservatives and Republicans what they think of Governor Huntsman’s bid, you don’t get a bunch of psycho-babble about “inability to forge a connection.” You get, “Why would Republicans nominate a guy Obama picked for an important role in his administration?” Huntsman was the president’s ambassador to China — a fact the Editors, remarkably, omit. So, when it comes to Bachmann, the Editors think “anti-vaccine rumors” are a disqualifier; on Huntsman, however, somehow the little matter of his service in the Obama administration doesn’t even rate a mention. To be clear, I am not suggesting that there is anything dishonorable about Huntsman’s service. But we’re not talking about whether he should be ostracized; we’re talking about whether he is a viable candidate in a race Republicans must frame as a referendum on the Obama administration. How bad can the administration be if we’re going to recruit our nominee from it?
Again: I don’t even agree with the substance of the above point (I don’t see a problem at all with the fact that Hunstman served his president when he was asked, even though it was from the opposition party. I respect it), I’m only noting the parallel in the argument, which is why each man is not good for this election cycle, not why either is unfit for office or a terrible person.
BONUS:
UPDATE: Ad hits Gingrich and Perry on ethics. Reminder: Mitt Romney is squeaky clean in that area.