Rush: Bachmann really jumped the shark on Gardasil

posted at 3:25 pm on September 13, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

After my earlier post strongly objecting to Michele Bachmann’s attempt to link the Gardasil vaccination to “mental retardation,” the response has been nearly unanimous among commenters — and as it turns out, pundits too.  The Boss Emeritus, whose rational objections to Perry’s Gardasil mandate threaten to be overwhelmed by Bachmann’s demagoguery, tries offering Bachmann some advice on how to deal with the issue in the future.  Rush Limbaugh, on the other hand, concludes that while Bachmann had an otherwise strong showing in last night’s debate, she “jumped the shark” last night and today by repeatedly using an attack that Rush says deserves “shame.” 

First, Rush defends Perry to some extent on the issue, calling it a “giant distraction“:

If you want to get directly to the “jump the shark” quote and see Rush deliver it, click the image to watch:

If Bachmann’s listening, here is Michelle Malkin’s advice, in part:

After successfully highlighting Perry’s troubling abuse of executive power during last night’s debate, Michele Bachmann risks blowing it with some factually inaccurate assertions.

She’s RIGHT on the principles, wrong on some of the details.

She needs to stay on message and stick with the facts.

The Texas state legislature repealed the order (over Perry’s hysterical objections) before any girl was forcibly vaccinated.

And while individual stories of Gardasil harm may or may not be true (Bachmann cited a mother who thinks the vaccine caused mental retardation in her child while making the post-debate rounds), it’s not the primary case she should be making.

Again: Bachmann is RIGHT on the principles, but it gets dicey citing cases where individual anecdotes need to be vetted before tossing them out on TV. She came dangerously close to using the same demagogic tactics Perry employed in obstinately defending the order even after it was repealed.

The main issue for Perry’s actions were the way he attempted to impose the mandate (by executive order) and the connections to Merck, both of which are fair game. As long as critics both inside and outside the race stick to those points, it’s an effective attack.  If the debate broadens to Gardasil itself as Bachmann tried to do, Perry may not be the only governor who will have to answer questions about Gardasil itself, however.  Pajamas Media’s Bryan Preston reaches into the Wayback machine and discovers the state of Alaska cheerfully accepting federal funds in order to distribute Gardasil for free during Sarah Palin’s tenure as Governor:

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.

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 Boss Emeritus calls this a “really, really stupid attack on Palin” in an update to the linked post above, but I’m not entirely convinced. In the same post, Michelle argues:

The point is that Perry rushed to mandate the Merck-pushed order less than 8 months after it had received FDA approval. Clinical trial and safety data was extremely limited at the time. And scientific assessments are still coming in about the long-term and synergistic effects of this and other vaccines.

If the argument is that Gardasil was not ready for large-scale usage, then it’s not just about the mandate or the connections to Merck. The same argument against the mandate also apply in this case to taxpayer funding for massive vaccinations, do they not? And in this case, it’s the taxpayers who didn’t get to decide whether they wanted 12-year-old girls injected with a supposedly questionable vaccine at their expense, for a virus that isn’t easily spread through mandated proximity such as school attendance.

It’s not a problem on the same scale as Perry’s, but it’s not an unfair question to raise, either, if Gardasil itself is the problem, as it seems it is for some Perry critics.

Update: Worth noting — Perry actually has received nearly $30,000 from Merck over the past decade. Also worth noting — that doesn’t put Merck in the top 200 of Perry’s donors during that period. Seriously.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 6

Wait, wait. The Fed government paid for Gard vaccinations in multiple states…and Alaska was one of them. The vaccinations were voluntary.

And this is somehow Palin’s problem?

Unless you are claiming that only Alaska received fed funding for vaccines, and then at the direct request of Palin, AND that the vaccines were mandatory, I simply cant twist my brain into the knot required to blame Palin for anything.

Bachmann isn’t the only one who has jumped the shark, Ed.

Irritable Pundit on September 13, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Why is it a stupid attack? Since she appeared to enjoy Bachmann’s demagoguery of Perry’s decision, she should as well enjoy the ensuing demagoguery of everyone else.

And trust me… it is just beginning. Everyone will be bloodied by the time this is over.

TheRightMan on September 13, 2011 at 3:52 PM

Key words being Perry’s decision, right?

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Whatever. I wouldn’t be surprised if Malkin starts attacking Palin. It’s all a conspiracy theory, right?

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 3:51 PM

No. Malkin will leave Palin alone. She and Levin (and John Nolte at Big Gov’t and Breitbart to a far more courteous extent) have latched themselves firmly to Palin. Any criticism will be weaksauce and always in the context of tearing down one of Palin’s enemies.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Don’t be so edgy. I’m just giving you insight into sheryl’s worldview.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 3:53 PM

LOL oops my bad, I missed your point.

Got it now though.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Unless you are claiming that only Alaska received fed funding for vaccines, and then at the direct request of Palin, AND that the vaccines were mandatory, I simply cant twist my brain into the knot required to blame Palin for anything.

Irritable Pundit on September 13, 2011 at 3:53 PM

Exactly. But I guess Palin needs to be brought down a few notches.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 3:55 PM

One (alaska’s) is done with federal tax dollars. Another’s (texas) is done with state tax dollars.
lorien1973 on September 13, 2011 at 3:34 PM

Which should make it even less an issue for Palin, as it would have been congress that made the money available.

Count to 10 on September 13, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Update: Worth noting — Perry actually has received nearly $30,000 from Merck over the past decade. Also worth noting — that doesn’t put Merck in the top 200 of Perry’s donors during that period. Seriously.

Holy Crap.

It sure looks like Crony Capitalism. Is Perry for Sale?

I am starting to feel like Jetboy when he was supporting The Orange Man Charlie Crist.

I might have supported Perry too soon.

portlandon on September 13, 2011 at 3:55 PM

its a legit question, she’s a quitter not a fighter. why does anyone support her?

chasdal on September 13, 2011 at 3:45 PM

First page and not dsdeseven using beaten to death talking point #11.

We have a winner!

What’s the prize, Don Pardo?

Laughter at your expense. Enjoy.

kim roy on September 13, 2011 at 3:55 PM

Ed show me evidence that Palin lobbied for the federal funding to benefit Merck and then I will say she’s a crony.

Rick Perry had a campaign contribution from Merck and had his chief of staff work for them and then tried to implement an executive order mandating its vaccination, which was thankfully over turned overwhelmingly by the state legislature. How can you even try to compare the two? Yeah as Malkin says, stupid attack on Palin.

milemarker2020 on September 13, 2011 at 3:50 PM

The pundits dont really have a case for attacking Palin on the crony charge , but they will try.

the_nile on September 13, 2011 at 3:56 PM

No. Malkin will leave Palin alone. She and Levin (and John Nolte at Big Gov’t and Breitbart to a far more courteous extent) have latched themselves firmly to Palin. Any criticism will be weaksauce and always in the context of tearing down one of Palin’s enemies.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Dude, just a few weeks ago, Malkin went after Palin for playing nice with Orrin Hatch. Yeah, she’s trying to spread some Palin propaganda or something.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 3:56 PM

Oooops. Moved to page two while composing.

kim roy on September 13, 2011 at 3:56 PM

I might have supported Perry too soon.

portlandon on September 13, 2011 at 3:55 PM

I call BS on this one.

You’re a Palin supporter.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 3:56 PM

No. Malkin will leave Palin alone. She and Levin (and John Nolte at Big Gov’t and Breitbart to a far more courteous extent) have latched themselves firmly to Palin. Any criticism will be weaksauce and always in the context of tearing down one of Palin’s enemies.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 3:54 PM

And this is different from Ace with Perry, Ingraham with Romney, and Coulter with Christie in what way?

Kataklysmic on September 13, 2011 at 3:56 PM

Ed, you’re a gem. You always find a way to get a grip on an issue when everyone else is flailing their arms.

Jim-Rose on September 13, 2011 at 3:56 PM

barry, soros, podesta and axe are probably having a tele-con to celebrate running against the party of stupid

obama is an efing wrecking ball for this country and the Rs are trying to outbid one another on arcane issues. The damage the left has done is enormous…it will not be undone by one R adminstration, one R congress. Rs have to all be on the same team, talking the same strategy.

SS is a molehill, gardisil is a theoretical. barrycare will lead to single payer in 10 years, barry’s enviro policy will doom the country economically for decades, barry’s union policies will further flat line business growth

I can not believe that Rs are this stupid

r keller on September 13, 2011 at 3:57 PM

Note: Alaska does not appear on this list. It was never a lobbying target for Merck. Nor did Palin have an ex-chief of staff lobbying for Merck or a staffer’s mother-in-law serving as a 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.

Moreover, Palin is on record in 2008 e-mails expressing her general opposition to certain vaccine mandates.

It’s a pathetic and ill-informed act of desperation to try and turn the crony capitalism charge on Palin, which is a telling measure of how effective her voice is on this topic — and why so many would rather silence her.

***

As a sidenote, Perry lowballed the amount of money he took from Merck. See here.

And a final point: A friend points out that Perry supporters sabotage their own defense of Perry. If Perry was simply “erring on the side of life” and would simply have pursued the policy of increasing access to Gardasil in a different way, then he most certainly would have no objection to what happened in Alaska — e.g., making the vaccine available to people who wanted it without mandating it by acccepting existing federal dollars.

Let’s see on one hand you have a gov telling people they will get the shot on the other you have a gov working to get the funds to make it available to those who would like to have it. Yeah only in the minds of those in Dc are the two the same. Keep on pushing that line guys. Palin once again comes out smelling like a rose and Perry comes out smelling like a midden heap

unseen on September 13, 2011 at 3:57 PM

Then you’ll recall your statements to me at the time, and your deliberate dismissal of my evidence.

So no, my comment stands.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 3:50 PM

I think my comment was that I was sorry that your fury at the ATF had blinded you to what I was trying to say about the FBI and the judicial process vis-a-vis search warrants. As to your evidence on the ATF, my comments were reserved to the FBI and I didn’t really feel like getting into it.

However, since that conversation apparently offended you in some way, I offer my sincere apologies, it was not my intention. Gentlemen can agree to disagree without being offensive. I look forward to your retraction of the scurrilous accusation that I am a liar and/or a criminal on the other thread, and to continued dialogue on other topics of interest.

Trafalgar on September 13, 2011 at 3:57 PM

Exactly. But I guess Palin needs to be brought down a few notches.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 3:55 PM

What is it the Perry haters have been saying all day?

Politics ain’t beanbag.

Palin could have avoided this…

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 3:57 PM

No. Malkin will leave Palin alone. She and Levin (and John Nolte at Big Gov’t and Breitbart to a far more courteous extent) have latched themselves firmly to Palin. Any criticism will be weaksauce and always in the context of tearing down one of Palin’s enemies.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Malkin attacked Palin over Hatch , the same week she attacked Perry over gardasil.

the_nile on September 13, 2011 at 3:58 PM

Dude, just a few weeks ago, Malkin went after Palin for playing nice with Orrin Hatch. Yeah, she’s trying to spread some Palin propaganda or something.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 3:56 PM

I’m perfectly aware of that. As you quoted, I said this –

Any criticism will be weaksauce and always in the context of tearing down one of Palin’s enemies.

She was disappointed that Palin would endorse a doddering big-government pork-hungry fogy who should just go die already.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 3:58 PM

I saw this. Between her and Mark Levin, what is it that causes some very good, strong conservatives to launch fusillades against other conservatives in service of Sarah Palin?

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 3:28 PM

Part of it, I think, is the virtually unprecedented level of vitriol that was leveled against Palin in ’08. Some have just become really defensive when it comes to her.

changer1701 on September 13, 2011 at 3:58 PM

Romney sits back and thanks Bachmann and Santorum for their efforts here. Good grief. Oh well, bring it. Perry will weather this and be in even better position to take it to The One.
But seriously. Bachmann’s decent into insanity is troubling.

Sugar Land on September 13, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Update: Worth noting — Perry actually has received nearly $30,000 from Merck over the past decade. Also worth noting — that doesn’t put Merck in the top 200 of Perry’s donors during that period. Seriously.

Holy Crap.

It sure looks like Crony Capitalism. Is Perry for Sale?

I am starting to feel like Jetboy when he was supporting The Orange Man Charlie Crist.

I might have supported Perry too soon.

portlandon on September 13, 2011 at 3:55 PM

He has a big problem regarding the appearance of corruption that much is certain.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304760604576428262897285614.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Among the companies that the Emerging Technology Fund has invested in is Convergen LifeSciences, Inc. It received a $4.5 million grant last year—the second largest grant in the history of the fund. The founder and executive chairman of Convergen is David G. Nance.

In 2009, when Mr. Nance submitted his application for a $4.5 million Emerging Technology Fund grant for Convergen, he and his partners had invested only $1,000 of their own money into their new company, according to documentation prepared by the governor’s office in February 2010. But over the years, Mr. Nance managed to invest a lot more than $1,000 in Mr. Perry. Texas Ethics Commission records show that Mr. Nance donated $75,000 to Mr. Perry’s campaigns between 2001 and 2006.

sharrukin on September 13, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Which should make it even less an issue for Palin, as it would have been congress that made the money available.

Count to 10 on September 13, 2011 at 3:55 PM

And Palin accepted. She didn’t have to.

I don’t really care about this issue a lot, it’s stupid, but at least Perry’s solution was entirely in state. Funds included.

lorien1973 on September 13, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Trafalgar on September 13, 2011 at 3:57 PM

Actually, you accused me of attacking all LEOs in general, and your entire basis of justification was that you regarded ATF as LEOs, which I tried to point out was an opinion that I did NOT share, and that I was in no way trying to implicate LEOs in my comments.

But you refused to accept my explanation.

So, your ‘sorry if you were offended’ apology doesn’t wash.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 3:59 PM

What is it the Perry haters have been saying all day?

Politics ain’t beanbag.

Palin could have avoided this…

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 3:57 PM

Are you saying she is being taught a lesson? I think this is a desperate attempt to smear Palin some more.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:00 PM

And trust me… it is just beginning. Everyone will be bloodied by the time this is over.

TheRightMan on September 13, 2011 at 3:52 PM

Over this? Some how I fear you may be right.

Yeah, the party of stupid.

cozmo on September 13, 2011 at 4:00 PM

Wait, wait. The Fed government paid for Gard vaccinations in multiple states…and Alaska was one of them. The vaccinations were voluntary.

And this is somehow Palin’s problem?

Unless you are claiming that only Alaska received fed funding for vaccines, and then at the direct request of Palin, AND that the vaccines were mandatory, I simply cant twist my brain into the knot required to blame Palin for anything.

Bachmann isn’t the only one who has jumped the shark, Ed.

Irritable Pundit on September 13, 2011 at 3:53 PM

+1

the_nile on September 13, 2011 at 4:00 PM

Let’s see on one hand you have a gov telling people they will get the shot on the other you have a gov working to get the funds to make it available to those who would like to have it. Yeah only in the minds of those in Dc are the two the same. Keep on pushing that line guys. Palin once again comes out smelling like a rose and Perry comes out smelling like a midden heap

unseen on September 13, 2011 at 3:57 PM

I think the point is that Merck benefited substantially in both cases, and that is the linchpin of any crony capitalism charge.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 4:01 PM

I call BS on this one.

You’re a Palin supporter.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 3:56 PM

I announced my support of Perry about 2 weeks after he announced. Go look.

I thought he was the best candidate of all the officially announced ones.

With his immigration performance last night, and the Crony Capitalism stuff coming out I think I’m going to have dump Perry.

Romney is unacceptable. Bachmann is nuts.

This is looking very bad.

portlandon on September 13, 2011 at 4:01 PM

No. Malkin will leave Palin alone. She and Levin (and John Nolte at Big Gov’t and Breitbart to a far more courteous extent) have latched themselves firmly to Palin. Any criticism will be weaksauce and always in the context of tearing down one of Palin’s enemies.
KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Sounds a lot more like Malkin is pulling for Bachmann than Palin.

Count to 10 on September 13, 2011 at 4:01 PM

The same argument against the mandate also apply in this case to taxpayer funding for massive [voluntary] vaccinations, do they not?

Did Palin issue a mandate forcing vaccinations? If not, this argument does not hold water and Ed Morrissey is deliberately muddying the waters.

RedRedRice on September 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Are you saying she is being taught a lesson? I think this is a desperate attempt to smear Palin some more.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:00 PM

Not necessarily, no.

But if you believe that, then you should also believe that there is a concerted effort to take Perry down, and grow any molehill into a mountain no matter how small.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Any criticism will be weaksauce and always in the context of tearing down one of Palin’s enemies.

She was disappointed that Palin would endorse a doddering big-government pork-hungry fogy who should just go die already.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 3:58 PM

1) Hatch, is not Palin’s enemy. OK?

2) The question that now needs to be asked is if you see no problem endorsing a doddering, big-gov, pork-hungry fogy who should, to be more polite, retire already.

3) Oh, and Palin didn’t endorse him.

I think we see just how credible you are.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Michelle Malkin, God bless her, is every bit as hysterical on this issue as she was the first time she went off on it. No way was Bachmann, with her criticism, any less demagogic than Perry was with his support. She went in on a time share with Jenny McCarthy in crazy land, the same place where fluoride is a communist plot to contaminate our water supply. She basically accused Perry of hurting little girls, forcing his will on them and said outright that the vaccine causes mental retardation without any proof. That is indefensible, no matter how obsessed MM is with the Gardasil issue (which is a serious concern of mine but it’s still one issue over 11 years of Perry being Governor)

Daemonocracy on September 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Remember when this was all supposed to be about Obama?

catmman on September 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

I hate to say this in the middle of a good food fight, but I think the Texas version of the Dream act is a bigger problem for Perry than the Gardasil issue…

d1carter on September 13, 2011 at 4:03 PM

Sounds a lot more like Malkin is pulling for Bachmann than Palin.

Count to 10 on September 13, 2011 at 4:01 PM

I personally believe that will be the case unless and until Palin declares. Then, Bachmann’s no longer of any use as Palin tries to make it a three-man race between her, Romney, and Perry.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 4:03 PM

I think the point is that Merck benefited substantially in both cases, and that is the linchpin of any crony capitalism charge.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 4:01 PM

Merck may have benefitted equally in both cases. But did the governors of Texas and Alaska benefit equally? It takes two to crony capitalize.

Kataklysmic on September 13, 2011 at 4:03 PM

Did Palin issue a mandate forcing vaccinations? If not, this argument does not hold water and Ed Morrissey is deliberately muddying the waters.

RedRedRice on September 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Yes he is.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:03 PM

So, your ‘sorry if you were offended’ apology doesn’t wash.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 3:59 PM

I’m sorry you feel that way. Nevertheless, my apology was proffered, is genuine, and still stands.

Trafalgar on September 13, 2011 at 4:04 PM

I think the point is that Merck benefited substantially in both cases, and that is the linchpin of any crony capitalism charge.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 4:01 PM

The there are two linchpins of any corny capitalism charge: 1) someone benefits substantially, and 2) they are a crony.

cro·ny/ˈkrōnē/
Noun: A close friend or companion.

steebo77 on September 13, 2011 at 4:04 PM

why does anyone support her?

chasdal on September 13, 2011 at 3:45 PM

because her r ecord shows she is not for sale. She would rather leave power then be bought off. She would rather return to her private life they feed at the teat of corruption. which part of this don’t you get? Palin’s record is one of working on behave of the people over the special interests. From her defying the mayore in Washilla when he wanted to use the power of the local government to reward his friend in the garbage collection business to her ACES law which took away the special cosy relationship between big oil and state government. Palin’s record is one of defeating corrution and returning government to the work of securing the greatest benefit to We the people. We don’t have to worry that we will have to pry her hands from power or that like Ted Kennedy the only way she will give up power is by dying in office.

this isn’t rocket science.

unseen on September 13, 2011 at 4:04 PM

But if you believe that, then you should also believe that there is a concerted effort to take Perry down, and grow any molehill into a mountain no matter how small.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

There are several different propaganda camps running right now. One of them is Mitt Romney’s fan base. They have targeted Perry as threat number 1. Oh, there’s a concerted effort alright!

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:05 PM

I think the point is that Merck benefited substantially in both cases, and that is the linchpin of any crony capitalism charge.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 4:01 PM

No that isn’t. It’s called making money. It’s crony capitalism when a politician goes to bat for a company for a cash donation.

sharrukin on September 13, 2011 at 4:05 PM

Remember when this was all supposed to be about Obama?

catmman on September 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Translation: let’s ignore the records of our prospective nominees.

steebo77 on September 13, 2011 at 4:05 PM

I don’t really care about this issue a lot, it’s stupid, but at least Perry’s solution was entirely in state. Funds included.
lorien1973 on September 13, 2011 at 3:59 PM

Didn’t the funds come out of insurance companies in Texas? Wasn’t the whole point of the order to extract more money out of them?

Count to 10 on September 13, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. I guess it is fair game now to look into every single candidate’s donors and proclaim them guilty by association.

Let’s start with Michele Bachmann and the skeletons in her closet:

Bremer believes Bachmann’s politics and career are about to get the sort of scrutiny they have long deserved. Indeed, he has already chronicled much of it on his blog. “She has got plenty of skeletons in her closet,” he said.

One of those skeletons could be her relationship with Frank Vennes, a man who served time in jail for cocaine distribution and money-laundering after being convicted in 1987. After his release, and apparently after finding God while in prison, Vennes became a friend of Bachmann and a big campaign donor for her elections. However, Vennes has recently been indicted on charges stemming from a Ponzi scheme and could end up behind bars again.

That is a juicy story. As are Bachmann’s links to the mysterious “Bobby Charles Thompson”, who disappeared after the collapse of his apparently fraudulent fundraising organisation, which had been portrayed as a navy veterans’ group. Arrest warrants have now been issued for Thompson, whose real identity is not known. But what is known is that Thompson’s group donated campaign funds to Bachmann.

Then there is the issue of the Bachmann family farm in Wisconsin. The large rural property has been the recipient of considerable government largesse in the form of agricultural subsidies, despite the fact that Bachmann is a vociferous critic of government handouts. Yet Bremer’s blog has reported that the farm has reaped the Bachmanns about $154,000 of government cash since 2001. That is obviously not illegal but – given Bachmann’s virulent dislike of state welfare – it could make for some interesting headlines.

Let the games begin!

TheRightMan on September 13, 2011 at 4:06 PM

I think we see just how credible you are.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

The fact that you’re haggling over the details and trying to make it about me means you’ve conceded my point – that MM has gone full-blown Palin partisan.

And for the record – Orrin Hatch is a fine man. To compare him to Bob Bennett is a disservice, and I do think he deserves another term. He has seen where his record was weak and sought input from the Tea Party to repair his mistakes.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 4:06 PM

portlandon on September 13, 2011 at 4:01 PM

I knew you were a Palin person! I didn’t know you switched to supporting Perry, though your last comment makes me think otherwise anyway.

Who are you going to support if not anyone in the race?

Hmmmmmm?

:)

catmman on September 13, 2011 at 4:06 PM

The same argument against the mandate also apply in this case to taxpayer funding for massive [voluntary] vaccinations, do they not?

Did Palin issue a mandate forcing vaccinations? If not, this argument does not hold water and Ed Morrissey is deliberately muddying the waters.

RedRedRice on September 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

Whatever you do, never send Ed to the fruit stand to pick up some goods. You write down apples on the list, he’ll bring you oranges.

whatcat on September 13, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Remember when this was all supposed to be about Obama?

catmman on September 13, 2011 at 4:02 PM

That’s why I can’t support Romney.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:07 PM

No. Malkin will leave Palin alone. She and Levin (and John Nolte at Big Gov’t and Breitbart to a far more courteous extent) have latched themselves firmly to Palin. Any criticism will be weaksauce and always in the context of tearing down one of Palin’s enemies.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Interesting crowd you’ve named here. What is the commonality of them?

What I see is a group of people who know that the liberals have been destroying the country and are trying to get it back. Brietbart has been trying to chip away at this with his websites and states often that the liberalization of the culture needs to be stopped.

I’m not doing justice to his argument here.

So one has to look at the laundry list of conservatives you’ve presented and look at their accomplishments and work and then assess why these people would look upon Palin as someone to get behind, even if it might harm their work.

I didn’t spell it out for you in my last post because I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, but I see I can’t do that.

Perhaps Palin is who they think is the best person to help advance their cause. Maybe they think Palin is the best conservative out of the bunch. Maybe they seen something in her that agrees with *their* work.

Sorry to the rest of the commenters that Captain Obvious had to make a visit.

kim roy on September 13, 2011 at 4:07 PM

The fact that you’re haggling over the details and trying to make it about me means you’ve conceded my point – that MM has gone full-blown Palin partisan.

And for the record – Orrin Hatch is a fine man. To compare him to Bob Bennett is a disservice, and I do think he deserves another term. He has seen where his record was weak and sought input from the Tea Party to repair his mistakes.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 4:06 PM

You’re the one haggling. You’re the one that said some pretty crappy stuff about Hatch. You own it.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:08 PM

She would rather return to her private life…

unseen on September 13, 2011 at 4:04 PM

I like Palin, but I laughed when I read that part of your sentence.

catmman on September 13, 2011 at 4:09 PM

Wasn’t the whole point of the order to extract more money out of them?

Count to 10 on September 13, 2011 at 4:06 PM

As far as I know, federal funds weren’t used. Companies in the state can complain, as is their right. I really don’t understand why this issue is bigger than having kids get other vaccinations before attending school.

In the end, the EO was overturned or whatever.

lorien1973 on September 13, 2011 at 4:09 PM

Perry The EO HPV mandate was a mistake….he has said so multiple times. Does he need to run an ad on TV?

People won’t accept his admission of making a mistake? Should he put on a hair shirt, chew glass, whip himself in the streets?

Dr Evil on September 13, 2011 at 4:10 PM

Merck may have benefitted equally in both cases. But did the governors of Texas and Alaska benefit equally? It takes two to crony capitalize.

Kataklysmic on September 13, 2011 at 4:03 PM

no merck did not benefit equally in both cases. In TX it was mandated which means Merck had the entire population as customers. in AK it was a offered if the people wanted it which means only a part of the population would take advantage of it. The AK case means less customers for Merck hence the drive by the company to get it mandated in states esp large population states like CA and TX. It is not a cooincidence that the largest amount of lobbying was done in the largest population states. Merck was trying to get the most bang for their buck and in TX they found someone that would play ball with them.

unseen on September 13, 2011 at 4:10 PM

I’m sensing Ed’s piece is more about Michelle Malkin than anything.

DaydreamBeliever on September 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

So one has to look at the laundry list of conservatives you’ve presented and look at their accomplishments and work and then assess why these people would look upon Palin as someone to get behind, even if it might harm their work.

kim roy on September 13, 2011 at 4:07 PM

Getting behind Palin need not – and should not – include calling her critics RINO traitors and slobs who are a disgrace to the party, members of the ruling class, and abettors of the liberal media. Oh, and sexists.

I guess we just don’t see eye-to-eye on this.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

I knew you were a Palin person! I didn’t know you switched to supporting Perry, though your last comment makes me think otherwise anyway.

Who are you going to support if not anyone in the race?

Hmmmmmm?

:)

catmman on September 13, 2011 at 4:06 PM

I would love Palin to run, but as of late I just don’t think she will. That is why I went to Perry. I can’t stomach a vote for Romney.

My 3rd choice was Pawlenty, but now he is gone.

Bachmann is nuts.
Cain is great, but not realistic.
Newt is…..Newt.

I’m running out of People!

portlandon on September 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Translation: let’s ignore the records of our prospective nominees.

steebo77 on September 13, 2011 at 4:05 PM

You really are a humorless, hyperactive person, aren’t you?

catmman on September 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

I guess it is fair game now to look into every single candidate’s donors and proclaim them guilty by association.
TheRightMan on September 13, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Eh. Perry got outted on national TV with his hand in the Merck cookie jar. When you’re handed at least $30 grand, it’s a little more than just “association” – you are a direct, benefiting party.

whatcat on September 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Michelle Bachmann wins on her own message.

She is toast.

gdonovan on September 13, 2011 at 4:12 PM

Perry The EO HPV mandate was a mistake….he has said so multiple times. Does he need to run an ad on TV?

People won’t accept his admission of making a mistake? Should he put on a hair shirt, chew glass, whip himself in the streets?

Dr Evil on September 13, 2011 at 4:10 PM

I can respect Perry walking this back. His supporters seem to have forgotten he has walked this back.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:12 PM

My guess is that if you went got back into the time machine and went even further back, the federal government probably gave money to Merek for the development of Gardasil. I don’t know for sure but when the federal government give automobile companies money for research and development it probably isn’t too much of stretch that they do the same for drug companies.

Cindy Munford on September 13, 2011 at 4:12 PM

I’m running out of People!

portlandon on September 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Wolverines!!!!..:)

Dire Straits on September 13, 2011 at 4:12 PM

I’m sensing Ed’s piece is more about Michelle Malkin than anything.

DaydreamBeliever on September 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

I caught that too

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

Wolverines!!!!..:)

Dire Straits on September 13, 2011 at 4:12 PM

LOL.

Thanks Dire.

portlandon on September 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

You’re the one that said some pretty crappy stuff about Hatch. You own it.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:08 PM

With the exception of “just go die already,” which was a hyperbolic extrapolation of the tone of Michelle’s piece and somewhat unfair, I accurately reflected Malkin’s characterization of Hatch.

I won’t apologize for stating her position as she wrote it.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

Gardasil is very expensive and some families want their daughters protected so I think Palin did the right thing.(priced at about 350.00 in Ga)

tim c on September 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

I think the point is that Merck benefited substantially in both cases, and that is the linchpin of any crony capitalism charge.

fossten on September 13, 2011 at 4:01 PM

No that isn’t. It’s called making money. It’s crony capitalism when a politician goes to bat for a company for a cash donation.

sharrukin on September 13, 2011 at 4:05 PM

Yes, but the perrykrishnas try to obfuscate the fact that Perry both got cash and had other connections to Merck.

the_nile on September 13, 2011 at 4:14 PM

Ed, I’m surprised you didn’t pull a ligament stretching that far.

SKYFOX on September 13, 2011 at 4:14 PM

With the exception of “just go die already,” which was a hyperbolic extrapolation of the tone of Michelle’s piece and somewhat unfair, I accurately reflected Malkin’s characterization of Hatch.

I won’t apologize for stating her position as she wrote it.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

At least you admit you smeared Malkin.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:14 PM

I

like Palin, but I laughed when I read that part of your sentence.

catmman on September 13, 2011 at 4:09 PM

laugh all you want but the evidence is t here for all to see. Twice Palin has been offered the faustian bargain to retain her position and power. The first on the oil and gas commission and the second as Gov of AK. Both times she choose to keep her soul and sacrifice power and return to her private life. both times she was rewarded for her choice on anticorruption with more power and influence then what she woould have had had she accepted the faustian bargain

unseen on September 13, 2011 at 4:15 PM

At least you admit you smeared Malkin.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:14 PM

I didn’t smear her at all. The piece she wrote was dripping with contempt and she should be ashamed she wrote it.

And you should reconsider why you’re defending the kind of language she used.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM

no merck did not benefit equally in both cases. In TX it was mandated which means Merck had the entire population as customers. in AK it was a offered if the people wanted it which means only a part of the population would take advantage of it. The AK case means less customers for Merck hence the drive by the company to get it mandated in states esp large population states like CA and TX. It is not a cooincidence that the largest amount of lobbying was done in the largest population states. Merck was trying to get the most bang for their buck and in TX they found someone that would play ball with them.

unseen on September 13, 2011 at 4:10 PM

I understand and agree. My point to fossten was let’s say for arguments sake Merck did benefit equally in both states. Unless it can be shown that Palin received the same type of quid-pro-quo that Perry did, the point is moot and it becomes an apples and oranges comparison as many others have pointed out. Unless Palin can be shown to have personally benefitted, it wouldn’t matter if Merck had made a trillion dollars in AK, there still wouldn’t be evidence of crony capitalism.

Kataklysmic on September 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM

whatcat on September 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

That was over 10 years, wasn’t it? He raised $30 million just in his last election. Even if it was during this last cycle (which it wasn’t) 30K out of 30M is hardly substantial, is it? To the point of ‘cronyism’?

catmman on September 13, 2011 at 4:18 PM

because her r ecord shows she is not for sale.

Except to Rupert Murdoch. And Harper Books. And TLC. And pretty much anyone who can afford a $100k speaking fee.

She would rather leave power then be bought off and cash in!

Fixed that for you.

She would rather return to her private life they feed at the teat of corruption.

So, when’s she going to start in on that, then.

Cause I don’t see where she’s returned to private life….

Palin’s record is one of working on behave of the people over the special interests. From her defying the mayore in Washilla when he wanted to use the power of the local government to reward his friend in the garbage collection business to her ACES law which took away the special cosy relationship between big oil and state government. Palin’s record is one of defeating corrution and returning government to the work of securing the greatest benefit to We the people.

unseen on September 13, 2011 at 4:04 PM

Palin’s record is one of promoting Sarah Palin.

This is why you’re such a joke to me, unseen (well, one of many reasons). You actually drink the koolaid. If you actually think that she’d make a great president, I’d laugh at you but fair enough, that’s your opinion, and you know what Larry Flynt says about those. But you actually can’t even comprehend the idea that maybe Palin is as vain and egotistical as any other politician that has EVER existed in the history of mankind, that maybe she’s not just doing this for purely altruistic reasons, but because maybe she just gets off on being powerful and influential.

And that’s a laugh.

Vyce on September 13, 2011 at 4:18 PM

I can respect Perry walking this back. His supporters seem to have forgotten he has walked this back.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:12 PM

Perry had his “I’m not a witch” moment at the debate, so in order to prop him up, his supporters are making false equivalencies between his EO and Palin accepting federal funding for voluntary vaccinations. This only makes Perry look even weaker and his supporters less credible.

RedRedRice on September 13, 2011 at 4:18 PM

I didn’t smear her at all. The piece she wrote was dripping with contempt and she should be ashamed she wrote it.

And you should reconsider why you’re defending the kind of language she used.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM

Malkin never said Hatch should go off and die somewhere. You did. Unless that’s what you think and not what you claim what Malkin thinks, you are engaging in a smear campaign against Malkin.

FURTHER, I think the thing that upsets you the most is you are getting called out for doing exactly what you claim Palin, Malkin, and Levin do.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Perry had his “I’m not a witch” moment at the debate, so in order to prop him up, his supporters are making false equivalencies between his EO and Palin accepting federal funding for voluntary vaccinations. This only makes Perry look even weaker and his supporters less credible.

RedRedRice on September 13, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Ed jumped on this boat and I thought he was a TPaw guy… hmmmm

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:20 PM

Gardasil is very expensive and some families want their daughters protected so I think Palin did the right thing.(priced at about 350.00 in Ga)

tim c on September 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

So if we’re going to have turnabout and all that, wouldn’t this be the same as asking the taxpayers of America to foot the bill for Alaska’s children? Don’t they have enough money with all of their evil oil? At least Texas went in state. They didn’t ask me to pay for Alaska’s health care.

*ducks*

catmman on September 13, 2011 at 4:20 PM

Yes, but the perrykrishnas try to obfuscate the fact that Perry both got cash and had other connections to Merck.

the_nile on September 13, 2011 at 4:14 PM

His son got a job with a firm doing business with the state as well. He either isn’t very bright or he’s crooked.

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Gov-Rick-Perry-draws-fire-over-son-s-job-1825953.php

The governor’s office confirmed that Perry’s son, Griffin Perry, 23, had secured a job at UBS, the investment banking firm that the governor has consulted on the lottery proposal.

Still, the firm, one of two the governor’s office has consulted, would stand to make millions of dollars in fees if it eventually brokered a deal to sell the state lottery to a private company, which the governor estimated would bring in between $14 billion and $20 billion.

Robert Rodriguez, president of Southwestern Capital Markets, an investment firm in San Antonio, estimated that a company could easily earn $100 million for brokering the sale of the country’s third largest lottery.

sharrukin on September 13, 2011 at 4:21 PM

I really don’t understand why this issue is bigger than having kids get other vaccinations before attending school.

In the end, the EO was overturned or whatever.

lorien1973 on September 13, 2011 at 4:09 PM

because with mumps or polio your actions do not determine if you catch them. with HPV you have to engage in sex to catch the virus. no sex no virus. Then with the vaccinations of thinks ike polio and mumps they work for 99% fo cases maybe more. With the HPV vaccine it works only on 4 strains fot he virus and there is still a great risk of contacting the virus even after being vaccinated.

unseen on September 13, 2011 at 4:21 PM

unseen on September 13, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Apparently you still don’t see the humor in you stating Palin “returned to private life.”

I see someone who returns to “private life” as doing just that – going back home and being, well, private.

Palin has hardly done that, though i do get your point. Still made me laugh.

catmman on September 13, 2011 at 4:23 PM

More info on the Alaska funds for vaccines:

http://www.hss.state.ak.us/press/2007/pdf/pr040907hpv-vax-facts.pdf

So, Bachmann brings up Perry’s mandate to give vaccinations to schoolchildren, and raises the possibility he could have been influenced by campaign $ from the manufacturer to his campaign. Palin chimes in with a charge that this could be “crony capitalism.”

Suddenly, someone discovers that Alaska’s Health Dept. received federal funding for poor kids to have the option of receiving free vaccination while Palin is gov.

I’m sorry, but unless somebody comes up with a Merck donation to Palin in the general timeframe, I think the Palin critics are making quite a leap of logic.

cs89 on September 13, 2011 at 4:23 PM

I understand and agree. My point to fossten was let’s say for arguments sake Merck did benefit equally in both states. Unless it can be shown that Palin received the same type of quid-pro-quo that Perry did, the point is moot and it becomes an apples and oranges comparison as many others have pointed out. Unless Palin can be shown to have personally benefitted, it wouldn’t matter if Merck had made a trillion dollars in AK, there still wouldn’t be evidence of crony capitalism.

Kataklysmic on September 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM

Yes , it’s the quid-pro-quo that makes it crony capitalism.

Perry supporters and pundits try hard to misunderstand this.

the_nile on September 13, 2011 at 4:23 PM

AFAIK, Palin did not mandate Gardasil — she helped make it available, using Federal $$…

Huge difference — unless less someone wants to attack her via the “causes cancer” angle. Which, is problemmatic all on its own…

OnlyOrange on September 13, 2011 at 4:24 PM

Update: Worth noting — Perry actually has received nearly $30,000 from Merck over the past decade. Also worth noting — that doesn’t put Merck in the top 200 of Perry’s donors during that period. Seriously.

I’m leaning more toward Romney than Perry now. Unless Palin runs of course. Too many red flags for my taste, and I can’t stand some of his supporters.

mike_NC9 on September 13, 2011 at 4:24 PM

cs89 on September 13, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Palin didn’t even ask for this, right?

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:24 PM

I’m sensing Ed’s piece is more about Michelle Malkin than anything.

DaydreamBeliever on September 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

I caught that too
MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

You gotta feel for Ed – he hitched his wagon to the Pawlenty star, visions of WH press sec gig dancing in his head. When the inevitable occurred on the rebound Ed threw himself at the totally unvetted new kid on the block, Perry. This is a Hillaryesque “stand by your man” moment for Ed. MM pointing out the fact that “It’s a freakingly obvious night and day difference” must be incredibly heartbreaking to him.

whatcat on September 13, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Eh. Perry got outted on national TV with his hand in the Merck cookie jar. When you’re handed at least $30 grand, it’s a little more than just “association” – you are a direct, benefiting party.

whatcat on September 13, 2011 at 4:11 PM

Since a $30 grand donation from Merck to Perry makes you squirm, let’s see how you handle this:

Mitt Romney Raised More Campaign Cash From Lobbyists Than All Other 2012 GOP Candidates Combined

While other GOP presidential candidates race to win Saturday’s Ames Straw Poll, Mitt Romney is quietly racking up support among Washington power brokers and heavyweights in the Republican party. His early lead in fundraising with lobbyists, Wall Street donors, and bundlers who raised money for George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is testament to this strategy.

According to disclosure reports filed at the end of July, 61 registered lobbyists and five lobbyist-linked political action committees contributed $137,650 to Romney’s campaign between Jan. 1 and June 30, 2011. The former Massachusetts governor raised more money from lobbyists during this period than all of his competitors combined.

I guess the lobbyists are donating to Romney because they are in a “Father Christmas” mood and expect nothing in return.

You guys are so pathetic… I am on the warpath now and since the other candidates want to play dirty, we will all do it!

If Obama gets re-elected then so be it! I am prepared, how about you?

TheRightMan on September 13, 2011 at 4:25 PM

I’m leaning more toward Romney than Perry now. Unless Palin runs of course. Too many red flags for my taste, and I can’t stand some of his supporters.

mike_NC9 on September 13, 2011 at 4:24 PM

Romney’s one big red flag.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:25 PM

With the exception of “just go die already,” which was a hyperbolic extrapolation of the tone of Michelle’s piece and somewhat unfair, I accurately reflected Malkin’s characterization of Hatch.

I won’t apologize for stating her position as she wrote it.

KingGold on September 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM

I hate to further encourage you on this side point, but how does MM strongly criticising Palin for supporting Hatch’s position on the BBA make MM a Palin partisan?

DrAllecon on September 13, 2011 at 4:26 PM

You gotta feel for Ed – he hitched his wagon to the Pawlenty star, visions of WH press sec gig dancing in his head. When the inevitable occurred on the rebound Ed threw himself at the totally unvetted new kid on the block, Perry. This is a Hillaryesque “stand by your man” moment for Ed. MM pointing out the fact that “It’s a freakingly obvious night and day difference” must be incredibly heartbreaking to him.

whatcat on September 13, 2011 at 4:25 PM

See, I thought he was more sore that TPaw got behind Romneycare.

All I do know is that other Minnesotan Bachmann must pay for stealing the thunder from TPaw.

MeatHeadinCA on September 13, 2011 at 4:27 PM

Too many red flags for my taste, and I can’t stand some of his supporters.

mike_NC9 on September 13, 2011 at 4:24 PM

Yeah, despite a pretty respectable record for the most part with Perry, his unhinged delusional cult worshiping fans are really turning me away from someone I otherwise would like!

lol

Brian1972 on September 13, 2011 at 4:27 PM

Vyce on September 13, 2011 at 4:18 PM

And the reason you are such an idiot is because you think Larry Flynt is a respected person to quote in your posts. Next time I want to digest the ramblings of a porn producer I’ll be sure to ask you what he would have said.

The kool-aid drinking is coming from you. Palin’s politcal record is there for all to see. If you would rather agree with the take of a porn producer on that politcal life so be it. Ace of Clowns would be so proud of you today. Is Larry Flynt one of Ace’s goto guys also? When he is searching for a memorable quote?

unseen on September 13, 2011 at 4:28 PM

I’m leaning more toward Romney than Perry now. Unless Palin runs of course. Too many red flags for my taste, and I can’t stand some of his supporters.

mike_NC9 on September 13, 2011 at 4:24 PM

I believe that as much as I believed Boehner’s promise to cut $100 billion from the 2011 budget if he became Speaker… /sarc.

A Palin supporter that prefers Perry to Romney because of Gardasil.

TheRightMan on September 13, 2011 at 4:29 PM

I’m leaning more toward Romney than Perry now. Unless Palin runs of course. Too many red flags for my taste, and I can’t stand some of his supporters.

mike_NC9 on September 13, 2011 at 4:24 PM

The biggest red flag of them all:

Romneycare.

catmman on September 13, 2011 at 4:29 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 6