Perry's 10th Amendment Stance is Looking Shifty

The national spotlight can be unforgiving, and Gov. Rick Perry appears to be feeling the heat. This last week saw him executing some fancy footwork after his stance on one of the Republican party's touchstone issues earned him attacks from prominent figures on the right, including 2012 presidential candidate Rick Santorum.  

The dustup occurred when Perry commented on the New York vote to recognize gay marriage. Alluding to the 10th Amendment--that's the one that grants to the states all rights not explicitly delegated to the federal government--Perry said he was "fine" with the result and that the state was within its rights to make such a decision. Of course, the governor has long been a staunch defender of the 10th Amendment:  a Washington Post article notes that in 2009, he even endorsed a resolution in the Texas Legislature claiming "sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.” 

The Texas Tribune noted that in his 2009 book, Fed Up! Our Fight to Save America from Washington, Perry illustrated this point bluntly:

“If you don’t support the death penalty and citizens packing a pistol, don’t come to Texas,” he wrote. “If you don’t like medicinal marijuana and gay marriage, don’t move to California.”

Unfortunately, last week’s comments about New York sent many social conservatives into orbit, including Santorum. He attacked Perry at an event for Republican governors, though he omitted using the governor's name, saying that issues like marriage and abortion had "universal implications in this country."

Perry spokesperson Mark Miner declined to comment on Santorum's attacks directly, but he said that those who know Perry best know of his commitment to states' rights and the institution of marriage. As though that cleared anything up.

Perry later attempted to cover his tracks by stating that though he remained firm on his beliefs about states' rights, “[o]bviously, gay marriage is not fine with me.”

He went on to say that New York's decision was a threat to other states, one that should be addressed by amending the Constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman.

But how can Perry, who called for believers in the 10th amendment to "stay out of [New York's] business," then go back and say he supports a federal statute to nullify that decision? 

“You either have to believe in the 10th amendment or you don’t," Perry said last week in Houston. "You can’t believe in the 10th Amendment for a few issues and then something that doesn’t suit you, you say, 'Well we'd really rather not have that state decide that.'"

So which does he believe?

Perry spoke to Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council the day after the controversial New York remarks. He blamed "activist judges" and "liberal special interest groups" for the rulings to allow gay marriage in other states.

"[T]o not pass the federal marriage amendment would impinge on Texas and other states," Perry said.

Oh, of course. NOT to pass a federal statute that would override decisions in six states and the nation's capital would be an infringement on states' rights.

We are amused, but confused. Throughout his career, Perry's beliefs, though unmistakably conservative, have often clashed with the established Republican stance. His supporters say that's always been one of his biggest selling points, but it seems as though Presidential Candidate Perry might look a little bit different than Gov. Perry. This leaves us wondering what in the world a President Perry would ever look like.