September 23, 2011
— Ace Of all the things he could have said, this was pretty much the worst.
Drew covered this, but it's worth noting this really hurt Perry with Frank Luntz's focus group.
According to LuntzÂ’s focus group, this line by Perry was not only his worst moment in the debate, but perhaps the worst moment any Republican has had in any debate since he started doing these debate-watching focus groups.
A few points:
1. Although Romney is never convincing as to why RomneyCare is right for Massachusetts but wrong for America, he does at least stress, again and again, that it's only right for Massachusetts. Gibberish though it is, he is insistent that Massachusetts is a special, magical place where RomneyCare is good policy... and nowhere else.
At the end of the day, the most important thing is that "and nowhere else" part. Romney makes no sense on this point, but he does try to convince people that RomneyCare is a unique thing which should not be duplicated elsewhere.
Perry obviously has some problems on immigration. The way I envisioned him dealing with this would be to stress that Texas has a different experience with the border than non-border states, and that anything he'd done in Texas on immigration would be, like RomneyCare in Massachusetts, explicitly limited as a policy response to the special conditions of Texas.
This "You don't have a heart line" completely undercuts that. If Mitt Romney proclaimed, "If you're not in favor of some kind of government-guaranteed health care, you don't have a heart," that would be evidence that his own heart urged him towards a national health care system, RomneyCare for EveryWhere.
Similarly, Rick Perry's claim that this issue is a matter of heart -- not particular circumstances in Texas, not a policy forced upon him by a federal government which refuses to patrol the border (and thus creates the problem in the first place) -- seems to suggest he thinks this is good policy as a national matter.
I'm not sure how he walks that back. And that's a problem, because while the purpose of the debates is to answer nagging questions about you (and not, as Drew notes, to rack up debating points against opponents), Perry is creating more of them.
2. Once again Perry seemed to grow mentally tired in the second half of the debate. All of his worst moments seem to come in that second half.
Why is that? Some have suggested he's still fatigued from his back surgery. I don't know.
3. Although there's joy in RomneyTown today, it should be noted that Romney always seems to be granted "you lose in the primaries, but you win in the general, so you really win in the primaries" sort of special rule.
On many issues, taking the "moderate" position is thought to be a political help with moderates. (I'm not sure that math applies in this election, at least not to the extent it has in the past, but ignore that for now.)
Romney is thought to be a strong general election candidate, because he has taken liberal positions on, say, abortion in the past. And by "playing in the field of health care," as ParisParamus says, that indicates to moderates, who just want to know a candidate is willing to consider a range of policy responses to a problem, Romney is also stronger in the general.
To some extent, on some issues, "losing" an issue in the primary is actually "winning" it in the general election campaign. Being perceived as the most doctrinaire, full-throated conservative is considered a plus in the primary; but being considered a more nuanced, heterodox thinker is a plus in the general.
Romney's backers rely on this logic all the time. But does this not apply to Perry as well? Who came across as the "extremist," and who the "moderate," in the in-state-tuition-for-the-children-of-illegals argument?
Not to say I liked Perry's answer. At all. But Romney's folks have a way of spinning primary sow's arses into general election silk purses. They should confess that this special rule applies to other candidates too.
But what a strange inversion this is when the putative "conservative" candidate is offering up emotion-tugging soft-headed moderate pablum, and the "moderate" one talks up vetoing a similar bill.
4. In the case of Mike Castle, I had a good reason for not caring very much about his liberal position on Cap and Trade: Cap and Trade was dead. (Seen it proposed lately?)
Sure, it offered a glimpse into his thinking, and that glimpse was not appealing, but the issue itself? Harmless. No one's passing Cap and Trade, not in current climate (nor the foreseeable climate for the next six years).
The actual issue of in-state tuition, though, is somewhat more live on a national level, as the Democrats attempt to get various amnesty-leaning bills through Congress. They go nowhere, but they do actually bother to introduce them into the Senate.
Given a right-leaning House of Representatives, and also given a Senate which will almost certainly have 40 strong conservative filibuster votes (for anything) in 2012, there is less danger in a candidate who frankly is simply soft on immigration.
But there is some.
Whether this is disqualifying, I don't know.
I know it's not a good thing for Perry that the best argument for him here is "Congress will restrain him.... hopefully."
5. But on that point, I do consider one's political sense and savvy to be important attributes. Perry's failure to have a smooth prepared response here seems to indicate he scarcely saw this one coming.
I don't know what kind of malfunctioning political compass he has to not have anticipated his weakest issue was immigration.
I anticipated that. All of my questions for him (I sent some to people who know him, or know people who know him) were on immigration.
Why didn't he?
On the 3am Question: Perry's answer wasn't good, but there are no good answers. Drew's proposed answer -- which he considers a "good" one -- is an evasive punt, essentially saying "I'll have a plan."
Here's the problem: First of all, this question should have been about a hypothetical country, not Pakistan. When you name the country as "Pakistan," you are... inviting a presidential candidate to announce to an Al Qaeda friendly, on-the-edge-of-becoming-a-full-fledged-terrorist-nuclear-state, that you intend to invade them.
What's a candidate supposed to say? "Yes, I will invade this country, which is formally an ally (even though it's an enemy), so let me right now push this nuclear armed terrorist-loving state further to the edge by playing into jihadist victimization mythology by announcing the Great Satan will take their nukes."
Further, look, here's what I really think about Pakistan: I think this ends in a nuclear exchange.
I don't think the public really wants to contemplate that. I'm contemplating that myself, and I don't like contemplating that.
But Pakistan is, in fact, pretty much Al Qaeda with nukes.
It won't end pretty.
I would not advise anyone in power, or seeking power, to be perfectly forthright on this point.
Posted by: Ace at
07:55 AM
| Comments (329)
Post contains 1191 words, total size 7 kb.
He either cannot articulate a jobs plan for the country or doesn't have one.
That's pretty pretty pretty pretty bad.
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 23, 2011 07:58 AM (sqkOB)
Posted by: SFGoth at September 23, 2011 07:58 AM (dZ756)
His low energy and stuttering speaking ability is a worrisome issue though.
Posted by: proudonkey at September 23, 2011 07:59 AM (NadeK)
385 OT: Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas formally submits application for full membership at the United Nations.
Thanks for the heads-up, Tami.
Here's the linky for all those interested -
Palestinians prepare to submit UN statehood bid
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at September 23, 2011 07:59 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: Scott J at September 23, 2011 08:00 AM (/bVuS)
I'm not sure how he walks that back. And that's a problem, because while the purpose of the debates is to answer nagging questions about you (and not, as Drew notes, to rack up debating points against opponents), Perry is creating more of them.
I don't think he can walk it back either. It's an acceptance that opposition is based on racism and bigotry rather than legitimate differences in public policy positions. Fuck that, I get that enough from the Left, I don't need it from the Right.
Posted by: alexthechick at September 23, 2011 08:00 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Rick Perry at September 23, 2011 08:00 AM (usXZy)
Posted by: uncivil & right at September 23, 2011 08:00 AM (RVwRR)
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 08:01 AM (Hx5uv)
I thought the only two that came out looking good were Cain and of course Newt. And of course it doesn't matter on either of them.
As for the 'heartless' line I have no clue. The only thing I could come up with is that (a) he believes it and/or (b) he thinks it will help him in the general.
Apparently he's told himself that jobs matter most. Of course that's true but I think he's underestimating how seriously people take the immigration issue.
Posted by: lu at September 23, 2011 08:01 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: HeartlessBlackOrchid at September 23, 2011 08:01 AM (SB0V2)
You mean, in order to complain about Obama's 0 jobs my first answer of the debate shouldn't have been "Yeah, I'll have a jobs plan some day, but not today." ?
Posted by: Rick Perry at September 23, 2011 08:01 AM (usXZy)
Posted by: cherry pi, terrorist hostage taking SOB at September 23, 2011 08:02 AM (OhYCU)
385 OT: Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas formally submits application for full membership at the United Nations.
Thanks for the heads-up, Tami.
-
Hahahahahahahahaha!
This is, what, Obama's sixth Chicago Olympics moment? President Out? Out? Out?
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 23, 2011 08:02 AM (sqkOB)
We know he hates Obama (politically hates him, who knows or cares if he personally hates him). I don't know that about Romney.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 08:03 AM (5H6zj)
Everything I read about him is being confirmed. Weak on immigration, Gardasil, highway through Texas, etc. We need a Conservative, this is our best and probably only chance to get someone in there who is really going to begin the dismantling of this fucking Leviathon!
I have kids and grandkids, and I'm scared shitless about where we're taking this God given country.
Last Chance Saloon.
Saddle up, game's on.
Posted by: BIG ROB at September 23, 2011 08:04 AM (hr33h)
<i> Dear lord, this is a HUGE issue for the US! I'm actually worried about how is pro-cheapass-businessman TX leanings are going to hurt the USA. Because just so his pals can get their slave-wage labor, TX could very well go Dem permanently - taking a lot of EVs with them. </i>
Don't worry, because the Mexicans are just soooo socially conservative. Why their illegitmate birth rate is---uh---well, we are a nation of immigrants and you are a bigot for suggesting limits. Oh and Consuela, you missed a spot on the tile floor over there....
Posted by: Wall Street Journal greedheads at September 23, 2011 08:04 AM (w7K7d)
Here's the linky for all those interested whose blood pressure has not yet hit 1,200/800 yet today.
FIFY.
Has SCOAMF given a speech yet today? It's been like minutes since his last one.
Posted by: alexthechick at September 23, 2011 08:04 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 08:04 AM (136wp)
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at September 23, 2011 08:04 AM (UQXED)
Posted by: Dan Rather at September 23, 2011 08:04 AM (8/DeP)
Posted by: lu at September 23, 2011 12:01 PM (pLTLS)
Not only that, but jobs and immigration are closely intertwined. See the whole 81% of new jobs in TX went to immigrants thing.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 08:04 AM (LD21B)
Posted by: HeartlessBlackOrchid at September 23, 2011 08:05 AM (SB0V2)
Posted by: ryukyu at September 23, 2011 08:06 AM (MOHSR)
Posted by: Patton's Ghost at September 23, 2011 08:06 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Dave at September 23, 2011 08:07 AM (Xm1aB)
I've wondered this too. What on earth would Barky say?
Posted by: Waterhouse at September 23, 2011 08:07 AM (u83UF)
I skip-read that article (Drudge link), but didn't have time to examine it.
Were the terms "illegal" or "undocumented" applied?
If not, I've got no problem with it (if the immigrants were legal)
Posted by: jwb7605 at September 23, 2011 08:07 AM (Qxe/p)
Posted by: HeartlessBlackOrchid at September 23, 2011 08:07 AM (SB0V2)
Posted by: HeartlessBlackOrchid at September 23, 2011 08:08 AM (SB0V2)
Does anyone think the Dems will attack Perry on immigration if he wins the primary?
Hard to know what goes through demented Commiecrat brains, but probably not.
Like it or not, Perry is probably still the best choice. Perhaps like Mitt and Obamunistcare, if we have a solid enough Congress, we can keep Perry's potential Hispandering in check.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 23, 2011 08:08 AM (w7K7d)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at September 23, 2011 08:08 AM (z/Mo8)
If Romney is smart, he'll get real close to Marco Rubio and make sure everyone sees it. He should court Sen Rubio as if he wanted to propose.
Perry should do the same. The man who gets Rubio first will not only win the nomination, he'll win the White House.
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 23, 2011 08:08 AM (sqkOB)
Posted by: SurferDoc at September 23, 2011 08:09 AM (STdkO)
Posted by: Patton's Ghost at September 23, 2011 08:09 AM (rJVPU)
Add to the list of things I hate besides midgets, mimes, clowns and monkeysÂ….
Guest hosts on Rush.
Posted by: jwest at September 23, 2011 08:09 AM (qeYI9)
Posted by: Mr Pink at September 23, 2011 08:09 AM (ZYek6)
I just unsubscribed to his bullshit e-mail newsletter. I am sick of his teasers for home remedies and rectal probes and his stupid books.
And his stupid political pontifications.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 08:10 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: Bob Saget at September 23, 2011 08:10 AM (F/4zf)
Regardless, he's gotta work harder, and find a solution to his lack of mental stamina.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 08:10 AM (LD21B)
Come for the rectal probes; stay for toe sucking.
Posted by: Dick Morris at September 23, 2011 08:10 AM (usXZy)
Posted by: Patton's Ghost at September 23, 2011 08:11 AM (rJVPU)
And injected directly into his brain.
I want the old Perry back. The one who shoots coyotes and tells Bernanke to fuck off.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 08:11 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: Dave at September 23, 2011 08:12 AM (Xm1aB)
Something clearly physiologically is happening to Perry in the second half of these debates - he is losing mental clarity and concentration. A number of things can cause this:
1) Back pain.
2) Depression
3) Sleep Apnea
4) ADD
No matter what it is, Team Perry needs to address and fix it. May already be too late. As Obama is seeing now, Messiahs aren't cut much slack.
Posted by: Bill Mitchell at September 23, 2011 08:12 AM (uVlA4)
‘Just a moment. Three measures of Tardasil s, one of vodka, half a measure of Kina Lillet. Shake it very well until it’s ice-cold, then add a large slice of lemon-peel. Got it?’
Posted by: Rick "James Bond" Perry at September 23, 2011 08:12 AM (136wp)
Easy solution: Vote for your candidate in the GOP Primary in your state. In the General, vote Republican
Perry fucked up last night but I am still voting for him. If Romney gets the nomination, I'll vote for his Obama lite socialism, individual mandate supporting, TARP loving self, As long as Barry gets unemployed in the process.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 08:12 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: Mr Pink at September 23, 2011 08:13 AM (ZYek6)
Posted by: Bill Mitchell at September 23, 2011 12:12 PM (uVlA4)
FIFY
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at September 23, 2011 08:13 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: Jypsea Rose at September 23, 2011 08:14 AM (A4C5M)
I guess it is a bit much to expect that we actually like the candidate we are going to vote for.
Posted by: Republican Voters at September 23, 2011 08:14 AM (usXZy)
Keep telling myself America is still the greatest country on earth even though we can't seem to produce a decent presidential candidate anymore.
:sad: :sad:
Posted by: uncivil & right at September 23, 2011 08:14 AM (RVwRR)
This eating our own shit is getting old.
Yeah but there's no DOOOOOOM thread today to get us all to want to slit our wrists so we'll take the fun we can.
Perry fucked up last night but I am still voting for him. If Romney gets the nomination, I'll vote for his Obama lite socialism, individual mandate supporting, TARP loving self, As long as Barry gets unemployed in the process.
This.
Here, let's argue this - what Cabinet position should Newt have?
Posted by: alexthechick at September 23, 2011 08:14 AM (VtjlW)
I've wondered this too. What on earth would Barky say?
The world is your oyster when your comments need not be restrained by truth or logic.
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 08:14 AM (Hx5uv)
So how does that work? A company/business in Texas hires 10 people and reports to the government (who is I assume the one compiling these statistics) that "We hired ten folks and five were illegals!" Or is it that the people hired provide the necessary paperwork (even if it's forged) and the employer has to accept that paperwork (because as we learned in Meg Whitman's situation the employer is not allowed to probe about their veracity or they can get sued)... but the determination that half were illegals is based on some other sort of analysis.
Also, after leaving California, let me tell you that not having a job does not stop them from living here. There may be a slow down in illegals because of our job market, but there are plenty of illegals who just stay and commit crimes etc. So in that narrow sense, I'd rather they were employed.
But I'd really rather they weren't here at all and that's the Feds' job.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 08:15 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: cherry pi, terrorist hostage taking SOB at September 23, 2011 08:15 AM (OhYCU)
Maybe Ron Reagan, Jr. will have children?
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 08:15 AM (136wp)
Posted by: The Tin Man at September 23, 2011 08:15 AM (5xF4I)
Posted by: Republican Voters at September 23, 2011 12:14 PM (usXZy)
Scheeyeah, right....that hasn't happened in almost 25 years.
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 08:15 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at September 23, 2011 08:15 AM (UlUS4)
Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at September 23, 2011 08:16 AM (21lBC)
Rubio can't even win—let alone deliver—the Hispanic/Latino vote in Florida.
But he'll make up for that with retired Jews.
And single white women in Colorado and Wisconsin who wanna bone him.
Yeah.
Posted by: oblig. at September 23, 2011 08:16 AM (xvZW9)
Republican Voters at September 23, 2011 12:14 PM
Then get out and bust your ass in your state for your candidate. Send them money, a book on debating skills, the US Constitution in pdf format.
In the general, any third party vote helps Obama period. Hate to break it to you, but, I want that fucker unemployed starting in January 2013.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 08:16 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: Dave at September 23, 2011 08:16 AM (Xm1aB)
If that is something you can't stomach, well I can understand your feelings, I felt the same way with McCain. But the writing is on the wall, Perry is this cycle's Guilinani. Seemed like a great idea on paper, but the candidate doesn't measure up.
And then there was one.
Posted by: Dave in Fla at September 23, 2011 08:16 AM (Why44)
Perry should announce that he supports the Fair Tax Plan. It solves the immigration problem.
Posted by: jwest at September 23, 2011 08:16 AM (qeYI9)
I guess it is a bit much to expect that we actually like the candidate we are going to vote for.
You still have your Housecritter and Senatecritter. A good enough Congress, and Romney's waffling on Obamunistcare and Perry's waffling on the borders won't matter so much.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 23, 2011 08:16 AM (w7K7d)
Because it needed to be repeated.
Posted by: lu at September 23, 2011 08:16 AM (pLTLS)
No, make that the Czar of Really Big Ideas.
I see that a few days ago the White House said that Obama would win because of better ideas. I think that that is an even longer shot than winning by running on unicorns and rainbows.
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 08:17 AM (Hx5uv)
Someone on the other thread said that Perry is uncomfortable being attacked from the Right. He can't wrap his mind around it. I think that makes sense and means, should he be the nominee, he'd make a stronger showing in debates against Obama.
We know he hates Obama (politically hates him, who knows or cares if he personally hates him). I don't know that about Romney.
~ by Y-not
It's normal behavior for guys like Perry to give guys who are 'on his side' a lot of slack. ...Call it the 'cowboy way' or the 'brothers in arms' mentality....but that's basically what it is that keeps Perry from tearing into his fellow candidates.
I know this because I'm married to a guy like Perry, and I have grown up around guys like this. To me it is an endearing quality and not a weakness.
Also, I don't think that Perry will ever attack Bachmann or Palin back......no matter what they do to him. ....Did you see what Perry was doing when Chris Wallace let Bachmann spew her bullshit about the "little 12 yr old girls"? ....Perry had his hands clasped and it looked to me like he was praying for strength.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 08:17 AM (gZO5m)
All of my questions for him (I sent some to people who know him, or know people who know him) were on immigration.
Did you get a response?
Posted by: HH at September 23, 2011 08:18 AM (HFnqj)
Slave labor chocolate.
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 12:07 PM
Damn, those union slugs look like they were eating more chocolate than they were producing for shipment
Posted by: kbdabear at September 23, 2011 08:18 AM (Y+DPZ)
Perry should announce that he supports the Fair Tax Plan. It solves the immigration problem.
Overcrowded schools and jails? Disproportionate takers of social services? As much as I like the consumption tax, no, it won't solve those immigration problems.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 23, 2011 08:18 AM (w7K7d)
"what Cabinet position should Newt have?"
I'd put him in as Chief of Staff . Or Press Secretary, that would liven the press briefings up.
Secretary of Defense, maybe.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 08:18 AM (kaOJx)
One thing Perry's 'Have a heart' comment could do is have an unseen connotation and soften his appearance on social securety cuts for seniors.
Posted by: sonnyspats at September 23, 2011 08:18 AM (I/MzF)
Posted by: brak at September 23, 2011 08:18 AM (Lxr/i)
I didn't think anything could be more offensive that the Last-name crack from the previous debate.
I was wrong.
I can still intellectualize where Perry is coming from, but it sticks in my craw.
Posted by: toby928™: Still a Perry Krishna, for now at September 23, 2011 08:19 AM (GTbGH)
I blame Jimmy Carter. If he'd have keep Bush, Sr as head of the CIA, he never would have been Reagan's VP. The RINO virus started with that move...
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 08:19 AM (136wp)
That's a gem from the current POS occupying the West Wing.
Posted by: lu at September 23, 2011 08:19 AM (pLTLS)
Posted by: Patton's Ghost at September 23, 2011 08:20 AM (rJVPU)
Rubio can't even win—let alone deliver—the Hispanic/Latino vote in Florida.
They aren't as Cuban as you think. Note how the Hispandering fools keep on referring to "the latino vote", forgetting that *Cuban Americans aren't Mexican Americans*.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 23, 2011 08:20 AM (w7K7d)
Gov. Christie, your country is paging you.
------
Christie's answers on illegal immigration are even better than Perry's. Hell, not only don't you have a heart, but it isn't actually illegal to cross the border illegally. Yea, he said that.
Posted by: Rich at September 23, 2011 08:20 AM (ldOlo)
But I'd really rather they weren't here at all and that's the Feds' job.
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 12:15 PM (5H6zj)
Especially when they can get welfare easy.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 08:20 AM (LD21B)
That's a gem from the current POS occupying the West Wing.
We've got to get the illegals up here faster.
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 08:21 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: Dave at September 23, 2011 08:21 AM (Xm1aB)
>>>Rubio can't even win—let alone deliver—the Hispanic/Latino vote in Florida.
Okay but can Rubio chip away a good chunk of latino support from Obama? Not just in FL but in all states?
Rubio is also a beloved conservative and an articulate speaker. The fact he's cuban/latino is a bonus.
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 23, 2011 08:21 AM (sqkOB)
Yeah, you are.
Posted by: Dave in Fla at September 23, 2011 08:21 AM (Why44)
I guess a question I have now is whether the drop-off in "independent" votes for Perry in the general will be offset by an increase in the Republican share of Hispanic votes.
As Juan McLame proved, no. The Rule Of Anyway applies.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 23, 2011 08:21 AM (w7K7d)
They aren't as Cuban as you think. Note how the Hispandering fools
keep on referring to "the Latino vote", forgetting that *Cuban Americans
aren't Mexican Americans*.
But, but, their names all end with vowels...
Posted by: Hispandering Fool at September 23, 2011 08:21 AM (136wp)
Have ya figured it out, yet, folks?
Two Republicans lead the campaign, thus far...and neither of them is really conserative....except in comparison to one another.
Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at September 23, 2011 08:21 AM (E7Z1r)
However,
Romney also flagrantly lied about changes to his book.
And given the topics that were changed, I can't trust him.
Given that MB is gone,
Paul is crazy,
Huntsman is Crist
What now? Hmm?
Herman Cain is looking better all the time.
And I'm even starting to like Newt.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at September 23, 2011 08:21 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at September 23, 2011 08:21 AM (cbyrC)
Posted by: toby928™: Still a Perry Krishna, for now at September 23, 2011 08:21 AM (GTbGH)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at September 23, 2011 08:22 AM (z/Mo8)
But Pakistan is, in fact, pretty much Al Qaeda with nukes.
It won't end pretty.
Annnnd there's the doom. brb stropping razor
I agree actually. Hell, I'm to the point that I'm hoping that India finally says oh fuck it and launches. Gah. Must meet the 'rents after work to get them yet another new printer and then set it up. Drinking time is far too far away.
Posted by: alexthechick at September 23, 2011 08:22 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: cherry pi, terrorist hostage taking SOB at September 23, 2011 08:22 AM (OhYCU)
Posted by: Inspector Asshole at September 23, 2011 08:22 AM (MeGRk)
Posted by: Patton's Ghost at September 23, 2011 08:23 AM (rJVPU)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 08:23 AM (q1Tbv)
That's a gem from the current POS occupying the West Wing.
Posted by: lu at September 23, 2011 12:19 PM
He was just tired from working so hard to save the economy from the Republicans who want to give teacher raises to Wall Street fat cats.
He knows it's the Trans Am railroad you racist wingnuts!
Posted by: MBM spin team at September 23, 2011 08:23 AM (Y+DPZ)
I think what he meant was that if you illegally cross the border from Mexico into Texas then move to New Jersey, you haven't committed a crime in New Jersey.
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 08:23 AM (Hx5uv)
Gov. Christie, your country is paging you.
Hey, I'm from NJ, and I like what he is trying to do in the state but he is not a viable national candidate.Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 08:23 AM (136wp)
Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Back To Being Neutral And Pissing Everyone Off) at September 23, 2011 08:23 AM (3XDPM)
I think that that is an even longer shot than winning by running on unicorns and rainbows.
You just don't get it, man. Obama has a vision. A vision for all of us.
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 23, 2011 08:23 AM (sqkOB)
Perry could still salvage the situation and at least arrest the downward slide in the polls he's no doubt experiencing already. He could stop taking ineffectual jabs at Romney, take a damn-the-torpedoes approach and stand by his promise to talk straight to the American people.
He could argue for sweeping entitlement reform: 'Why yes, Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme, and here's how to fix it.'
Perry could successfully defend his deviations from the usual conservative hard-line on immigration: 'Why, in Texas, a near-majority of my constituents are Hispanic. I'd be a one-term governor and a fool not to take a different approach to the issue than those advocated by my opponents, none of whom have had to deal with the day-to-day realities of the problem.'
He could go after the President: 'In answer to your question, I do believe President Obama is a socialist by any definition of the term, a Marxist socialist, that is. Tell you what: let's stop pussy-footing around, stop the commie bullshit and put this country back on track.'
Perry could mention Fast & Furious. He could talk up the Solandra scandal. He could do and say lots of things. If nothing else, a frontrunner in a presidential primary can get several issues some much-needed press coverage and national attention. I swear to God, I've got several gun-owning friends who didn't even know about Gunwalker or Fast & Furious until I told them about it.
Mitt Romney is the quintessential establishment candidate, what we call a 'Country Club Republican' in my home state. For once, I'd like to see a genuinely conservative candidate from the other side of the GOP's ideological tracks beat the daylights out of one of those buttoned-down bastards. If not Perry then Palin. If not Palin then Cain. Somebody.
Posted by: troyriser at September 23, 2011 08:23 AM (vtiE6)
How is getting the Senator from Florida/Puerto Rico going to ensure the nomination?
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 08:24 AM (eEfYn)
Posted by: Jypsea Rose at September 23, 2011 08:24 AM (A4C5M)
Posted by: Dave at September 23, 2011 08:24 AM (Xm1aB)
Dude, you've got some problems.
Posted by: cherry pi, terrorist hostage taking SOB at September 23, 2011 08:24 AM (OhYCU)
Oh crap, too late. I thought it was masturbate over "Sarah dressed in boots & miniskirt" playing a schoolteacher day.
Posted by: The Robot Devil at September 23, 2011 08:25 AM (136wp)
It's very un-cowboy.
Posted by: Jypsea Rose at September 23, 2011 12:24 PM (A4C5M)
The stool they get him could have a saddle on it.
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 08:26 AM (X6akg)
If I were Team Stuttering Clusterf'ck.......I think I would be playing up the meme that "He's toast, anyone could beat him". ....What better way to get a weak candidate in place to go up against?
The only ones who are benefitting from these dumbass early debates, are:
a) The media
b) The candidates who have no chance of winning the general
I keep asking this question about Romney: ...How can he possibly win the general against Obama after the media tears him up with crap about 'crazy Mormon underwear' and all the other stuff about 'crazy Mormonism'. ....But so far no one has an answer to this.
All of this stuff that people on the right are taking issue with Perry over.....is not stuff that the Dems can beat him up with. Quite the opposite. These are things that could very well win over a lot of crossover votes.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 08:27 AM (gZO5m)
Everyone loves Marco Rubio. Getting him would be a huge score.
He ain't no Joe Biden. And, unlike other Veeps, he has no baggage.
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 23, 2011 08:27 AM (sqkOB)
Someone has to clean up all the crap they leave behind on their way in.
How did Texans feel about it? He is the Governor of Texas.. his job is to do what the citizens want. Do they hate it?
Only the good Texans hate it.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 08:27 AM (eEfYn)
While we're on the topic of shit making no sense, can someone please explain to me the 'Intercontinental Railroad'?"
Tunnel under the Bering Strait, I think.
A Mag-Lev Atomic Powered Supertrain Tunnel under the Bering Strait! Get it right!
Posted by: Lyndon LaRouche Cultist at September 23, 2011 08:28 AM (w7K7d)
Curmudgeon,
The Fair Tax Plan draws a bright line between citizens and non-citizens. There would be, by necessity, ID cards for both. No one would need to sneak across the border if the U.S. issued a photo ID for anyone who cared to come.
Citizens receive the services meant for citizens, non-citizens receive whatever benefits the people vote to give them. However, non-citizens are paying the freight with every purchase they make and not receiving prebates, social security or unemployment benefits.
Posted by: jwest at September 23, 2011 08:28 AM (qeYI9)
Here we go again. (Perry) Let's vet him first before we crown him.
Posted by: cherry pi, terrorist hostage taking SOB at September 23, 2011 08:28 AM (OhYCU)
I wish he was more aligned with my opinion on immigration, but this is not even remotely a dealbreaker for me. We got bigger fish to fry and I don't trust Romney on these issues.
Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at September 23, 2011 08:28 AM (+lsX1)
Posted by: Dave at September 23, 2011 08:28 AM (Xm1aB)
Whether or not people want to be told it, it is not only cruel but self destructive to punish the children of illegals who have been in this country for years for something their parents did and for something the federal government was complicit in.
How is it even remotely in this country's interest, or in the interest of any state to purposely assist in creating a permanent underclass of people by denying them access to the institutions that would help them be even greater positive participants in the success of a society they have become a permanent fixture in?
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 08:29 AM (jx2j9)
I hate to be so callous, but Holder and Obama have handed us a great opportunity. Holder and Obama intended for the fast and furious guns to kill Mexicans, otherwise their scheme would not work. Two hundred plus dead in Mexico because of fast and furious. (I do realize that there is some issue regarding how innocent the dead are.) If that is not enough to bleed support away from Obama, I don't know what would be. Plus, Hispanics are in many ways conservatives; i.e., they are pro-family, religous, not afraid of work, etc. The liberals do not own them in the way that they own the blacks.
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 08:29 AM (Hx5uv)
Romney lies constantly; to hear him tell it he's Reagan and Teddy Roosevelt rolled into one irresistible package. Bush I, Dole, Bush II, McCain, Romney - just let it roll off your tongue. Which of these guys is not like the others? None of them, they're all the same fucking guy.
Bachmann irritates me so much I don't even want to have sex with her anymore. She can beg all she wants but as far as I'm concerned she can just go back to that gay dude she's married to. And please bitch, quit talking about the HPV shots, I just can't take it anymore.
Cain is fine but has zero chance of getting the nomination. Zero. Even if he will sell me a medium-sized two-topping pizza for $9.99.
Ron Paul is still crazy, and so are his supporters. I mean, really, are you people fucking serious?
Santorum, Johnson (what, we didn't have enough people that we had to add more?), Huntsman (I had to flip over to a site with a picture of the stage to see who I was leaving out) can all go away now; and to paraphrase Mickey Kaus, "faster please."
Newt is brilliant. He has no hope but he is brilliant. He is probably the only guy in either party with the brains to get us our economy back on track and the personal experience of having already done so in the past. Naturally, he is the only one we all look at and say, "well, he's just too flawed personally" and summarily reject him. Honestly, that's too bad; in fact, maybe we need to revisit that issue.
If Palin gets in I'm just going to shoot myself. Ditto a third party candidate. If Palin herself runs as a third-party candidate I may have to be institutionalized.
All that said, I would vote for my dog and cat for Pres and VP, respectively (what, you thought I was going to let the cat run anything important?) over the incompetent partisan hack and imbecilic running buddy we have now, so whoever emerges from this fiasco will get my vote no matter what.
It's going to be a long fourteen months. Even Megyn Kelly doesn't look as good to me as she once did.
Posted by: Blacksheep at September 23, 2011 08:30 AM (8/DeP)
Posted by: Dave at September 23, 2011 08:30 AM (Xm1aB)
Posted by: Inspector Asshole at September 23, 2011 08:30 AM (MeGRk)
BTW: Governor Fat-mittens is no better.
Posted by: Chairman Mow at September 23, 2011 08:31 AM (ih+cL)
If Palin gets in I'm just going to shoot myself. Ditto a third party candidate. If Palin herself runs as a third-party candidate I may have to be institutionalized.
DITTO
Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Back To Being Neutral And Pissing Everyone Off) at September 23, 2011 08:31 AM (3XDPM)
The Fair Tax Plan draws a bright line between citizens and non-citizens.
It does? How does a national consumption tax do that?
There would be, by necessity, ID cards for both.
Why is that? Do retailers care when they take illegal alien money for purchases?
(cue national ID discussion, and wondering why tamper proofing state ID's didn't help much)
Posted by: Lyndon LaRouche Cultist at September 23, 2011 08:31 AM (w7K7d)
The Texas dream act.. dont the illegals have to be on a path to citizenship?
Well, they have to sign a piece of paper saying that they like totally will be on that path at some point. That is not exactly the same thing.
Also, I think you're missing the point that the objection isn't so much to the plan itself as it is the statement that it's heartless to oppose it. That combined with the prior last name comment gives rise to a reasonable belief that Perry does not view opposition as being based on different political priorities so much as simple bigotry. Yeah. No.
Posted by: alexthechick at September 23, 2011 08:31 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: joncelli at September 23, 2011 08:31 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 12:23 PM (Hx5uv)
Hmm, that's shitty reasoning frankly, an illegal immigrant is illegal anywhere in America, not just in the border states.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 08:32 AM (LD21B)
Posted by: sonnyspats at September 23, 2011 08:33 AM (I/MzF)
I'll vote for anybody against Bambi except RAWN PAUL!!11
Even Rawn Pawl would be much better than the Obamunist. The foreign policies are just as inept with both, and frankly, if only domestic issues mattered, I think all of us Morons would be Pawlians.
Of course, in the real world, foreign policy matters, I know.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 23, 2011 08:33 AM (w7K7d)
Posted by: somebody else, not me at September 23, 2011 08:35 AM (7EV/g)
All of this stuff that people on the right are taking issue with Perry over.....is not stuff that the Dems can beat him up with. Quite the opposite. These are things that could very well win over a lot of crossover votes.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 12:27 PM (gZO5m)
This.
Only part where Perry is beginning to concern me is his performance ability. position wise, hes gold.
Posted by: Jollyroger at September 23, 2011 08:35 AM (NCw5u)
If that is not enough to bleed support away from Obama, I don't know what would be.
And all we need to do is flip 5% from '08 to win. A few hispanics here, a few blacks there, a few Jews here, a few stupid independents there, and before you know it we'll have 300 electoral votes.
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 23, 2011 08:35 AM (sqkOB)
No, don't like this at all. So who is left? Newt is too unstable to be POTUS. Santorum has been pretty much error free in the debates so far but the media have probably succeeded in labeling him the "Social Con candidate" even though he really isn't just that or even mostly that. Like Cain but hate this new 9/9/9 plan even more than the Fair Tax. Bachman was better last nite but still hasn't demonstrated any Presidential qualities. I'd take Romney over Huntsman if I had to pick a RINO. Paul is still 95% spot on but 5% batpoop crazy.
Posted by: John Morris at September 23, 2011 08:35 AM (OMT3n)
Posted by: Lady in Black at September 23, 2011 08:35 AM (ycuSb)
I'm pretty much with you on that bones.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 08:36 AM (jx2j9)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at September 23, 2011 08:36 AM (z/Mo8)
144....I pretty sure Obama wouldn't go down the "crazy religion" route to attack Romney.
I mean that would open up, again, a can of worms for Obama. The last thing he wants is for the worms to come home to roost.
Obama won't have to say a word.
The media will do it for him. ....HBO will do specials on crazy Mormons. ....The lib bloggers will bring it up every other day, then the Obama media will cluck their tongues and be soooo concerned about what a 'serious issue' it is for Romney's candidacy.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 08:36 AM (gZO5m)
Bachmann irritates me so much I don't even want to have sex with her anymore. She can beg all she wants but as far as I'm concerned she can just go back to that gay dude she's married to.
OT: If Mr. Bachmann just likes getting pegged with Michelle's strap-on but isn't into the all-male thing, is he gay?
Posted by: Curmudgeon at September 23, 2011 08:37 AM (w7K7d)
Posted by: themofocaptain at September 23, 2011 08:37 AM (6V1UP)
Then he could have said:
1st, the Hispanics in Texas? Many of them can trace their family tree on both sides of the border to back before Texas was a state. The Spanish and their Mexican forefathers were in Texas long before the were 13 Colonies.
2nd, Texas has a great relationship with Mexico, we trade over $10 billion a month with Mexico--more than any other state. In one year, our trade with just Mexico alone is nearly equal to the entire gross domestic product of Massachusetts.
3rd, the Texas border with Mexico is 1200 miles long, that's over 4 round trips from Boston to Pittsfield on the western border of Massachusetts. You could put the entire state of Massachusetts on the Texas/Mexico border and still have 1000 miles left.
4th, our Republicans in the legislature--not a one who is liberal or moderate enough to get elected in Massachusetts--voted overwhelmingly for the bill. They, living in Texas, with one of the largest Hispanic populations in the nation, well aware of the problems associated with illegal immigration, voted for that bill. And not a one of those who voted for it has lost re-election by their constituents because of it.
So again: I'm not sure you understand the bill and I'm certain you don't understand the issues.
Posted by: Jimmuy at September 23, 2011 08:38 AM (ibeMV)
Posted by: George Orwell what knows Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure at September 23, 2011 08:38 AM (AZGON)
How is it even remotely in this country's interest, or in the interest of any state to purposely assist in creating a permanent underclass of people by denying them access to the institutions that would help them be even greater positive participants in the success of a society they have become a permanent fixture in?
At what point was there advocacy of saying that they couldn't go to college at all? It appears that you are conflating opposition to granting in-state tuition with you cannot have access to the schooling at all. From your statement, it is cruel that an American citizen from Wyoming is not granted in-state rates.
Look, if you want to argue that immigration law should be reformed to permit a minor child of illegals to have access to legalizing his/her own status upon the child obtaining majority, then, hey, fine, that's a fair argument. But your repeated accusations of cruelty do nothing to persuade me that you are willing to grant consideration to the countervailing arguments.
Posted by: alexthechick at September 23, 2011 08:39 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: George Orwell what knows Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure at September 23, 2011 08:39 AM (AZGON)
Jimmuy, you are sounding particularly rational today. What, no rabbits?
Good comment.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 08:40 AM (jx2j9)
Perry may be the poster boy for why politicians should quit one government job before running for the next.
If he want to keep his governor's job, just in case he loses this presidential election, there are some things he can't say out loud...or else he'd lose the next election for governor of Texas.
The way it's playing out, he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.
Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at September 23, 2011 08:40 AM (E7Z1r)
It's not so much the actual policy as the "You're a bigot and without a heart" defense of the policy that has got potential voters like me gagging.
Right. It is reminiscent of Obama's statement in the 2008 campaign to the effect that he would raise taxes on the rich despite the effect on revenue out of a concern for fairness. And that punches one of my sore spots. The liberals consider themselves so much more intelligent than us knuckle-draggers and yet they are perfectly willing to abandon logic for their per-conceived ideas as to social justice. It is as though we have never achieved intellect but they have moved beyond mere intellect into the realm of the gods.
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 08:41 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: George Orwell what knows Obama is a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure at September 23, 2011 08:42 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: dagny at September 23, 2011 08:42 AM (Ayvi1)
Where Mitt? How does the Federal Government have this power, and the States don't? After you say you believe in the 10th Amendment.
Mitt believes in the 10th Amendment when it is expedient. He's just another Big Government Repbulican who doesn't like Big Government right now because he isn't in charge of it. Note that NONE of his answers are ever 'I'll de-regulate and let people and markets take over.' It's always 'I'll figure out ways to do X'.
If he wins the Presidency, he'll sell us out faster than Scott Brown.
As for Gingrich - he is so right on most of the stuff he says, yet I can't get over Global Warming and Dede. I don't know that Newt has the courage of his convictions. I have to wonder if Perry does as well, as he tries to walkback his stance on Social Security.
Frankly, Herman Cain is starting to look better as the debates wear on. Ron Paul has a lot right, but some stuff really wrong - stuff that could endanger us. And Michele Bachmann simply sounds shrill.
Posted by: blindside at September 23, 2011 08:43 AM (x7g7t)
Gov. Christie, your country is paging you.
Hey, I'm from NJ, and I like what he is trying to do in the state but he is not a viable national candidate.Posted by: The Robot Devil
///
But Perry, Romney, Cain, Santorum, Bachmann, Huntsman... are? At least Christie will put his heft into what he stands for. I live in CA. Anyone who takes on a teachers union gets my support, if not my admiration. Oh, and the guy canceled that tunnel project. Here in S.F. -- well, just look up "central subway" -- a subway with a couple of stops (a sop to Chinatown) that's not actually connected to the rest of the "subway" (which is essentially a 3 mile straight line) -- folks are balking at canceling the boondoggle b/c it might cost $200,000,000 to repay the feds, so we'll just spend a $billion to build it instead.
Posted by: SFGoth at September 23, 2011 08:43 AM (dZ756)
Posted by: Phineas at September 23, 2011 12:34 PM (DrWcr)
Good. There is somebody else out there. I think of this every time I hear his name and wondered if I were alone...............
Posted by: dagny at September 23, 2011 08:44 AM (Ayvi1)
There were about 11,000 Mexicans in Texas when it became a country. (including El Paso but not Nuevo Mexico). Many moved to Mexico after Texas 'withdrew' from Mexico.
Most 'Mexicans' in Texas are descendants of immigrants or immigrants themselves. The border did not cross them; they crossed the border (legally or illegally).
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 08:44 AM (eEfYn)
Similarly, Rick Perry's claim that this issue is a matter of heart -- not particular circumstances in Texas, not a policy forced upon him by a federal government which refuses to patrol the border (and thus creates the problem in the first place) -- seems to suggest he thinks this is good policy as a national matter.
This sounds to me like a bit of pandering to Karl Rove and the RNC, whom I hope will become increasingly irrelevant as the campaign progresses. After the McLame debacle, they have proven themselves out of touch with most of America. It's not called the Stupid Party for nothing.
Teh Rickster needs some polish, but whoever's advising him to "tone it down" needs to be fired. Having said that, Perry needs to make sure his main target is the stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure currently propping up his hooves on the Resolute Desk. If it can be inferred that he was forced by the Feds' refusal to enforce the Mexican border to give in-state tuition to illegals, then he should say so often.
He really needs to learn how to turn these barbs around on The Vapid One™, and observe Reagan's 11th commandment a bit more. Enough in-fighting and back-biting to try and claw your way to the top of the ticket. What we want is to hear concrete plans to reverse everything Obama has done to the country. Then to say what everyone in the country knows needs to be done to get us back to properity.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy, Tea Party SOB at September 23, 2011 08:44 AM (d0Tfm)
Posted by: nraendowment at September 23, 2011 08:45 AM (KQVeV)
I mean that would open up, again, a can of worms for Obama. The last thing he wants is for the worms to come home to roost.
Obama won't have to say a word.
Right. If they can get away with a too-inexperienced attack against Palin in favor in of Empty Suit, they can get away with a crazy-religion attack against Romney in favor of the Apostle of Wright.
Posted by: WalrusRex at September 23, 2011 08:45 AM (Hx5uv)
Posted by: joncelli at September 23, 2011 08:45 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: nraendowment at September 23, 2011 08:46 AM (KQVeV)
Conflating? They are residents of those states illegal or otherwise and have been under these laws for years. How is that conflating anything. And like it or not, making it more expensive for children of people with little money anyway to get access to education will have the affect, logically, of excluding them from the institutions. How would you propose to deal with that? Interest free loans or some other mechanism? It would come out to be the same thing.
You're pissed. You want to not be. Thinking that punishing these kids by making them pay for you being pissed won't make you unpissed. That's my bet.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 08:46 AM (jx2j9)
Posted by: ryukyu at September 23, 2011 12:06 PM (MOHSR)
That would be worth seeing. Heh.
It almost makes Perry more electable than Romney - he may be able to garner a large share of illegally cast votes by illegal aliens voting under the name of Joe Smith. Even the Chicago Way may not have enough fraud to overcome it.
Posted by: blindside at September 23, 2011 08:47 AM (x7g7t)
Posted by: mike at September 23, 2011 08:47 AM (4zZFt)
I don't think he's given up on Perry yet, just deeply saddened.
Posted by: toby928™: Still a Perry Krishna, for now at September 23, 2011 08:49 AM (GTbGH)
4. In the case of Mike Castle, I had a good reason for not caring very much about his liberal position on Cap and Trade: Cap and Trade was dead. (Seen it proposed lately?)
Sure, it offered a glimpse into his thinking, and that glimpse was not appealing, but the issue itself? Harmless. No one's passing Cap and Trade, not in current climate (nor the foreseeable climate for the next six years).
Since the stupid Delaware Republican primary voters were so stupid, as agreed upon by the majority of this blog, how in Hell was this pack of idiots supposed to see into the future and KNOW that some variation wouldn't reappear? Most people here didn't think that obama would regurgitate yet another stimulus package. You're using hindsight to gloss over Castle trumpeting the glory of cap and trade in a national publication the day before the frickin' primary. Harmless my feathered ass.
You could use this argument to gloss over Bachmann's attacks on Gardasil. neither this or cap ad trade are good ideas. Are we ready to rehabilitate Bachmann now? I hope not.
Posted by: Blue Hen at September 23, 2011 08:49 AM (326rv)
"27. But there is no joy in Dallas — mighty Perry has struck out."
Trust me, there is a lot of joy!
Perry got the last election because many of us in Texas had to hold our noses and pull the lever due to the alternative being so rotten. If elected, Perry's first White House state dinner would be a fiesta with Vincente Fox and Carlos Slim as honorary guests
Posted by: Cat at September 23, 2011 08:50 AM (oVmNQ)
So now they have a right to a college education at public expense because they are poor?
Let's just pay all tuition for everyone: rich/poor, legal/illegal, dumb/stupid, lazy/energetic.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 08:50 AM (eEfYn)
Some people have used the term "Perry's debate team" upthread. ....This assumes that he has one. ....I don't think he does.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 08:51 AM (gZO5m)
That's a bullshit argument an you know it. Read the discussion.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 08:52 AM (jx2j9)
Thinking that punishing these kids by making them pay for you being pissed won't make you unpissed.
So, not giving someone a benefit has now become "punishing" them? How 'bout we frame the issue correctly - let's not punish the citizens and legal residents of this country by making them pay for the benefits of those here illegally. That is, after all, one of the prime purposes of government: to protect its citizens.
Posted by: somebody else, not me at September 23, 2011 08:52 AM (7EV/g)
You're pissed. You want to not be. Thinking that punishing these kids by making them pay for you being pissed won't make you unpissed. That's my bet.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 12:46 PM (jx2j9)
How do we deal with that? We tell them that if they can't afford it, tough luck. What's so hard about that? Why are they entitled to those institutions?
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 08:52 AM (LD21B)
I guess you'll have to use your superior intelligence and explain it to me.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 08:54 AM (eEfYn)
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 12:52 PM (jx2j9)
Your argument is bullshit, frankly.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 08:54 AM (LD21B)
Posted by: NotALibertarian at September 23, 2011 08:54 AM (psns8)
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber
The phrase "punishing kids" is almost as asinine as what Perry said.
1. this is college. They are NOT kids. They are consenting adults.
2. No one is "punishing anyone.
3. I am being punished by driving a 16 year old station wagon. Stop punishing me.
4. If they HAVE to have money for colege, and if it MUST be from us, then they can do what I had to do, and enlist as a Marine Corps machine gunner. Instead of rewarding them for breathing.
Posted by: Blue Hen at September 23, 2011 08:55 AM (6rX0K)
I like the cut of your jib!
Posted by: Liz Warren at September 23, 2011 08:55 AM (PLvLS)
Posted by: Y-not at September 23, 2011 12:03 PM (5H6zj)
Didn't Romney say Obama would make a fine president?
Muah Hahahaah Hahahah!
Posted by: Max Power at September 23, 2011 08:55 AM (q177U)
I'm pretty deflated about Perry today. I was so excited when he got in. He is squandering his silver platter advantage. I'm really ticked off at this dumb ass, unjustified "have no heart" bleeding heart compassionate conservative illegal immigrant hard line stance. Just...damn it.
Posted by: Lady in Black at September 23, 2011 08:55 AM (ycuSb)
Isn't that what's happening now? All in-state tuition contains a subsidy granted to everyone that has residency.
Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at September 23, 2011 08:57 AM (+lsX1)
You're being obtuse. One way, and possibly the best way, is to let these RESIDENTS of the states that they live in, have the same access to the institutions in those states as other residents. Why? So they can make more money than their parents so they can pay more taxes and start new businesses so their employees can pay more taxes so they can start paying back society instead of being in a class that consumes services more than they pay in.
Capitalism is hard.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 08:57 AM (jx2j9)
I'm pretty deflated about Perry today. I was so excited when he got in. He is squandering his silver platter advantage. I'm really ticked off at this dumb ass, unjustified "have no heart" bleeding heart compassionate conservative illegal immigrant hard line stance. Just...damn it.
Posted by: Lady in Black
That's because you're not a compassionate conservative.
Posted by: George W 'let's put everyone's nuts in the gunsights' Bush at September 23, 2011 08:58 AM (6rX0K)
Posted by: mike at September 23, 2011 08:58 AM (4zZFt)
191......Right. If they can get away with a too-inexperienced attack against Palin in favor in of Empty Suit, they can get away with a crazy-religion attack against Romney in favor of the Apostle of Wright.
The Obama media can do whatever they want. It's what they do. They have no shame. .....I still think that HBO show about Mormons was started as prep for a Romney candidacy in 2008. ....The show sucks, but they have kept it. I think because they were thinking Romney could be the guy who might get the nom in 2012.
They are freaking out right now at the prospect of Perry getting the nom, that's why they're putting out a bounty for any dirt that anyone can come up with.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 08:58 AM (gZO5m)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at September 23, 2011 08:59 AM (z/Mo8)
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 12:57 PM (jx2j9)
We're talking about illegals, who don't legally belong there.
Rule of law is hard.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 09:00 AM (LD21B)
Yes. It should only be for legal residents in my view. (Also paying in-state tuition rates is not quite the same as having 'all' tuition paid is it?)
Oh, excuse me. I meant for 'documented' residents.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:01 AM (eEfYn)
Yep. Out-of-state students don't cost any more to educate than in-state students. The higher cost is an attempt to make up for the fact that they, and their families, haven't been paying any of the state taxes that fund the college.
Posted by: toby928™ at September 23, 2011 09:01 AM (GTbGH)
I guess you'll have to use your superior intelligence and explain it to me.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 12:54 PM (eEfYn)
I didn't suggest, nor does the law in Texas suggest, that children of illegals get their education for free or for less than other residents get it for. It does allow them to pay in-state tuition the same as other residents pay. That's it.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 09:01 AM (jx2j9)
Logic and rhetoric are hard, too. I would suggest that you take some classes, but you would probably get Rick Perry-like grades so there would be no point.
Posted by: somebody else, not me at September 23, 2011 09:01 AM (7EV/g)
Rule of law is hard.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 01:00 PM (LD21B)
You think that 15 million illegals are going to be rounded up and sent back?
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 09:02 AM (jx2j9)
I didn't suggest, nor does the law
in Texas suggest, that children of illegals get their education for
free or for less than other residents get it for. It does allow them to
pay in-state tuition the same as other residents pay. That's it.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 01:01 PM (jx2j9)
That's not it, that's the problem. Illegals are getting treatment that even citizens in other states aren't getting. They are here illegally, they are not entitled to such treatment.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 09:04 AM (LD21B)
No, I'm not. Not when politics and government force me into something I don't approve of. Not when the actions of the federal government take from me or my family what we deserve as legal American citizens. I am, however, a compassionate conservative of my own free will....being charitable privately, giving of time and money as permits to help causes I care about.
Posted by: Lady in Black at September 23, 2011 09:04 AM (ycuSb)
Alright. I've been exposed. Now everyone knows. I hope you're happy, you cruel bastard.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 09:04 AM (jx2j9)
Posted by: toby928™ at September 23, 2011 01:01 PM (GTbGH)
Does anyone in Texas pay a state tax?
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 09:04 AM (X6akg)
No. Why should they receive the benefits of documented citizens?
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:05 AM (eEfYn)
You think that 15 million illegals are going to be rounded up and sent back?
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 01:02 PM (jx2j9)
Fine the hell out of anybody hiring them, or chain their doors and we won't have to round them up...no worries about THIS administration doing that though
Posted by: Red Shirt at September 23, 2011 09:05 AM (FIDMq)
Does the Dream Act provide for free tuition to illegals or is that just a strawman you constructed?
Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at September 23, 2011 09:05 AM (+lsX1)
You think that 15 million illegals are going to be rounded up and sent back?
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 01:02 PM (jx2j9)
You think 15 million illegals should receive preferential treatment?
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 09:06 AM (LD21B)
That Mitt ain't gonna fly, I think it is horrible and awful: But it is reality.
You think the JEF campaign--that got away with flipping people off, got away with calling Palin a pig, got away with calling the Clinton's racists, got away with all sorts of vile misogamy--will have any problem running a deadly whisper campaign against "those strange Mormans and their weird beliefs?"
Damn, step away from the polls and the spin and start thinking about how the Dems are going to attack our guy--that's the real game here. And Mittens is DOA. Dead, dead, dead.
Posted by: Jimmuy at September 23, 2011 09:07 AM (ibeMV)
Sales Tax.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 01:05 PM (eEfYn)
So even in-state illegals would have paid sales tax?
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 09:08 AM (X6akg)
Unless they have stolen everything they have. Or maybe undocumented purchases?
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:10 AM (eEfYn)
You think that 15 million illegals are going to be rounded up and sent back?
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber
Should 15 million unlicensed drivers be taken off the streets and their cars impounded? Is that the society that we want to live in?
Should 15 million (fill in the blank)?
This is the problem that all apologists have with illegal aliens. The IRS is pursuing expatriates (at least their money), but we won't enforce our border controls, because the latter isn't 'realistic'?
Posted by: George W 'let's put everyone's nuts in the gunsights' Bush at September 23, 2011 09:10 AM (326rv)
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 01:04 PM (LD21B)
They won't be sent back. The immigration laws aren't enforced. They will never be for this group of people. What's the answer then? They are currently consumers of services whatever their status. You are paying for those services whether they are entitled to them or not. Is it a good idea in your mind, to continue to have subsequent generations of these unentitled people be consumers of services?
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 09:10 AM (jx2j9)
I haven't found any numbers on how many illegal aliens have taken advantage of the Texas Dream Act. Anyone have a link?
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 09:11 AM (kaOJx)
My bet is that there are at least that many unlicensed drives on the road at any given moment. There are certainly at least that many uninsured drivers on the road at any given moment.
How's that not wanting them to be there working out for you?
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 09:13 AM (jx2j9)
I haven't found any numbers on how many illegal aliens have taken advantage of the Texas Dream Act. Anyone have a link?
No one knows. It is all undocumented.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:13 AM (eEfYn)
Unless they have stolen everything they have. Or maybe undocumented purchases?
Posted by: RioBravo
Technically we all pay taxes indirectly, through prices with the producers' taxes included. But they may not pay any taxes directly, unless they're buying gas or alcohol, since several states have no sales tax.
Posted by: George W 'let's put everyone's nuts in the gunsights' Bush at September 23, 2011 09:13 AM (326rv)
Posted by: davidinvirginia at September 23, 2011 09:13 AM (ED4oz)
Nope, nope, nope. You do not know him like we do here in Texas, especially those of us who have been here from his inception as our governor, and before. THAT is the only argument you have for him. That is the one thing I've been consistently trying to convey to people: He'll USUALLY do the right thing BUT ONLY if he has the right legislature backing him and a VERY involved constituency to keep him in check, and even then you can't trust him. There is no hopefully to it. If we don't have a strong congress he will run amok. Immigration is his worst issue in every way, shape, and form. He is not Bush, well not 1st term Bush. He is McCain. 100%. You will not like him when you get him, in fact I'll go out on a limb and say I'll give it a full 2 years and you will be saying WTF in some form or another. All that being said, just go into it with eyes wide open. If it is any help, full disclosure: I voted for him in 2002, hated him so much in 2006 I voted for Kinky, hated him so much in 2010 I had to vote for him because I hated KBH more. I'll vote for him here, but only if I have to, depending on how the primaries are going by the time they get to us, and because I hate Obama more I am willing to accept Obamalite.
Posted by: halodoc at September 23, 2011 09:13 AM (gLiPk)
You think that 15 million illegals are going to be rounded up and sent back?
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 01:02 PM (jx2j9)
Do you think if 15 million people didn't pay their income tax, that the Federal Government wouldn't figure out a solution? This isn't a matter of 'cannot.' It's a matter of 'will not'.
Posted by: blindside at September 23, 2011 09:14 AM (x7g7t)
238....So even in-state illegals would have paid sales tax?
Right. ....Anyone who's been living in the state for a while has been paying taxes.
That 'must have been in a Tx high school for 3 years' rule probably has something to do with that. ....Texas runs on sales taxes, property taxes, etc. ....I live in a state that borders Texas, and people are always coming up here to buy high-ticket items because it is cheaper without the higher sales taxes.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 09:14 AM (gZO5m)
My bet is that there are at least that many unlicensed drives on the road at any given moment. There are certainly at least that many uninsured drivers on the road at any given moment.
How's that not wanting them to be there working out for you?
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber
About as well as an unliscensed illegal alien driving a tractor trailer. One difference: If I'm caught, I'm screwed. If he's caught, he gets to whine to the consulate of a foreign power.
Posted by: George W 'let's put everyone's nuts in the gunsights' Bush at September 23, 2011 09:15 AM (326rv)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 09:15 AM (Qjh0I)
Hispanics were 16% of the U.S population 2010 Census.
With current immigration, Hispanics will be 30% of the population 2050 (Census estimate).
Hispanics vote about 65% Democrat. Since Hispanics are not assimilating in terms of income and education, there is no reason to believe this will change. Second generation Mexicans vote overwhelmingly Democrat.
The people who say immigration is not important don't understand that there will be no Republican party if we continue this policy. This is why Democrats are so Gung-Ho.
Pro-unskilled immigration Republicans are digging their own grave, and of conservatism.
Posted by: Worried at September 23, 2011 09:15 AM (OsBNW)
How's that not wanting them to be there working out for you?
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber
At any given moment, people are burglarizing, beating, raping, and killing other people. I guess since that happens, and not all of them can be caught, we should just ignore the problem. Or legalize them. I guess that would make the crime rate drop sharply.
Posted by: blindside at September 23, 2011 09:17 AM (x7g7t)
Gawd this is stupid. In-state tuition is not a big deal.
Posted by: Jimmuy at September 23, 2011 09:17 AM (ibeMV)
The solution is to elect a gov't that will enforce the border and deport illegals, not to give illegals all the benefits of citizenship and residency just because.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 09:17 AM (LD21B)
" for millions more illegals by adding yet another incentive to sneak across the border. "
Of course, if the Federal Government would put the troops on the border, drones, and more border agents, as Perry has asked, that might not happen.
Millions. How many are going to go to college in Texas?
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 09:17 AM (kaOJx)
243.....I haven't found any numbers on how many illegal aliens have taken advantage of the Texas Dream Act. Anyone have a link?
I think Perry gave the figure of 16,000 in the last ten years, iirc. ....Hopefully someone will correct me if I am wrong here.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at September 23, 2011 09:18 AM (gZO5m)
Posted by: toby928™ at September 23, 2011 09:18 AM (GTbGH)
It's also a consideration of how it would look to begin rounding up 15 million people and deporting them, with all of the interim messiness that would be involved with that. Probably not a pretty picture.
The better answer, in my weak minded opinion, would be to elect someone who would enforce the laws. If they exist. Then start enforcing them and then come up with a way to handle illegal immigrants in a way that makes sense on all levels.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 09:19 AM (jx2j9)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 09:20 AM (Qjh0I)
Posted by: cranky-d at September 23, 2011 09:20 AM (nRliU)
Millions. How many are going to go to college in Texas?
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 01:17 PM (kaOJx)
You're not at all concerned that Perry would push the DREAM act at a National level? I most certainly am because he chose to answer the question with an emotional plea that amounted to nothing more than 'racist!'
Posted by: blindside at September 23, 2011 09:21 AM (x7g7t)
Dude. Come on. Those laws are being enforced. Imperfectly granted. The border is not being enforced. Immigration laws aren't being enforced. I didn't suggest that they should be. They should. As soon as possible. Start enforcing the fucking laws. But if you think that means that this government or even a majority of people would buy into the process of rounding up 15 million people and expelling them, I suggest you're wrong.
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 09:23 AM (jx2j9)
"You tell me Dick."
Merely asking for how many illegal aliens have gotten in state tuition in Texas.
I'm all for securing the border. Put the troops on the DMZ in Korea on the Mexican border, bring home any troop in Europe and Japan and do the same thing with them. Drones are low cost ways to maintain security. Fine employers $50000 per illegal on the payroll. Whatever it takes.
Maybe the Federal Government should be held accountable for illegals crossing the border. Since that is their responsibility.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 09:24 AM (kaOJx)
I am not disagreeing with the sentiment here. I do like the If they exist part though.
I can imagine Obama now:
I am deeply concerned abut (insert scandal here). If any laws were broken, if they exist, I will pursue justice diligently.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:24 AM (eEfYn)
Posted by: Joffen at September 23, 2011 09:26 AM (EPcuy)
"You're not at all concerned that Perry would push the DREAM act at a National level?"
No. He hasn't indicated anything like this would be proposed.
I'm more concerned about Romney not wanting Obamacare repealed in its full form.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 09:27 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 09:28 AM (Qjh0I)
Q. But just to be clear: if border security is accomplished, you can envision some sort of path to citizenship for people who are here illegally.
Perry: Sure.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:28 AM (eEfYn)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 01:28 PM (Qjh0I)
That is BS. You don't like Perry, fine. But don't lie.
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 09:31 AM (X6akg)
Q: I think everyone can agree on that, but...
Perry: HereÂ’s what everyone should agree on: get the border secure, then we can have a conversation about what type immigration policy we want to put in place. If thereÂ’s a revolving door at the border, your immigration policy is not worth the paper itÂ’s written on.
Q: But just to be clear: if border security is accomplished, you can envision some sort of path to citizenship for people who are here illegally.
Perry: Sure.
Posted by: toby928™ In Context at September 23, 2011 09:32 AM (GTbGH)
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at September 23, 2011 01:23 PM (jx2j9)
The first step is securing the border - I agree with you. There is no point deporting people if they can come back in.
In the meantime, however, they can be made to be very uncomfortable while here, such that some may leave on their own, and others may not decide to enter.
There are things that CAN be done NOW - no schooling, food stamps, or other freebies; make employment difficult as well as aggressively prosecution employers.
If you do those things, the reason for coming here illegally dry up.
As far as 'rounding up' 15 million people and how Americans feel, I submit that people are quite on board with deporting illegals when they are caught. I've never seen a poll how people feel about 'rounding up 15 million people' (and I submit that 15million is low - I suspect it is as high as 40 million).
Posted by: blindside at September 23, 2011 09:33 AM (x7g7t)
Are there a lot of penniless Mexican freshmen that sneak across the border so they can pay in-state tuition? In the grand scheme of solving the immigration issue, this seems like maybe the least important.
Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at September 23, 2011 09:34 AM (+lsX1)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 09:36 AM (Qjh0I)
Posted by: Joffen at September 23, 2011 01:26 PM (EPcuy)
When your argument is based on an emotional appeal, it call into question.
It's not that he made the statement, it's that he made the statement and used the old dem trick of calling people who disagree on policy 'heartless.' In other words, you can't argue the policy on facts, but have to resort to namecalling.
Posted by: blindside at September 23, 2011 09:36 AM (3Uns6)
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 09:37 AM (kaOJx)
Of course the GOP must follow the process of finding out who is the best or most popular candidate. But the thing that continually pisses me off is that they never seem to see that the ultimate goal is to defeat Obama and try to reverse some of the damage.
Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at September 23, 2011 09:37 AM (dIHHd)
Gotta say that a Cain/Gingrich ticket is sounding pretty good to me right now... and it's killing me to give that kind of benefit of the doubt to Newt. I don't trust him but he's easily been the most articulate and in control person in every debate. He really is good at this.
So would Cain have the intestinal fortitude to not back down when something un-PC comes out of his administration? Would Gingrich nudge him to the dark side because of political expediency? I dunno, but those two currently lead my ticket. I want to hear more from them. And f*ck the polls right now. They are for strippers.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at September 23, 2011 09:38 AM (r4t7/)
Tue. But it is enjoyable.
Now, how are we actually going to control the border as apposed to agreeing on the fact that it is very important to do so?
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:38 AM (eEfYn)
"You're not at all concerned that Perry would push the DREAM act at a National level?"
No. He hasn't indicated anything like this would be proposed.
I'm more concerned about Romney not wanting Obamacare repealed in its full form.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 01:27 PM (kaOJx)
He hasn't indicated anything like this, but if he is willing to use the 'heartless' argument during the primaries AND twist the question (note the original question and that Perry turned it into a general education question), I'm afraid he will use it as President. If it is heartless in Texas, it's heartless everywhere.
I agree 100% on Romney. President Romney will not lead the charge on repealing Obamacare. I wouldn't be surprised if even his waiver offer turns out to be as much BS as JEF's 'close Gitmo' statement.
Posted by: blindside at September 23, 2011 09:39 AM (3Uns6)
Pretty basic rule: If you want less of something, tax it. If you want more of something, subsidize it. Perry knows this and so do his supporters.
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 09:40 AM (Qjh0I)
I do not know. How many National Guardsmen or Texas Militia personnel has Perry actually deployed to the border. How many DPS officers?
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:40 AM (eEfYn)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 01:36 PM (Qjh0I)
Well then, nearly the entire Texas legislature is 'fully hostile to border enforcement' because all but 4 of then voted for in-state tuition.
Now...go ahead, tell me that almost the whole Texas legislature is hostile to border enforcement.
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 09:41 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 09:42 AM (Qjh0I)
They are not hostile; they just don't care.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:43 AM (eEfYn)
Tami, have you been reading the comments? TX politicians Hispander, we all know that. Perry pulls the asinine "heartless Republican" card, do they all do that?
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 09:43 AM (Qjh0I)
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 01:43 PM (eEfYn)
Probably more like it's not their job.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 09:44 AM (LD21B)
Isn't Perry allowed to make his state into a laboratory? Isn't that federalism?
Why are conservatives suddenly so protective of liberal college professors' over-inflated salaries and benefits packages?
Children of illegal immigrants have no in-state options. They work under the table for the most part, as to their parents, and they will never be able to afford out-of-state tuition.
As conservatives busily alienate yet another ethnic group, I can't help but wonder what is so un-conservative about the children of illegal immigrants paying for college at the local rate if local taxpayers don't mind.
This is pure nativism and reactionary fear of lost priviledge. This is the difference between a conservative and a reactionary.
Posted by: Peter at September 23, 2011 09:46 AM (xdG5r)
Perry has sent the Texas Rangers (Not the baseball team) and their critical response units to the border. As far as the Guard defending the border, wouldn't that interfere with the Federal Governments mandated responsibility to defend the borders?
Don't know the answer to that. As far as the Texas Militia, are they a law enforcement agency? The group on line is a private citizens militia and I don't if Perry has any control of them.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 09:47 AM (kaOJx)
Since when has the security/safety of the state not been the job of the legislature?
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:48 AM (eEfYn)
Actually, they kinda are. They are all politicians and pander to a Hispanic constituency and the cheap labor business lobby where possible. The proof is in the Legislative pudding. I can't say I've seen them up in arms as an institution getting the border under adequate control. Everyone political wants to pass the buck on this issue.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at September 23, 2011 09:48 AM (r4t7/)
This is pure nativism and reactionary fear of lost priviledge. This is the difference between a conservative and a reactionary.
Posted by: Peter at September 23, 2011 01:46 PM (xdG5r)
Still don't get it. It's called Rule of Law.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 09:50 AM (LD21B)
Posted by: toby928™ In Context at September 23, 2011 09:50 AM (GTbGH)
My error. I should have said Texas State Guard. Basically it is a state reserve for the National Guard. The Governor has 'complete' control over the State Guard. Most if not all states have a state guard force. Texas has a navy too but that is only an honorary something or other.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:51 AM (eEfYn)
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 01:48 PM (eEfYn)
I was referring, and thought you were referring, to border enforcement which, as we have seen with AZ, is something that apparently states aren't allowed to do.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 09:51 AM (LD21B)
Posted by: danny at September 23, 2011 09:52 AM (2OCgP)
Tami, have you been reading the comments? TX politicians Hispander, we all know that. Perry pulls the asinine "heartless Republican" card, do they all do that?
Posted by: Lincolntf at September 23, 2011 01:43 PM (Qjh0I)
Yes, I've read them. Yes, his answer sucked, big time. But I'm still waiting for an answer to my question early this morning. WTF are border state Governors suppose to do when the Fed. govt. will do nothing? Any time they try something the courts block it.
So, these particular illegals, who have been there at minimum 3 years are suppose to what? Go on welfare?
Yes, yes....we'd all like that they were not there to begin with but they are and the fed will not let Texas deport them. So your answer is? They should take out a student loan to pay out of state tuition? Guess who owns the student loan program. So taxes would pay for it anyway.
I was looking for a serious answer this morning when I asked what the govs are suppose to do....and 'secure the border' is not a serious answer. They aren't ALLOWED to secure the border.
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 09:53 AM (X6akg)
Ace and felllow acers
If Perry were AZ he wouldnt be governor.
Did anyone check that when that this in state tuition law was first passed?
A. 2010
B. 1971
C 1993
D All of the above
If you picked D you were correct - Perry doesnt have good answers or perfect answers but Romney is on the defensive - people are searching the state schools in Mass for illegal students attending, they are looking at the financial burdens of the state due to his healthcare and Fox news this morning is questioning his staff over the fortuitious changes in the text of editions of his book and most of the other crap he has been spewing.
Romey has had the Huckabee treatment - the golden child no hard questions no answer challenged, his media appearances are that he gets to give his campaign stump speech and bash Perry and move on and answer no questions
Didnt work for Huck, nor Hillary
Posted by: EricPWjohnson at September 23, 2011 09:54 AM (6xrsv)
You were correct, I was referring to border control. You also right that the federal government would likely try to prevent the enforcement. That should not prevent states from attempting to begin controlling their borders. Let the feds step in if they want. That would be more impressive than simply complaining about the lack of federal enforcement.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:55 AM (eEfYn)
See, the 'you have no heart' line worked on non-partisan independents like me.
Really? Where are they? You are the first person I've encountered who viewed that comment positively. Most people are rightly disgusted by it.
Posted by: Reggie1971 at September 23, 2011 09:56 AM (b68Df)
Thanks Bravo. Would using the Guard (either one) be legal under Texas Law to enforce the border?
Legally if Perry could send them to the border, I'd be ok with it in a heartbeat. I assume they have access to and are equipped with appropriate firepower to go on the Texas border safely.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 09:57 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 09:57 AM (eEfYn)
Posted by: toby928™ at September 23, 2011 10:02 AM (GTbGH)
@KG "Still don't get it. It's called Rule of Law."
The lay is the Dream Act. It isn't a rule of law issue in that sense.
As for the parents, true. But until then, isn't it the responsible thing to deal with the problem humanely without creating a permanent underclass with no access to a better life?
They don't come here saying, "I'm going to risk my life and pay a drug lord my life savings so that my children can pay in-state tuition in Texas..."
If Marco Rubio's parents had been illegal, would that have made Marco Rubio less of an American? How many Marco Rubio's will grow up democrats?
I think it is perfectly in keeping with conservatism to help the innocent victims of our government's lack of border enforcement to gain the tools to become productive independent citizens.
Posted by: Peter at September 23, 2011 10:02 AM (xdG5r)
We already invaded Pakistan. There is a precedent, and everyone would accept the answer. And...it's important to point out that the question wasn't if Pakistan went rogue and is now run by terrorists, but it was that Pakistans nuclear armaments were hijacked/stolen by terrorists.
Posted by: matt at September 23, 2011 10:04 AM (2WDMC)
But if you reward lawless behavior, you get more of it.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 10:04 AM (LD21B)
Posted by: Your Inner Voice at September 23, 2011 10:05 AM (ApXjP)
I am to understand that the illegal immigrant children of illegal immigrant parents are innocent victims of the lack of border enforcement? WOW !
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 10:05 AM (eEfYn)
KG-
I see what you are saying, but I really don't think in-state tuition is high on the list of reasons for emigration from Mexico and Guatamala, etc.. to border states.
The top reasons are more likely opportunity, freedom, and the dynamism of the American economy. If you really want to discourage immigration, you will have to destroy all three.
That's why Obama likes to brag that illegal immigration is down under his administration.
Posted by: Peter at September 23, 2011 10:08 AM (xdG5r)
"rootin', tootin' Texas"
Why all the hate on Texas? I'm not from there, only been 3 times that I remember. Good economy, nice scenery, good hunting.
It's like a lot of people have State Envy or something.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at September 23, 2011 10:09 AM (kaOJx)
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 01:57 PM (eEfYn)
Yes, absolutely....and then there's reality.
Posted by: Tami at September 23, 2011 10:10 AM (X6akg)
RioBravo--
Where were you born? Where did your parents take you?
Children have no choice in the matter. They are often victimized by human trafficking. And it is federal policy that encourages illegal immigration through the lack of a common-sense working visa policy and lack of enforcement.
Denying in-state tuition to the children of illegal immigrants doesn't do a thing to discourage illegal immigration.
Posted by: Peter at September 23, 2011 10:12 AM (xdG5r)
Posted by: toby928™ at September 23, 2011 10:16 AM (GTbGH)
Yes, absolutely....and then there's reality.
Yep.
I should also have said 'required by the Constitution...' rather than 'invasion by the Constitution' though application of the Constitution would be rather like a foreign invasion is some ways.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 10:16 AM (eEfYn)
That makes them victims of human traffickers not US immigration or visa policy.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 10:20 AM (eEfYn)
THE PRESIDENT: If you want to cut taxes for middle-class families -- pass this bill.
AUDIENCE: Pass this bill!
THE PRESIDENT: If you want to help small businesses, what do you do?
THE AUDIENCE: Pass this bill!
THE PRESIDENT: If you want veterans to share in the opportunities of this country, what should you do?
THE AUDIENCE: Pass this bill!
The article:
http://tinyurl.com/3c4p6sd
Posted by: Chairman LMAO at September 23, 2011 10:23 AM (9eDbm)
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 10:27 AM (eEfYn)
That makes them victims of human traffickers not US immigration or visa policy.
This whole "don't penalize the children" meme is straight from the Dem playbook. Every despicable law proposed by the Clintons in the 90's was preceeded by "It's for the children!"
Posted by: elliot m at September 23, 2011 10:29 AM (zPich)
Denying in-state tuition to the children of illegal immigrants doesn't do a thing to discourage illegal immigration.
Posted by: Peter at September 23, 2011 02:12 PM (xdG5r)
That's not the point, the point is that they are not entitled to that treatment.
Posted by: KG at September 23, 2011 10:46 AM (LD21B)
how many soldiers: More than 0
Can there be a mile between them? less than 1254 miles between
Should they be in squads of 2 or 4: 16
Shifts: 3 watches per day
Supported by mobile companies to be referred to as Rangers.
Posted by: RioBravo at September 23, 2011 11:04 AM (eEfYn)
Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at September 23, 2011 11:08 AM (vahvH)
Agreed on that 3 AM thing. Perry's response was bad, but that was a gotcha question.
Also, there's no good response to that question anyway.
Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at September 23, 2011 11:14 AM (epBek)
One thing Perry's 'Have a heart' comment could do is have an unseen connotation and soften his appearance on social securety cuts for seniors.
You know what would do that more effectively? Softening his position on social security cuts for seniors.
I mean, what oldster is sitting around saying, 'look, Ma, Perry gives tuition breaks to illegals. Social Security is saved!'
Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at September 23, 2011 11:22 AM (epBek)
Instead of "you don't have a heart" it should have been "you don't understand the issues.
Yeah. You're not heartless, you're stupid. Great line.
Posted by: Emperor of Icecream at September 23, 2011 11:28 AM (epBek)
Posted by: Jordan at September 23, 2011 11:30 AM (4z6KA)
Perry's take on his debate performance:
“It’s not who is the slickest candidate or the smoothest debater that we need to elect. We need to elect the candidate with the best record and the best vision for this country.... The alternative is candidates who stick to principle, stand their ground because they believe in something...”
Principle ? Believe in something ? This from the man who said making illegal aliens pay out-of-state tuition rates is "heartless ?" The man who invoked weeping women to justify Gardasil* ?
Three things to do after a gaffe:
1. Walk it back
2. Double down
3. Act like it never happened and hope everyone just forgets you said it entirely.
Rick's obviously opted for #3. The campaign staffers he inherited from Gingrich may be having second thoughts after last night.
* Yeah, it's not a real issue in my book, either, but it gives the lie to being "principled" about one's politics.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame - Left Behind Child at September 23, 2011 11:55 AM (yK8YH)
People do know that Mass Health still polls well in Massachusetts. Mass is magical. Its a place where Elizabeth Warren is mainstream.
RomneyCare wasnt shoved down anyone's throat. The people demanded universal health care. From Shannon O'Brien, Deval Patrick or Romney.
They wanted it and they like it. Not like ObamaCare.
Posted by: Massachusetts at September 23, 2011 11:56 AM (FewJP)
Posted by: Rex the Wonder God at September 23, 2011 12:00 PM (vahvH)
Posted by: steevy at September 23, 2011 12:11 PM (fyOgS)
Posted by: cccolt at September 23, 2011 01:25 PM (KaJBC)
Posted by: meona at September 26, 2011 10:36 AM (AP+PN)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2431 seconds, 457 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Another look at Santorum Cain Dole?
Posted by: Soothsayer at September 23, 2011 07:57 AM (sqkOB)