Could not resist :)
Posted on 08/14/2011 7:12:33 PM PDT by Clairity
That’s why he’s been elected for the last 27 YEARS.For what party? 23 yrs ago .Rick Perry Was Al Gore’s Texas Campaign Chairman...
11 years before Perry chaired Gore’s presidential campaign in Texas, in 1976, Gore held the first Congressional hearings on climate change. Gore’s reputation on environmental issues was so solidified by 1988 that the first President Bush took to the habit of calling him ozone man.
Could not resist :)
Good to see you, dearest Jeff! I pray you’re doing better!
Thank you very much for posting more recent dialogue from Sarah Palin, herself!
Starting a thread using old info about a non-declared candidate, who the poster of the thread, thinks the non-declared isn’t running, is starting a flame war, but it’s all calmed now.
Hello and a good late night to you!
Yeah. Reagan was a Democrat too, before that conservative party switched. Rick was slow in catching on on the national scale, but in Texas, MOST conservatives voted Democrat up till that time. You can be snarky, or you can educate yourself on the weird world or TX politics. Either way, Perry has been a conservative all his life.
Indeed, there is a big difference giving up one's term as governor to serve as President and giving it up to go camping with Kate Plus Eight.
I just said *Good night* with my messages to you on the FReepathon thread!
See you tomorry!
Please keep it up....LOL.
I'm *done* voting for the lesser of two evils, after what Bush and Rove did to the GOP.
Cheers!
Her negatives are high and she know it, but she can’t bring them down without first entering the primaries.
No guarantees that she will win, but she has to run.
The debate has to be elevated and she has exellent solutions.
Oh, you hadn't heard? Onyx dear, I think it's you who'd better get a grip. You don't want to get the stern talking to that I did last night from DRey:
"Don’t be an idiot Winifred. I don’t have time to explain Texas politics to you, or Conservatism, and I really don’t care if you understand it or not because frankly, you don’t matter. But if you’re ever in the mood to get educated, do a little research. As for me, please don’t worry yourself about my “street cred.” You have no idea who you’re talking to."
She's obviously some sort of supernatural demi-god of Texas politics or something. *rolls eyes*
“The “deport them all” position is probably politically untenable at this point, so that is where the negotiation must focus. I would support permanent residency status for these people, as long as they are law-abiding; but NO voting rights nor chance of citizenship.”
I think you’re coming closest to “where things are going to end up” regarding the “illegals question”. I’ve thought of the very same “solution” as you have.
The illegals — the vast majority of them — are NEVER going to be involuntarily deported. It doesn’t matter if we “cut off their benefits”. The reality is that, even without benefits, many if not most of them are light-years better off here than they would be back home (at least from _their_ viewpoint).
But even if they’re never going back, they should also NEVER be permitted to enjoy the full benefits of citizenship, because they chose to enter America illegally. And like you said above, NO voting rights, EVER. They should be tolerated, but never be given a direct voice (through the vote) in the future of the country.
What this really does is little more than “slow down” the browning of America.
The inescapable reality of the illegals is that it doesn’t matter if they are “legalized”, “amnestied”, or given citizenship. Because, within twenty years, many are going to “auto-legalize” THROUGH THEIR CHILDREN (shouting intentional). Every baby born to an illegal on U.S. soil is an automatic citizen, who will someday have the same “citizenship rights” as those children of native Americans. Where will we be then?
The only way to prevent this is to change the law of the land that bestows such citizenship, probably by a Constitutional Amendment that rewrites the earlier provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment. And — same as with the “deport them all” argument — this isn’t going to happen, either.
Before I’m attacked for being pessimistic, I would wholeheartedly endorse deporting them all, and wholeheartedly endorse rewriting the Fourteenth.
But the essence of conservatism is a willingness to see things in the cold light of reality, and understand what can be changed, and what can’t. That’s what separates us from the liberal mindset.
And the reality is that once, earlier on, we might have properly dealt with the illegal problem — but lost the opportunity to do so by waiting, waiting, and waiting some more until their numbers had grown so large as to make such efforts politically (as well as logistically) impossible. It’s simply too late, at least for some areas of the country.
The solution? Wish I had one. Actually, I think it’s time for conservative Euro-Americans to start migrating to those states where they can rebuild their demographical majorities so as to be un-challengeable, at least within those state borders, and let the “multicultural states simply go their own way. We may even see a Soviet-style breakup in our future — a “Commonwealth of North American States”. It could happen peacefully, perhaps not. We’ll just have to wait and see.
Just sayin’...
Do those things and illegal aliens would deport themselves muy pronto!
I will do my best to support and vote for the most conservative candidate that can win the general election! From my state of Georgia, Saxby may need a primary challenge. Tom Price from my congressional district seems to be doing a fine job.
My support extends beyond my state and districts though. I give extensively to all sorts of candidates’ campaigns (that have the potential to win).
So, I will be eager to be pinged about right races that need support.
The lesser of two evils is all there is. No candidate is perfect. No candidate will measure up completely. Remember Reagan? He used to be a Democrat and his wife was a kook. She brought palm readers into the white house and reintroduced booze to their parties. Reagan was a divorcee with kids that hated him. That wouldn’t fly today. But thank God for Reagan. Who will be the force we need? Who will beat Obama? They are ALL the lesser of two evils.
He tried to get a sanctuary cities law through the legislature that he said would give the police the tools they needed to find and deport illegals. When it failed in regular session (because it needed 2/3rds senate, and the democrats have more than a 3rd), he added it to the special session, where they only needed majority vote.
Unfortunately, the republicans in the house and senate got into some pissing contest, passed competing bills, and nothing ended up happening.
I’m not a fan of allowing illegal immigrant kids to go to college on in-state tuition. Virginia doesn’t allow it. But if Texas wants to do so, I don’t think it is a particulary “pro-illegal” stance.
The argument against seems to be that, knowing their kids could one day get in-state college tuition, mexicans will risk crossing the border with their 2-year-olds, and then live in the country for 16 years while their kids go through school, just so they can get cheaper college.
I DO think mexicans and others sneak into our country to benefit their kids; many come here to HAVE kids to take advantage of the stupid birth-citizenship laws. But I don’t think they are coming here because they can get cheap college 16 years later.
The problem is that we let them stay here for 16 years. But the “law” forces us to educate their children in our public schools. They live in our communities, they are on our sports teams, they make friends, they even become americanized (if we are lucky). Now they are 18-year-olds that don’t even remember their home country, speak english, are ingrained in our culture. They are smart enough to go to college. They have lived in the state essentially their whole lives.
So, if the taxpayers of that state want to give them taxpayer-subsidized college education, I understand it. (I think people who see college as something kids pay for might feel more like this than people who think that the cheap tuition is a benefit to the kid’s parents).
Again, to me the problem is that we let these people hang around in our country for decades. We let them have jobs, pay taxes, send their kids to our schools. That is what we have to stop. But the kids? I’m not quite as worried about them, on a state level, if the state sees a reason to help them.
I would however oppose allowing the illegal kids to bump legal kids out of college slots (OK, I already said I personally oppose letting them have cheap college as well, so I mean I “more oppose”, and would hold it more against Perry if that was what happened).
I certainly don’t “credit” Perry for this, but I am not letting it turn me off to him — I’m more interested in what his FEDERAL platform will be for immigration. No Federal Dream Act, Secure the Borders, go back to actually deporting people.
I hold Sarah to the same standard. I don’t really care what she said when running for VP, and in fact I have agreed with some of her less “strident” comments on the subject, as well as the ones people say are “different” — I don’t see them as different, just a broader view.
But she’s not a candidate yet. When she becomes a candidate, she’ll have to put out a platform, and that’s what we will judge her on, not words she said 3 years ago, or whether she took harsh enough action against sanctuary cities in Alaska.
BTW, unlike some supporters here, I don’t think it is a foregone conclusion that she will run. She has repeatedly said that she is still thinking about it, and that she has NOT made a decision.
And again, unlike some supporters, I tend to believe what Sarah Palin says. I like to quote what she says, and if she says hasn’t made a decision, I choose to believe her, rather than thinking she already knows she is running and is just lying about it for political theatre.
I don’t believe Sarah would lie for political theatre, or to be a VP candidate.
But plenty of your follower Palin supporters are and I haven't seen you object to the lies and smears they post about Rick Perry and other candidates.
You haven’t exactly said things in a way that would discourage or diffuse those attacks. I’m not sure I have either, although I am trying very hard, as I support Sarah and I think I like Perry as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
