Nuff said. Buh-Bye.
Troll.
Don’t you you think you better stop? Your latest troll-fest just got the “No Thanks”.
I’ll LMAO if you get the zot, not just your lame old articles.
So, Mr. Perry; life is good for you, you look to be a shoe in .... now you open your mouth and alientate 95% of the RNC base. Why not concede now and save some money?
Please save the bandwidth and sent it away.
This is the truth. One he can’t get away from. He said it.
A killer diller for me.
I do not want an open borders candidate.
Well, so much for Perry.
Like 2008, the Republican Establishment wants a candidate who will not bring up the immigration issue. And like McCain, it will give Obama a free ride on the issue which would be the tie breaker in the coming election.
Americans don’t want amnesty (75%); don’t want birth citizenship; don’t want citizenship as a reward for law-breakers; and don’t want employers violating laws and avoiding taxes with illegals.
Republicans in the ruling class want cheap labor; want easy profits for their Chamber of Commerce cronies who write all Republican immigration laws; want open borders and off-shoring.
The MSM and pundits want a weak Republican who will guarantee an Obama win by demoralizing the potential campaign workers and contributors with a RINO candidate.
In the last campaign, Obama’s people were everywhere, visiting neighborhoods multiple times.
McCain’s were nowhere, because nobody wanted to work for a guy who would stab them in the back on immigration, judicial appointments, defense necessities, and most conservative issues.
It is true that illegal immigration is but one of several existential issues facing America, along with the economy/jobs, collapsing national security, and uncontrolled debt and spending. But it is a litmus test for these Republicans. If they follow the open borders/amnesty call of the party elites, they will show their contempt for the American people, best exemplified by the Tea Party.
If the elites get their guy again, like a Romney or Perry, the conservative majority in this nation will sit this one out again.
The date if this speech is Wed, Aug 22nd, 2001.
I’m not sure how Gov. Perry would feel about his open borders stance today. Also, in the speech the kind of “open borders” he’s talking about certainly isn’t the reality of even back then, much less today.
What I would have a problem with would be where he talks about giving instate tuition rates to illegal immigrants. Is this true. Did he and the Texas legislature do this? That has been done here in MD recently, and I can tell you, no true conservative is a fan of that at all here in MD.
If his version of the Dream Act did give illegals the ability to pay for college at in-state rates, I’m sorry that’s not conservative, and a deal breaker for me. I mean goodness, we here in MD are castigating the MD legislature and Gov O’Malley for doing the same thing! Wouldn’t it be hypocritical to give Gov Perry a pass on it just because he has an R next to his name?
10 years ago. Taken out of context much?
I’m still trying to find out more about Perry, as I don’t really know much about him.
This statement, though, doesn’t actually say he supports open borders in any way, any time soon. He says he hopes for a future where illegal immigration is no longer a problem because Mexico has fixed their problems and their people have opportunities on their own side of the border. That is, a day when Mexico is more like Canada and our southern border is more like our northern border.
There’s nothing particularly wrong with that opinion.
This is an utter bullshi- post by a simpleton in Connecticut. Perry’s remarks are taken out of context.
He said, “If” a litany of remedial actions are taken. “If!”
The poster knew full well that this post is a damned lie!
The #1 reason I will never vote for Captain Gardasil.
Ping!
i think its pretty evident here exactly why Perry will be “allowed” to become president this cycle.
The RinoCracy now plans to flush America with Mehico....
An open border means poverty has given way to opportunity, and Mexico’s citizens do not feel compelled to cross the border to find that opportunity.
It means we have addressed pollution concerns, made substantial progress in stopping the spread of disease, and rid our crossings of illicit drug smuggling activity. Clearly we have a long way to go in addressing those issues.
What's wrong with Perry's vision of an open border with Mexico?
What difference is there with his "vision of an open border with Mexico" and what we currently have with Canada?
Your opinion is worth nothing because it is based on the fact that you only read half a sentence or half a paragraph so it based on half information.
You're playing with half a deck!