The Truth and Lies About Perry 's Immigration Views

Technocrati ^ | Oct 16, 2011 | Timothy Bladel

[Clairity]

Perry's opponents have unfairly painted the governor as relaxed on border security, and all too willing to give illegal immigrants a free ride. Presidential politics can be harsh sometimes, and some candidates are all too quick to foster erroneous lies about other candidates in the hope to plant seeds of doubt about how serious Perry is about border security.

The ide Perry is soft on border security is just wrong.

Ramshaw reports In 2005, Perry announced a $10 million state program to boost border patrols and upgrade radio systems along the border, installed hundreds of video cameras, and requested 1,000 National Guard troops along the Texas-Mexico border, but only received 250. In 2009 he supported a since-passed legislation requiring Texans to show a photo identification to vote, and worked to outlaw sanctuary cities.

[bullypulpit]

Good list of "Reasons to Hate Rick Perry" to narrow down. Here are things to consider on each:

1. private property rights: Perry supports private property rights, although his image on this took a beating with the Trans-Texas corridor issue. Perry was being entrepreneurial in his outlook, and ambitious. When he heard the outcry about the TTC land grab, he backed down. (More facts and thoughts on Rick Perry and the Trans-Texas Corridor). Interestingly, those who demean the Perry record on the TTC as being a land grab, are wholeheartedly demanding that Perry confiscate land from property owners to build a continuous border fence across ranches and private property along the Mexico border. (More info on the complexities of building a physical border fence, and Perry's work-around)
2. parental rights: Ah, The Great Gardasil Conspiracy of 2006-07. There are 400 threads on this I am sure. However, Perry also supports parental notification for minors to have abortions. You can't have it both ways. Is he for, or against parental rights? Or is he trying to balance good policy for citizens? I think the latter.
3. encouragement of illegal migration (and yes, he was for sanctuary cities before he was against them)- Not sure about your parenthetical accusation. But, I have looked into the recent sanctuary cities legislative boondoggle here. If Perry is really against it as you say, at least he has two people ahead of him to accept most of the blame, Lt Gov David Dewhurst and Tex House Speaker Strauss ( <-- not a Tea Party fav around here, either).
4. he supports and defends ‘compassionate conservationism’ (I do not want Bush III). Perry's rough edges reveal that he's no Bush. In fact, the Bush gang hates him: From Karl Rove to Dick Morris to Jeb Bush himself. If Dave Carney wins, Karl Rove loses lots of money. Karl Rove is very much against Perry (and behind much of all of this anti-Perry bullsh$t). Trust me, Perry is a straight-shooter "tell you like it is" guy; not a mambly-pambly "compassionate conservative" guy. The first real rift between Perry and the Bushies was over this very issue. Perry wanted to run a very negative campaign ad to guarantee his election as Lt Gov. in 1998. Karl Rove made Perry pull the ad because it would have harmed Bush's image and desire to run later that year as a "compassionate conservative." That is since Bush 41 was on the line to endorse Perry. Perry is an in-the-trenches, hand-to-hand combatant when he needs to be.
5. he did not defend Jan Brewer when he had the opportunity - Perry said the law wasn't right for Texas. And it wasn't. It tied law enforcements' hands, and risked alienating the Hispanic constituency. Without that constituency, it's really hard to win elections in Texas.
   
   Some have assumed that when Perry said that the Arizona law “wasn’t the right direction for Texas,” he was taking a position against strict enforcement of immigration laws. Not so – what he actually said was, “I fully recognize and support a state’s right and obligation to protect its citizens, but I have concerns with portions of the law passed in Arizona and believe it would not be the right direction for Texas.” His concern was related to the portion of the Arizona law that required peace officers to inquire about citizenship status. Perry believes that the best solution is to allow officers the discretion to ask if they deem it necessary to carry out their duty. Here is more on my take of the Az law issue.

Thanks for condensing your objections into an easy to understand list. Whether I change your mind or not, I appreciate your post.

Gig 'Em and vote Rick Perry in 2012!

Joe

[hocndoc]

If we’re being forced, it’s by the State Legislature who twice voted for the measure. This was not an Executive Order or a measure (as when he appropriated funds for Operation Border Star from funds from the Criminal Justice Division, out of the Governor’s office funds, or when he used Department of Homeland Security grants to coordinate Operation Linebacker and Operation Border Star under the Department of Public Safety and the Texas Office of Homeland Security, and making State DPS manpower, autos, helicopters and guns available to apprehend invaders.

Where were your protests in 2001 or 2005, when the Legislature passed this by a nearly unanimous vote?

Did you let your Senator or Rep know that you supported Senator Birdwell’s Bill to over turn this law, this year?

Have you called your Rep and Senator to tell them about your distaste, now?

Do you know who your State Representative and Senator are?

[hocndoc]

That’s because a lot of us gave more than we ever had to a single candidate when we heard that the Governor was running. The maximum donation by Federal Law is $2500 per person.

[lonestar]

Wired...looks like fencing to keep people out. Why didn't they just use radios and cameras?

Really worked didn't it! Couldn't keep an arsonist out.

[SwatTeam]

I agree that community colleges are partially funded by property taxes but your assertions were that every college in Texas
was funded by property taxes. That is not the case. If you live in Austin then maybe you should start going to some city council
meetings and some school board meetings and let them hear from you.

[bullypulpit]

A 2007 legislative study conducted for the Texas Legislature determined that the in-state tuition law was a net money-maker (~$3 million more earned annually, across all schools). The study was undertaken for opponents of the law who wanted to repeal it.

Some subsidy.

No one on this board was screaming about its repeal back then, when it was on the block. They only come out when Karl Rove shouts "go!" on Fox news. (0;

More ammo to argue about Rick Perry's record here.

Gig 'Em and Vote Rick Perry 2012!

[chesty_puller]

"In Texas, our schools are primarily funded by property taxes."

The local schools yes. The State colleges are funded by sales taxes.

[bullypulpit]

I maxed it out, too. That’s what got me ()-;

[John Valentine]

You are wrong about the financing of Texas state colleges. You may well be correct as to community colleges, but not otherwise.

[bullypulpit]

U of Texas and Texas A&M are funded by OIL! Lots of it, out here near Midland.

[RedMDer]

[TexMom7]

That is due to the Federal Government not the State of Texas.

The Federal Government requires Texas and all other states to provide education to illegals.

It’s the law. The State of Texas or any other state has no recourse.

Texas use to charge illegals to educate their children.
We got sued and the Supreme Court sided with the illegals.

The rest is history.

Once the border is secured, these problems will ease.

[CajunConservative]

Rhode Island just passed the same in state tuition law a few weeks ago.

[deport]

they are treated better than US citizens from other states!)

---

If that were true you’d have a valid point.

But in fact the citizens from all the remaining 49 states can move to Texas and establish residency in one year and if they can get accepted into a Texas University/College they get the same instate tution as Texas residents get. In other words that get instate tution status in one year not three that the illegals have to meet.

Now pedal you Santorum bullshit somewhere else.

[steel_resolve]

Spoken like a fool democrat

[hinckley buzzard]

All public schools in every state have to educate illegals not just your state so says the supreme court.

Educating them is one thing. Giving them welfare benefits and in-state tuition is quite another. Nice try, though.

[VRWC For Truth]

Perry is a Hispanderer and the Perrywinkles like cheap labor and cheap tarts. Just admit Perry’s sins and get over it.

[TexMom7]

They cannot be denied access to a college.
According to the Federal law.

The in-state tuition is paid by the Adult child of an illegal if they have lived in Texas at least 3 years, graduated and have the grades to be accepted.
Most have been here most of their lives.

Just like all other Texas students. Military who are stationed in Texas. All legal immigrants. And students living in neighboring counties in Okla, Louisiana and New Mexico.

[TexMom7]

No their not.

The local school district in which you live is supported by your property taxes. Public Schools. K-12

[TexMom7]

Marie

Texas colleges are not funded by property taxes.

Only your local school district is funded by your property taxes.