“For some reason, the writer fails to mention that Rick Perry signed legislation to grant Illegal Aliens In-State Tuition to Texas Colleges and Universities.”
THAT’S ALL YA GOT? AW YOU GOTTA DO BETTER THAN THAT, SONNY...
‘let not the perfect be the enemy of the ‘git ‘er done’ hahahaah
Ping to my last.
Loss of control of Texas, and eventually the politics of the nation, to bloc-voting Mexican hordes led by irridentist politicians whose ideas of leadership were molded by Santa Anna and Pancho Villa, would be an absolute disaster to the folks we used lightly to call the People of the United States.
Perry's observed Texas OBL politics to date, if elevated to national office, would prolong the open-borders policies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama and result in both reproletarization of the American people and, eventually, civil war.
You won't be laughing when you realize that "bracero-to-votero" shamnesty now embraced by Perry (and others) will guarantee that the next dozen Presidents will be left-wing Democrats.
For one I have to question his core values. This week he vetoed a law making texting while drive illegal calling such a law government intrusion. Yet several years ago he was hell bent to shoot up every sub-teen girl in Texas with Gardasil.
For long watching Texans we've noticed how "conservative" he gets around an election and just as soon as it's over, well, he's that dim that supported Al Gore.
“THAT’S ALL YA GOT!!?”
See previous thread where Gov. Perry refused to support an anti-sanctuary city bill along with some of his rich pals. Big break for illegals. Worth looking into.
“A buck’s a buck, even when it turns into a peso.”
Perry should be considered among those who are acceptable as candidates. He is pro-life, pro-God, pro-guns, pro-family, pro-marriage, pro-fiscal responsibility, and pro-free market.
There are some problems with Perry in some immigration positions he has taken. Some take issue with his state-run, opt-outable immunization for some STD or another. Some don’t like his support of the free trade agreement as evidenced in his support the trans-texas corridor.
To me, the question is whether I want Perry with his positives or Romney with his negatives. Perry’s positives far out-weigh Romney’s positives. And Romney’s negatives are much worse than Perry’s negatives.
Anyone who can count electoral votes based on the patterns of recent history knows that Perry begins with huge Texas and in all likelihood runs the south, most of the southwest, and a fair part of the midwest.
In other words, Perry is extremely viable as a winner.
While Palin remains my #1 choice, as each day passes I do not see her doing the things to get into the race. She has been terribly vilified, and it’s possible she either doesn’t want to go through that again, or she has polling data that says it’s too hard to reverse the damage in the time she has til the election.