Posted on 08/11/2011 8:01:20 PM PDT by Clairity
The "trolling" meme is almost as bad as the "Nazi" meme. Get a grip. Presumably, the point of posting a large amount of "information" is to inform. As obvious, such informtion, posted anonymously on the internet, is worthless without sourcing. Are suggesting one should accept whatever one comes across on the internet as fact? If someone can take the time to compile a collection of facts, they can source them.
I'm a busy man trying to do my best. If shrill reprisals are the best one can do to answer genuine requests for sourcing, it tells me my skepticism is warranted.
I am correct. There is no argument on the point.
Somewhere, you’ve got the source of those notes. When you post notes that are so obviously cut-and-paste (not to mention spammed on so many threads), you really should give the sources.
Nevertheless, the American Spectator does believe the Governor would be strict on illegal aliens and enforce the border. So do I.
Perry is for border control:
Since Perry is a former Air Force pilot, a rancher’s son, staunchly prolife and against the homosexual agenda, he changed parties, when most of Texans did.
Perry has always advocated for “boots on the ground” at the border, but has been unable to get the Feds to send the manpower. He’s advocated for letting the military practice the use of unmanned Predator aircraft along our border (they’ve gotta practice somewhere” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEHDDktDn8o )
There are National Guard troops on the Border. Perry has repeatedly asked for more and recently won approval for the 1200 (we only got about 250) that have been deployed to stay longer.
from a year ago: http://www.texastribune.org/texas-mexico-border-news/texas-mexico-border/national-guard-arrives-in-texas-aug-1/
The result of the Governor alerting the Texas Republican Congressman about Obama’s plan to remove the National Guard after less than 6 months: http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/2010/11/texas-republicans-protest-plan-move-national-guard-troops-border
News from last month about the extension: http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2011/06/president-obama-extends-national-guard-deployments-in-texas/
More, here http://www.freerepublic.com/%5Ehttp://wingright.org/2011/08/06/perry-palin-fish-or-cut-bait/
Apologies for typos. It’s late, and I’ve imbibed my share of wine this evening. Just a reminder—presumably we’re allies. Freegards.
I don’t mean the internet in general for the specific purpose of my argument (although that occurs as well), I’m talking about specifically this website. I’m well reminded back during the last Presidential cycle when this website was infested to the core with Slick Willard groupies and agents. We’d go over the same arguments ad infinitum, and after all the sources/links, et al, were cited chapter and verse, they’d chime in again with “SOURCE ?!?!?” It was tiring and absurd.
Folks want to know the facts about Perry’s record, check the current thread or all the other previous threads discussing him. Now, if there’s a NEW point about Perry (or rumor), it’s valid to ask, but not on these same issues about open borders, TTC, Gardasil, etc. I receive info on Perry more and more now and I’ve got to be careful what claims I publicly make, so I stick to criticisms of his PUBLIC record. One tip as of late would be enough to destroy his candidacy in one fell blow, but I won’t repeat it because I don’t have verifiable evidence to confirm it and won’t risk damaging my well-earned reputation here.
And here are more canned talking points and unfounded speculation that Perry will somehow discover and enact Conservative positions in DC that have eluded him for decades in Austin. Sorry, Hoss, no sale.
My point stands: If you are going to post a crapload of "information" onto a thread, include a source, or else it's worthless. If the informer is truly better informed, and if the goal is to inform the uninformed, source your information. I'm not going to simply accept whatever someone posts, especially in a domain (politics) where disinformation is a commonplace. I can't possibly see how that is an out of line request.
Those links in #22 are not “canned talking points and unfounded speculation.”
They’re real-time MSM coverage of the proof of Governor Perry’s and Texas’ fight to control the Texas border.
No one who wasn’t a commie rat, RINO loser, or kook has ever run against him, that’s why he’s still Governor.
No, I’m not expecting that of every FReeper. I am, however, expecting of those actively participating in these discussion threads to have some basic knowledge about the candidate they are cheering on. Unfortunately, those that seem the most aggressive in promoting candidates who are anything but favorable to the Conservative cause are often those with little stake in changing the status quo. Lots of paid trolls and agents infest the internetland, and as soon as their cause is over, they just as quickly disappear into the ether. I remember all the Ah-nold pimps from 8 years ago lying about how he was going to “Save Cullyforneeah” despite evidence to the contrary, and the personal attacks that I and others endured, nevermind we were proven right, and all those punks nearly vanishing to the last after their boss/savior, whichever, got in.
My point is that for those of us who have been here a long time and have established reputations for knowing about what we speak, we are given deference — unless something is clearly and demonstrably false (i.e. stating a factual error: such as “Rick Perry served as the Democrat Lieutenant Governor of Texas from 1987-2001”, when in actuality he was a Republican as Lt Governor from 1999-2001). I wouldn’t then demand, “Prove that, show me your sources !” from someone else when I can easily verify the error. That’s the difference between respected posters and n00bs/retreads or sleeper trolls posting disinformation.
What proof ? Illegals and the border is my #1 issue. If Perry were doing anything of substance about it, he’d have my support. He does not. An open borders “FReeper” the other night stated as much. To do something might “offend” illegals and we can’t have that !
He sent Rangers (one riot, one Ranger), helicopters, Texas Guardsmen. He demanded and got National Guard and two unmanned drones. He got the National Guard deployment extended beyond the original 6 months.
Unfortunately, Texas only got 1/4 of the Guardsmen and 2/8 of the drones.
Texas (with our costs from the ICE detention center detainees being dumped in the State by Homeland security, support of Katrina refugees, our natural disasters like Ike, wildfires, and tornados) is expected to pay for our own Guard if we want them here after September.
His policy has been virtually identical to Dubya’s from the get-go. Shameful pandering and nothing done to truly address the problem. Blaming the Feds is one thing, but Perry has NEVER been known for taking a strong approach against illegals or sanctuary policies. Of course he’ll claim otherwise because he’s running for President. They always get religion when they’re running, too bad they don’t find it long before.
I'm old enough to remember the 1960 election, Nixon vs. Kennedy (stolen by phantom voters in Chicago and other places, btw, but the statute of limitations has long since expired and most if not all the miscreants are dead and buried along with their confessions).
To many Protestants, Kennedy's Catholicism was of great concern. It was believed by some--and possibly many even today--that once elected, the Pope would have JFK's ear as much as or more than the American people who elected him. This was a fear which came naturally to a segment of the American people in the '50s after having been through the agony of World War II, revelations of communist infiltration during the McCarthy era and "duck and cover" exercises accompanying the nuclear arms race which evolved into what we now call the Cold War. Suspicion of treasonous activities ran high all through that era.
Turned out, Kennedy wasn't that strong a Catholic after all. He only visited the Pope, at the Vatican, on one occasion, in July 1963--four months before his assassination in Dallas. Satellite communications were not yet perfected, but it's possible JFK talked with the Pope every day by phone via trans-Atlantic cable. Not very likely, though. (One recent president did talk daily with a well-known evangelical minister. That's a matter of record.)
By contrast, G. W. Bush met with the Pope six times during his presidency, Bill Clinton three and Richard Nixon twice. As far as I know, none of them were Catholics. These could best be called courtesy visits, out of respect for the head of one of the world's largest religious bodies.
I never heard any calls for impeachment as a result of these meetings between the President and the Pope. No promises were made; no money changed hands; no holy wars were started and no one was converted to Roman Catholicism as a result, we can assume.
What Gov. Perry said in his debate with Sen. Hutchison, however, begs for further explanation. Is it "faith" that requires him to "support" Israel or perhaps a political sense that it's what his Texas constituents expect?
Let's hope and pray it's the latter. We don't need another Jimmah Carter in the White House.
Those news reports are real time - there’s tons of information from years ago that make your claim that Perry
“has NEVER been known for taking a strong approach against illegals” a lie.
Texas has spent $200 million a year on illegal aliens that the feds bring here. We’ve spent $79 million of our own funds on troops, helicopters. http://www.texastribune.org/texas-legislature/82nd-legislative-session/texas-senate-to-the-feds-pay-for-border-security/
The Legislature refused to fund his virtual border, so he used money from the Governor’s discretionary fund. The local sheriff and cities refused to cooperate. http://www.texastribune.org/texas-mexico-border-news/border-cameras/about/
Here’s an article from Jan of this year showing resistance from border Sheriff Wiles.
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2011/01/13/sheriff-safest-city-says-took-years-gaining-trust-immigrants/
Wish we could get all that on a tee shirt.
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.