Posted on 09/13/2011 1:53:07 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
TAMPA, FL -- The morning after a sometimes-rocky appearance in front of a Tea Party debate audience, Gov. Rick Perry said he was "taken aback" by cheers from some crowd members on a hypothetical question of whether a young man who decides not to buy health insurance should be refused care if he develops a life-threatening illness and be left to die.
"I was a bit taken aback by that myself," Perry told NBC News and the Miami Herald after appearing at a breakfast fundraiser in Tampa.
"We're the party of life. We ought to be coming up with ways to save lives."
Perry distinguished from that the issue of "justice," reiterating his strong support and "respect" for the death penalty on a state-by-state basis. "But the Republican party ought to be about life and protecting, particularly, innocent life," he added.
Perry also responded to the crowd's negative reaction to his support for allowing in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, saying his campaign has "the right message" on opportunities for children who were brought to the United States illegally "by no fault of their own."
"This issue is about education, it's not about immigration," he said.
"These kids showed up in our state by no fault of their own, some 2-3 years of age. And they've been in our schools, they've done their work, they've prepared themselves good, they want to be contributing members of society. So it would be I think the wrong message to say somehow or another that you can't go to our colleges, or we've going to punish you because of the sound of your last name."
"When people really think about it, I think they'll understand what we did in Texas was the right thing for Texas," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at firstread.msnbc.msn.com ...
Yep. Illegal means illegal. He also needs to stop with the pro life bit when he allows executions. I am for capital punishment, I just think he looks bad saying he is pro life and that is why he supported gardasil, yet he supports the death penalty. For me that is a minor irritant when compared to his pandering to the illegals. He made a big tadoo about the feds not helping with the border. I have a sinking feeling that he wouldn’t deport illegals even if the feds helped him to do it, that he would come up with some excuse not to deport them.
He isn’t getting my vote. He tried to make it about race instead of rule of law when he said it was because of their ‘last names’. He can stick it!
There is a place for compassion but it is not via the force of government arms. Compassion belongs to individuals and their voluntary associations. There is no such thing as a compassionate government.
You would force all of the rest of us to support your compassion. How do you reconcile such a thing? You would cause the IRS to seize my personal property in order to help those you believe should be shown compassion.
There is nothing to stop you from spending ALL of your wealth to help someone. You even said you would risk your life so what is spending all you have compared to that? So go ahead and have at it but DO NOT force the rest of us to go along with it.
You mention if people do not pay they should get help but less than those who pay. I am curious where does your compassion end? After you have the government take our money to pay for getting the dying man off the street, will you also have us pay for his kidney transplant? You wouldn’t pay for it personally would you? Even though you would die helping him from getting run over buy a bus.
Good question, but let me ask you this, would the people against in-state tuition be happy if these kids were charge out of state tuition? If the answer is no, they want the families deported, then I would have a problem with deporting the young adult children. If the answer is YES, I would be happy if only the children paid out of state tuition. I could appreciate this position but this minuet difference of in-state vs. out of state tuition doesn't seem worthy of presidential debate.
So the real issue is, as you elluded too, are we going to give these children a path to citizenship. Here is where I am not so sure. My position was to deport but now I am not so sure.
Those were Ron Paul’s people. Did you see how many Paul signs were shown at the remote locations?
Sorry mac, a man who is a hedonist, and thinks only of himself until he gets a terminal illness, is NOT an innocent life.
Goes double for perverts.
This is the Dream Act, a rolling amnesty that would give up to 3 million legal status and eventual citizenship. And once they reach age 21 they can sponsor their siblings parents, cousins, uncles, aunts, etc. to enter the US thru chain migration, i.e., family reunification.
And where is the fairness to those "kids" who don't want to go to college? Shouldn't we be willing to help them so that they "can be productive members of our society?" We need electricians, carpenters, lawn maintenance personnel, etc. If you are going to be generous with other people's money, let's help them all.
Playing the race card, albeit obliquely, is so lame.
I don't care what his last name sounds like, he is not entitled to the benefits of citizenship.
If he/she/it has caught the "American Spirit," he can dispense with the aztlan BS, diligently work to become a regularized immigrant, and then claim the rewards of citizenship.
Perry can run for office in Mexico,
No chance in hell that I would ever vote for him.
Public announcement : I will vote for a third party candidate or write-in candidate over Perry in a second. If that allows the great Bulls****er to win reelelection, I did not force it. Business-as-usual Republicans did.
A rejoinder to Blitzer would be, “Who pays for the medical costs associated with the 12 to 20 million illegal aliens in this country?”
There are 60 million people on Medicaid, including the children in the CHIPS program. And there are 12 to 20 million illegals who use our ERs as free medical clinics. I guess Blitzer is more concerned about a few working American citizens getting on the socialist gravy train. We need more Americans paying so we can expand the freebies to others.
Easy solution, as I learned 30 years ago from one of the homeless town drunks. Every October he’d throw a brick through a jewelry store window and wait patiently until the police arrived to take him to jail. By spring he’d received better medical and dental than most Americans and he was out for the summer, all fixed up and rearing for six good months of Wild Irish Rose binges.
A false dichotomy and a stupid question.
Not all persons lying on the street are victims.
I can think of cases when I would choose one or the other without a second thought.
That's where real human beings are at their best. Not with slogans or bleeding hearts, but with rational thinking and a sense of judgement.
When I ran a Psych office and someone didn’t have health insurance, we sent them down to St. Vincent’s Charity Hospital.
Note, St. Vincent (Catholic) charity (free).
Churches will step in where Government fails.
Right on...I think the cheering was because the guy made a decision and they don’t want to pay for his foolishness...There use to be charity hospitals for such people run by the religious community’s...
I wonder if they were Democrats there under false pretenses.
That is a straw dog answer...Its not only mexicans crossing the border...it is middle eastern men and asians. Any one with the money to pay will be taken across the border and dropped in America..the governor made a big boo boo with that bigot remark...but to him it sure sounded good...if one doesn't think...
Ricardo Perry is so out of touch with the Tea Party!
Hospitals that accept federal funding have to accept the uninsured. Those that don’t can refuse them and send the ambulance somewhere else.
My problem with this hypothetical is that it’s a phoney-baloney straw man. It’s meant to shame the conservative movement. Like some else posted above: the Left is already busy turning this into a campaign ad.
Therein is the rub, and a profound irony.
Why should the people bend to the rule of men? Elected or not. And we're talking defective men; often very defective men.
If exactly half those asked answer one way and the other half the opposite? what prevails?
There is a profound, and often disturbing difference between what is legal, and what is just.
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.