Rick Perry Is the New Chuck Norris - "Gun control is hitting what you aim at"

National Journal ^ | September 15, 2011 | Elspeth Reeve

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Want proof? Here's a video Perry made for the National Rifle Association's convention in April. It opens with a bunch of old guys in t-shirts shooting big guns at stationary targets while the camera shakes to boost the suspense. Then the video cuts to a guy in a black polo shooting stuff -- it's Rick Perry!

[Arrowhead1952]

LeRue Tactical is in Leander? I guess I need to check them out when I have time. That is less than 25 miles from home!

[green iguana]

Thank you for the insightful reply.

WRT Perry, one of the predominant complaints that many here in Texas who are notoriously hard to please have about him is exactly what you ask - that he veers right at election time then veers back towards the center after he wins.

I have not noticed that. I think it’s just that a lot more policy items come up during the 3 1/2 years of governing than are spoken about in the 1/2 year of campaigning for Governor. Some of those items the notoriously hard to please disagree with strongly, and those items are what these folk remember.

I don’t agree with Perry on a number of things, but I do find him consistent and conservative, overall.

[shield]

Perry Ping....

IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.

IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.

[milagro]

ROTFLMAO!!!

[Grunthor]

Like Pavlovs’ pooches they will come slobbering....I haven’t even read the thread yet. Call it intuition.

[Grunthor]

Out of Huckabee, Romney or McCain.....it’s a wash.

[TexanByBirth]

And “Where are you AT” makes me want to scream!

When someone asks me "where are you at" my standard response is "between the A and the T."

[milagro]

And Perry knows that while it seems to be "gospel" to the MSM and many political pundits, supporting amnesty would NOT automatically garner the Hispanic vote. There are just too MANY Hispanic U.S. citizens who deeply resent and oppose the idea of handing out the privileges of citizenship to those who think they can go around the laws to get them.

But Perry is also well aware that strident anti-illegal immigration rhetoric will also be resented--and opposed--by many Hispanic voters, because ethnicity can be seen as the focus, instead of illegality. And THAT is why he has to be slow and deliberate when he takes aim at the issue of illegal immigration, and not end up shooting himself in the foot during his "race to the White House".

[ZULU]

Good points. Before dealing with illegals here, the border must be secured FIRST. AFTERWARDS, we have to deal with the fact that there are over 10 million illegals here already. Had we followed the rules set down under the Reagan administration under HIS amnesty, they wouldn't be here in the first place. That means we also need a get tough policy with new illegals AND THOSE WHO HIRE THEM. And we need to do something with the situation about allowing someone who is just BORN here to have automatic citizenship rights. AT THE SAME TIME, as for the 10 million already here, many of whom have established families and are otherwise decent citizens, we need to set up a path to citizenship. We can't just deport more than 10 Million people. To kick out kids who have grown up here, speaking English and thinking of themselves as Americans, to another cultural world, would simply be inhumane, cruel and un-American. I think most Americans remember Elian Gonzales as I do - the entire episode was something out of a socialist fascist state. We don't want that on a massive scale. THAT subset of illegals here who are criminals need to be deported. If somebody is found guilty of a felony, they should be deported automatically. No crap about immigration appeals.

[milagro]

I totally agree with you! And I think Perry has the best chance of beating Obama, and--more importantly--steering our great "ship of state" away from the "iceberg" the Left seems so hell-bent on sending it into.

And thanks for sharing your thoughts: they are well-reasoned and refreshingly sane!

[Ro_Thunder]

I’m trying to retrain myself to ask “What is the time?” rather than “What time is it?”.

It’s slow going, but I’m making some progress!

[milagro]

Re: "...steering our great 'ship of state' away from the 'iceberg' the Left seems so hell-bent on sending it into."

OOPS! Grammatical correctness would require me to rephrase that:

"...steering our great 'ship of state' away from the 'iceberg' INTO which the Left seems so hell-bent on sending it."

But that just sounds weird! And Strunk and White's ELEMENTS OF STYLE--my "bible" for grammar and proper wording of phrases--prepositional and otherwise--would probably agree.

[gogogodzilla]

What? In 2004?

How about this, since the thrust of the argument is that Perry should have predicted the financial crisis of 2008 as much as you should have... why didn’t you do anything to let the Texas Republican party know about the upcoming disaster?

Why did you keep your mouth shut about this? How many Americans did you callously leave open to losing their retirements? By staying quiet, you let the collapse happen... which let Obama into power.

---

Not so much fun is it when the logic of the argument is pointed at you...

[gogogodzilla]

The answer is very simple. Self-deportation.

Remove illegals access to the free government bennies that make America more beneficial to live in as opposed to their home country. So no bilingual education for their children, no Medicare/Medicaid, no welfare, no low-income housing, etc, etc, etc.

And they will buy their own bus/train/plane/boat tickets home. Those that stay are here to make a better life for themselves and their children. They are the one’s working and contributing to America. And they are the one’s we want to keep.

[LomanBill]

>>What? In 2004?

That’s right genius.

2004 — 3 years AFTER the Obama National Finance Chairwoman Penny Pritzker’s Chicago Family-owned bank went bankrupt from doing Sub-prime loans in 2001.

So much for Fithcal Conthervatism.

[ladyjane]

If he comes out and says he will secure our borders and deport the ILLEGALS then maybe I will vote for him.

Otherwise no deal.

[FlyingEagle]

Not hitting what I aim at is a result up with which I shall not put.
vs
I won’t put up with not hitting what I aim at.

How’s that for construction? English is difficult; it’s easier in Texan.

[inthaihill]

Absolutely LOVE IT!!

Better than an OKIE . . . Hitting not the target for I have exhausted putting up with that which I shan’t. No, that’s not Okie!

Yours I will instead use.

[gogogodzilla]

Well, then... he’s halfway towards getting your support. As he has long called for securing the border with more surveillance plus the needed boots on the ground to actually intercept the illegals.

He hasn’t come out yet in favor of deportation. Something I don’t support as that’ll cost a ton of Federal dollars. The post you replied to has my view on what to do. Get the illegals to deport *THEMSELVES*.

Not keep the bennies in place that attract ‘em, then pay to deport them. For they’ll just try again.