Posted on 09/24/2011 10:20:19 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Last week you posted an article by Ruben Navarette, a La Raza supporter, to bolster your support of Perry.
Now you are posting articles by MSNBC.
What’s next, an article by La Raza itself???
“I think he’d be willing to work with conservatives on that.”
Over the course of two debates now he has pretty much called us heartless racists. I don’t think he’d work with us anymore than Bush worked with those “Vigilantes.”
Must be a club full of RINOs and morons. Perry, Romney and Hunstman are RINOs. Cain worked for the Federal Reserve which is worse than Goldman Sachs. Sadly most Americans are clueless about The Fed.
In what was among the worst moments of the Orlando GOP debate, former Sen. Rick Santorum said the following on the subject of the end of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
“I would say, any type of sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military and the fact that they’re making a point to include it as a provision, within the military, that we are going to recognize a group of people and give them a special privilege, and remove Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell tries to inject social policy into the military. The military’s job is to do one thing and that is to defend our country. We need to give the military, which is all volunteer, the ability to do so in a way that is most effective in protecting our men and women in uniform and I believe this undermines that ability.”
This wasn’t a misstatement on Santorum’s part. In the re-direct from Megyn Kelly on what a President Santorum would do, he doubled down.
“We would move forward in conformity with what was happening in the past. Which was, sex is not an issue. It should not be an issue, leave it alone, keep it to yourself whether you’re heterosexual or homosexual.”
The derp is strong with this one. Does Rick Santorum not know that there are thousands upon thousands of military members who are married? That that has been the case, well, pretty much forever. Santorum’s policy as described would ban military members from being married, at all, to anyone. No families, no kids, no way. Because once you get married, you’re not keeping things to yourself. You’re out of the closet as a flaming heterosexual, at least. Santorum’s answer here is obviously very poorly thought through.
Should the children of illegal aliens be given preferential treatment over legal American citizens, by being allowed to pay lower tuition?
No. But the voters of 12 states including Texas have decided that illegal alien residents should be given the exact same treatment as every other resident of said state. A group opposed to the California law filed suit and lost in every single court on the way to the Supreme Court. In 2011, the Supreme Court refused to even hear the case.
Do you think people who oppose this are “heartless?”
That's not a word I would use. I suspect most are cynical opportunists, some are downright liars. States can not get rid of illegals. Only the feds can do that. Courts have repeatedly ruled that all states must educate the children who live in them through high school. If a state wants to treat the same way as other residents, illegals who have lived there for years and completed high school there and been accepted to a state college, so be it.
You say that you think children of illegal aliens should NOT be given preferential treatment over legal American citizens, by being allowed to pay lower tuition.
I agree.
Perry does not. He defends it, and goes so far as to call you and me “heartless.”
Unless you are heartless, (I know I’m not, and I very much resent this liberal “guilt trip” tactic), Perry is wrong on both counts.
Perry is DEAD WRONG on this.
“...it was a mistake to underestimate G.W. Bush”
You’re right. He way WAY WEAKER on immigration than conservatives wanted. We underestimated that.
I think you have a reading comprehension problem. I support Perry and think you are wrong here.
You say that you think children of illegal aliens should NOT be given preferential treatment over legal American citizens, by being allowed to pay lower tuition.
Perry disagrees with you and calls you heartless.
Have a nice day.
No sir, I said they should be treated exactly the same as any other state resident until such time as the federal government decides to get serious about the problem. How do you call this special treatment?
“Real conservatives?” Who? The only one that had any kind of numbers before Perry’s entry was Bachmann, and her decline was self-produced. 1 percenters like Cain and Santorum will remain there no matter who is in the race.
You be correct, penny stock category.
It's not the media - it's the old money Republicans. It's Romney's turn. In 2016, it will be Jeb's turn.
Bush didn't show his hand on his intentions for immigration policy until the 2000 South Carolina primary results were in and he had the nomination sewed up.
Then he asserted, disingenuously, that the GOP voters had "mandated" a mi casa, su casa immigration policy as part of their "kinder, gentler" view of illegal aliens.
Which was complete bull hockey, they'd mandated nothing of the sort.
"How could you be so Dr. Evil?
You're bringin' out a side of me that I don't know
When did Texas voters pass anything giving illegals that sort of status before the law? They have no status before the law except illegal alien, and future deportee.
Our founding fathers did not want us to be trapped in voting blocs yet that’s exactly where we are. The media has selected the candidates we can “safely support” by telling us who is electable and who doesn’t have a chance.
It’s a circular argument since the candidate who doesn’t stand a chance is only in that position if we don’t support them. Makes me dizzy to think of it.
Bottom line, the self-appointed experts and manipulating media have already excluded Cain. You’re either in the Romney or Perry voting block or you’re wasting your vote.
Sadly I don’t think I can change the world but I think I have to go for Cain as things stand now because he says the things I believe in and because I don’t like being manipulated.
Voters didn't - the Supreme Court did. Texas started charging them extra money back in the 70s. But then..
A U.S. District Court judge issued a preliminary injunction requiring Tyler, Texas to admit all students and required the state education board to release funds to the Tyler school district for all students. In 1978, that judge found both the state law and Tyler's policy unconstitutional, holding that they violated the 14th amendment's equal protection clause. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the decision. The Plyler case and a similar one from Houston ended up in the U.S. Supreme Court.
In 1982, the Supreme Court affirmed the lower court decision that all students must be allowed to attend school.
Illegal immigrants entering Texas’ higher education system are direct beneficiaries of the 1982 Supreme Court decision, Plyler vs. Doe. Parents in Tyler sued after the state began charging tuition for illegal immigrant children. The court ruled that Texas and the rest of the country must educate illegal immigrant children free of charge in public schools.
In 2001, the Texas Legislature passed the law to give in-state college tuition to illegals. To qualify the student must have been a resident of Texas for the prior 3 years, have graduated a Texas high school, have been accepted to a Texas University, and must sign a pledge to become a citizen.
Florida CPAC straw poll came through just as you said.
Just kidding.
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.