Perry is NOT real bright.
That works for me.
This is EXACTLY why Jim opened his living room up for us ... to talk and bandy about ideas.
Yours sounds good and worthy of thought and discussion.
,,,,,,, lost my potential vote on his immigration beliefs and policies .
I’d permanently BAR a person who was caught in the country illegally from EVER voting or obtaining citizenship. Their ceiling is lawful permanent residence.
Perry could survive depite these issues. His inability to handle the issues and then turn to name calling is what is killing it. He is letting two minor issues....a ten year old popular bill on education and the guarasil issue...dominate these debates and cause severe damage. The tx dream act had near universal support among all electedofficals because it is constructed in a whole different way than the current liberal bills of a similar name. He has bumbled and fumbles the issue to the point of
Iterally insluting those who disagree. We need a skilled campaigner to take on the media and Obama, and he has fallen very, very short on that requirement. He can turn it around, but even a lot of people like me that WANTED to get behind Perry are pretty skeptical that he can perform effectively under fire.
The right to vote is certainly not the illegals’ main incentive for coming and staying here. Democrats are patient and, even if they weren’t, I don’t see how delaying the right to vote after providing amnesty and citizenship should affect the question of subsidizing illegals’ college educations.
(BTW, given the reality of affirmative action, they already are moved to the head of the line in admission before white and Asian citizens and other legal residents, before you even start talking about the competition for state subsidies.)
That is completely wrong for all those immigrants who came here legally, jumped through the hoops, earned their own way and finally became citizens.
Here’s another point: Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but the TX Dream Act is in direct violation of federal law. Perry apparently thinks he can decide which federal laws he cares to uphold. Speaking for myself, I’ve had a bellyful of that attitude with the current admin.
Would require an amendment, not a law. Violates the 14th amendment.
The franchise should be limited to honorably discharged veterans instead of anyone who is 18 years old and has a body temperature near 37 C.
While I’m not with Perry or my state on the issue of illegal in-state tuition, I think Perry failed to make a point on that, too.
The children of illegals have to have been going attending and graduated Texas schools for at least three years. Yes, he mentioned that but....
Being in Texas schools for three years would mean that the students family has been shopping and living in Texas, paying sales tax and property tax— even as a renter property tax shows up in your rent. Anyhow, the student would have had family paying taxes to Texas in varied ways.
That is something that students that are from out of state would not have been doing. Perry has not pointed that out.
Interesting idea which I have not heard before. Maybe 18 years would be the easiest to argue because if you are born here you are here 18 years before you can vote, thus it makes sense. It does take that unspoken but central issue out of the argument.
It inspired me to look up the history of US voting rights.
Ultimately, I think the right to vote should be earned (even by citizens) by showing some basic level of personal responsibility. If you act irresponsibly you don't get to participate in the important decisions.
Then we need to keep the pols from changing the rules for their own personal gain. Your idea seems like a solution. Term limits would solve this problem, and others too.
While I felt that slap of Governor Perry’s words, I do appreciate the up front manner in which he made NO bones about who he serves first. At least he did NOT pitch his campaign theme in sheep’s clothing of compassion. Perry for president is NOT the same office as Perry for Governor of Texas, which I can only ‘guess’ he will attempt to redress in the next ‘debate’.