Posted on 09/25/2011 10:11:11 AM PDT by Eva
Eva, I think you fail to recognize that Gov. Perry is running for the office of the President of the United States, the top federal government, Executive Branch, job. If he succeeds, it will fall under his purview to "deport the illegals and if the federal government refuses to do its job, those illegals are here to stay."
As such, there are legitimate concerns about someone who, once elected, may take the same position as the last Texas President, and blow off the concerns of American Citizens when he was confronted about illegal immigration.
President Bush made a lot of his supporters (including me) very unhappy when he suggested they were racist and uncaring concerning the issue, and that "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" would be passed regardless of their objections.
And now, another Texas Governor has, while running, made similar comments, and has apparently (so far) no intention of walking back those comments.
Perry is still on my list of possibilities, but let's be realistic, he is sending verbal messages that don't sit well with many Conservatives, especially since they've already been there, seen that.
Time will tell whether he will survive the Primaries following such comments. He, his staff, and his committed supporters should take the situation seriously, not blow off those who voice concern/opposition.
That's how your comment is going down. That's why you can't win the point.
Texas was already a magnet. Adding a cheap college education to the pie didn't make it less of a magnet.
It's now time to cut all of this stuff off.
That means it doesn't matter who we got as President all we need is Congress!
The only illegals that will EVER get deported are ones that commit crimes within the United States. There is no candidate that is going to endorse wholesale deportation of illegal aliens from the United States. Ever.
Politicians who want to win will promise to get rid of the illegals. I expect some of the Democrat Senators (there are 23 of them up for election this next year) to make that very promise ~ just so they can win.
Currently Republican candidates unwilling to take a stand against the illegals are finding themselves dumped like yesterday's garbage.
I read this argument regularly. Would like your comments on:
1. As I understand it (from reading many posts - including yours), the illegals seeking instate tuition already have High School Diplomas. They are a very small number of individuals, and if not given the tuition, they might turn to crime, etc. In other words, they will be HS graduates turning to crime because they cannot get a higher education at an instate rate.
Yet, surely there are an equivalent number of Texas residents (not illegals who are being called residents) who also have High School Diplomas and many will not even seek to go to college. So they will not receive a higher education either. What equivalent incentive should they receive for not "turning to crime" because they lack a higher education?
2. Also, from what I've read, the instate, or out-of-state tuitions are a significant amount of money. And the illegal parents have been living in Texas for many years while their children became educated in K-12. Based on what I read, I must assume that their parents have saved up enough money to pay for either the in/out of state tuition (or they are getting grants/student loans/scholarships).
Taking the money they've presumably saved over the years, and their children, back to Mexico should allow them to get a good start back in their native country, and higher-educate their children there (especially with the cost of living differences).
3. I've also read that living in the US is the "only life they've known", and that's why they can't go back to Mexico. These statements tend to send the message that nobody in their family knows anybody/has any relatives in Mexico. I find it hard to believe that could be the case for every one of these families.
Politicians who want to win will promise to get rid of the illegals.
Of the current candidates, are there any that meet this criteria? Non-candidates?
I agree, and would only change it to "hire/and fire (when needed) anyone ...".
Cain.
Actually, what we need is both, but each is capable of acting somewhat independently, the Congress through the States and the organized militia and the President through border "enforcement" agencies. Given the near-total lack of the latter I see minimal potential for conflict, but it certainly would make for interesting news stories! Congress even has the power to preclude the Federal courts from putting a halt to it.
Here’s his immigration position from his website. How is it any different than anyone else?
“We must secure our borders, enforce our laws and promote the existing path to citizenship. Protecting our nation’s sovereignty should be a paramount concern of those elected to lead us, not an afterthought or a reaction once the problem becomes even worse. Further, taking a stand on the issue does not mean one lacks compassion, but instead, that one respects the rule of law and the importance of not becoming a lawless nation.”
As Texas has demonstrated if you give the enemy a wedge issue they'll pry it open to make sure the illegals get additional subsidies from the government.
Has it ever been done before in the US?
In the ancient past it happened, but the operation name is enough to get you ran out of town if you say it anymore.
We’re going to see another Reagan-style amnesty soon...I hope a Republican Senate and Congress can do something to give border security some teeth or we’ll be back at this point again in another 25 years.
Ah, but per our conversation from before, he is NOT saying he is for deportation or anything similar. His position is essentially the same as the other candidates.
It’s okay. “Deport them all” = “Another Obama Term.”
So, with Conservatives the secret word is "enforce".
I’m saying that the media and the left throw out this 12 million and I said at least 30 million illegals!
Perry follows in the footsteps of Bush. He is an amnesty supporter and delusional in thinking he can win the Hispanic vote. We don’t need another Bush in the WH.
signed: Heartless in Virginia
With our new leader, Cain, we are probably not going to be going after him hammer and tong ~ we already know most of what he stands for.
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.