Maybe but how many of his hard core base did he lose with his last debate and especially a very clear stand against a border fence and for amnesty? .... ExSoldier
First of all, Perry did not say anything about "amnesty". That is just a falsehood.
Secondly, funding allows commercials that allow complex issues to be explained outside these silly "30 Second Sound Bite" Contests that pass for "debates" in these days when "Where's the beef?" is considered a great moment in Presidential "debates".
Back in the days of the Lincoln-Douglas Debates, the first candidate spoke for 60 minutes, the second spoke for 90 minutes and then the first candidate spoke again for 30 minutes. Americans back then may their decision based on the full extent of information.
Today, far too many Americans make their decision by reacting to silly Sound Bites made during 30 second responses.
Fence = Good
"No Fence in the middle of the desert" = "He supports illegal immigration"
The fact of the matter is THE FENCE STRATEGY ADVOCATED BY PERRY IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE FENCE STRATEGY USED BY THE STATE OF ISRAEL.
One of my old Navy Captains used to say, "Load brain before firing mouth". However, "loading the brain" takes effort. Is is far easier to be a loose cannon and simply fire statements such as:
"No Fence in the middle of the desert sounds like the State of Israel supports Palestinian terrorist infiltrators to me".
"No Fence in the middle of the desert sounds like the Governor of Texas supports supports illegal immigration to me."
Here are the facts:
The map below represents the Israeli Fence on its southern border.
An Israeli Prime Minister would describe it like this:
"Strategic fencing along the border, especially in high traffic areas where manpower alone is insufficient to do the job."
That quote, however, are the words of Governor Perry.
In the areas corresponding to and extending 50 km (31 miles) from the high population areas of Gaza and the Gulf of Acaba shore, the Israelis have built their Fence.
In the middle of nowhere in the Negev Desert (which corresponds to the middle of nowhere in the Texas Desert), THE ISRAELIS HAVE BUILT NO FENCE.
That area can be easily patrolled with air assets and Israeli troops can be sent where needed to easily round up crossers struggling to travel through the middle of the Negev Desert. The Negev Desert region of the southern Israeli border is the EXACT equivalent of the Texas desert regions of the U.S. southern border.
Any crosser stupid enough to attempt to cross a well patrolled desert border is intercepted within an hour when helos appear overhead and "Boots on the Ground" follow shortly thereafter because Rick Perry made them available.
Building a Fence in the middle of the desert does absolutely NOTHING since a Fence in the middle of the desert is defeated in seconds.
Why have the Israelis adopted this particular Fence strategy?
Because it WORKS.
The Israelis base their defense strategies on what WORKS and not on the knee-jerk emotionalism of "No Fence in the middle of the desert sounds like the State of Israel supports Palestinian terrorist infiltrators to me".
But, why shouldn't Texans just favor building a Fence along it's entire southern border just to please those who claim "No Fence in the middle of the desert sounds like Texans support illegal immigration"?
For very practical reasons.
1.) A FENCE IN THE TEXAS DESERT AREAS WOULD CUT OFF RANCHER'S CATTLE FROM THEIR RIO GRANDE WATER SOURCE.
2.) A FENCE IN THE TEXAS DESERT AREAS WOULD BE A MASSIVE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LAND GRAB THAT WOULD STEAL THE ENTIRE RIO GRANDE RIVERFRONT FROM RIVERFRONT PROPERTY OWNERS AND GIVE IT TO MEXICO.