Perry Lost The Debate AND His Presidential Chances Tonight Over Subsidizing Illegals

[bripat9643]

Walls don't just keep people out. They keep them in as well. I am surprised by Perry. I thought he'd come across as batshit crazy. He's been more rational then I gave him credit for. If he survives the primary, Obama is going to have some trouble on his hands.

Yeah, right. We need a wall to keep all those Americans from escaping to the paradise of Mexico.

The stupidity of liberals defies comprehension.

 

[mudwhistle]

He totally bombed in the debate and foundered like the Titanic. The reason, a poor performance, looking lost and pausing trying to put a sentence together and finally, his stance on telling people you don't have a heart for not wanting to subsidize illegal aliens in having tuition to go to college. That and not wanting to build a wall to protect the borders just didn't resonate.

So, to be a viable GOP presidential candidate one must be opposed to the rule of law and advocate the building of a wall (idiotic) that will waste taxpayers’ money and not work.

Telling.

What part of his post implied anything about opposing the rule of law? If anything, giving government benefits to illegal aliens is an example of flouting the rule of law. By definition, illegal aliens are ILLEGAL. Anything short of sending them back where they came from is a violation of the rule of law.

I think every candidate needs to have all of the other candidates taking fucken pot-shots all night and see how well they handle it.

 

[bripat9643]

Yeah, like that time McNamara wanted to build an electric fence to separate North and South Viet Nam.

Great idea.

If a fucking river isn't going to keep people from crossing the border, a fucking wall isn't either. Hell, they are tunneling across the border now. If you think this problem can be solved by a wall, you are the blatant idiot.

It sure seems to be working for Israel.

A wall with guards will keep out all but the most determined and resourceful. Do you actually think any believes libturds are opposed to the wall because it wouldn't work? Libturds oppose the wall because they know it will work, not because they know it won't.

 

[bripat9643]

"Building a wall"

I take it none of you have actually been to El Paco or Larado before. The wall is already there, it's over 12 ft tall with barbed wire. And it stops nothing. Building a wall has been done and has been proven ineffective. Build another wall is stupid.

Allowing illegals access to education on the condition that they register for citizenship is also not crazy. But then again, some people read talking points and not what the law really says

If it stops nothing, that's only because the govenrment is looking the other way. With Obama in charge, that's easy to believe.

 

[JakeStarkey]

bripat, shut up until you know what the law says. You spout like the little tea pot, just steam nothing else.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What part of his post implied anything about opposing the rule of law? If anything, giving government benefits to illegal aliens is an example of flouting the rule of law. By definition, illegal aliens are ILLEGAL. Anything short of sending them back where they came from is a violation of the rule of law.

It wasn’t implied, he stated it clearly:

‘…and finally, his stance on telling people you don't have a heart for not wanting to subsidize illegal aliens in having tuition to go to college.’

In that Perry was wrong to obey the Constitution and provide in state tuition for Texas residents, regardless their immigration status.

In Plyler v. Doe (1982), the Court held that illegal aliens were entitled to 14th Amendment due process rights. To withhold in state tuition from a Texas resident without first determining the guilt or innocence of that resident is a violation of due process and the rule of law accordingly.

 

[bripat9643]

What part of his post implied anything about opposing the rule of law? If anything, giving government benefits to illegal aliens is an example of flouting the rule of law. By definition, illegal aliens are ILLEGAL. Anything short of sending them back where they came from is a violation of the rule of law.

It wasn’t implied, he stated it clearly:

‘…and finally, his stance on telling people you don't have a heart for not wanting to subsidize illegal aliens in having tuition to go to college.’

In that Perry was wrong to obey the Constitution and provide in state tuition for Texas residents, regardless their immigration status.

In Plyler v. Doe (1982), the Court held that illegal aliens were entitled to 14th Amendment due process rights. To withhold in state tuition from a Texas resident without first determining the guilt or innocence of that resident is a violation of due process and the rule of law accordingly.

State universities withhold instate tuition from millions of legal Americans all the time without some court determining whether they are legal residents of the state. Why should the law apply any differently to illegal aliens?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Tell that to a monolithic South from the 1880s to the 1950s, a monolithic Utah Territory from 1850 to 1867, Puritan voting blocks, Quaker voting blocks, so forth so on. Tell us what the voting % of blacks was for Obama last time.

Ignore history at your peril.

You're referring to ancient history. Let's try to stay in the present.
Ignorance is a terrible thing.
To answer your question. About 95%.
Ask them why....Answer, because he is black.
As a matter of fact, blacks vote democrat at over a 9-1 ratio. When the candidate is black the rate is about 97%.
Go ahead and spin that with some nonsense about Quakers. Then tell us how a black man JC Watts was able to win elections in Oklahoma, a state about as red as it can get. Slat Lick claims all conservative whites are racist. So how is it Watts served in the US House as a member of the GOP?

 

[thereisnospoon]

What part of his post implied anything about opposing the rule of law? If anything, giving government benefits to illegal aliens is an example of flouting the rule of law. By definition, illegal aliens are ILLEGAL. Anything short of sending them back where they came from is a violation of the rule of law.

It wasn’t implied, he stated it clearly:

‘…and finally, his stance on telling people you don't have a heart for not wanting to subsidize illegal aliens in having tuition to go to college.’

In that Perry was wrong to obey the Constitution and provide in state tuition for Texas residents, regardless their immigration status.

In Plyler v. Doe (1982), the Court held that illegal aliens were entitled to 14th Amendment due process rights. To withhold in state tuition from a Texas resident without first determining the guilt or innocence of that resident is a violation of due process and the rule of law accordingly.

State universities withhold instate tuition from millions of legal Americans all the time without some court determining whether they are legal residents of the state. Why should the law apply any differently to illegal aliens?

How dare you upset the apple cart by asking such an insolent question....

 

[whitehall]

Perry looked bad and I still don't buy his explanation of subsidizing the college education of non citizens with taxpayer dollars. Make them sign an affidavit stating they are "pursuing citizenship"? What a crock. That having been said, if he emerges as the top contender I wouldn't hesitate to support him. Look what we have now.

 

[Firehorse]

"Building a wall"

I take it none of you have actually been to El Paco or Larado before. The wall is already there, it's over 12 ft tall with barbed wire. And it stops nothing. Building a wall has been done and has been proven ineffective. Build another wall is stupid.

Allowing illegals access to education on the condition that they register for citizenship is also not crazy. But then again, some people read talking points and not what the law really says

If it stops nothing, that's only because the govenrment is looking the other way. With Obama in charge, that's easy to believe.

Border guards not withstanding, the last time I was in El Paco (over a year ago) they had unearthed a tunnel that was over a quarter mile long and big enough to drive a semi through.

Drug money can buy a lot of inginuity

 

[Dot Com]

How would Palin get the Hispanic vote USAR?

 

[JakeStarkey]

thereisnospoon, and you ignore you own advice and believe doctrine instead of reality. They voted for him because they had much in common with him and the Dems, and very little in common with the GOP. They still have very little in common with the GOP.

Herman Cain, J. C. Watts, and others have made a home for themselves in the GOP, but you can't demonstrate their paths are the only ones for blacks.

Yes, ignore history at your own risk.

 

[Dot Com]

He totally bombed in the debate and foundered like the Titanic. The reason, a poor performance, looking lost and pausing trying to put a sentence together and finally, his aweful stance on telling people you don't have a heart for not wanting to subsidize illegal aliens in having tuition to go to college. That and not wanting to build a wall to protect the borders just didn't resonate. Watching the post debate show on Fox News now is revealing that audience members are totally turned off by Perry and have switched to other candidates by his 'you don't have a heart' comment. I agree with them.

Who has better policies Let me guess PALIN!!!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I was listening to a news report today about Perry ‘apologizing’ for his ‘heartless’ remark and defending the in state tuition policy for undocumented students as a matter of ‘states’ rights.’ Perry’s wrong about the ‘states’ rights’ nonsense, of course, but we again see the specter of conservative hypocrisy in their advocacy of disallowing the people of Texas to educate their residents as they see fit.

 

[Dot Com]

I was listening to a news report today about Perry ‘apologizing’ for his ‘heartless’ remark and defending the in state tuition policy for undocumented students as a matter of ‘states’ rights.’ Perry’s wrong about the ‘states’ rights’ nonsense, of course, but we again see the specter of conservative hypocrisy in their advocacy of disallowing the people of Texas to educate their residents as they see fit.

There's a political science term used to describe what he is doing: "back- pedaling"

 

[freedombecki]

I was listening to a news report today about Perry ‘apologizing’ for his ‘heartless’ remark and defending the in state tuition policy for undocumented students as a matter of ‘states’ rights.’ Perry’s wrong about the ‘states’ rights’ nonsense, of course, but we again see the specter of conservative hypocrisy in their advocacy of disallowing the people of Texas to educate their residents as they see fit.

Sorry, Mr. Jones, that's not how it works in Governor Perry's state. Last year, many parents got involved and spoke before the state curriculum committee about their children's books. The committee in turn sponsored local curriculum meetings in a number of towns in the state before making any hasty decisions, and they concluded the complainers were fully supported by others in the state and made corrections and changes based on the consensus. Do we all think alike? Not hardly. But local parents have a large influence.

 

[Dot Com]

Has corporate America picked someone to replace him yet. The RINO- Romney would be good. Conservatives LOVE RINO's right?