Posted on 08/27/2011 10:53:16 PM PDT by Right Wingnut 2
I just read the text of Rick Perry's remarks to the Border Summit on Aug, 21st 2001. How in the hell is this stuff slipping through the cracks without a single mention in the conservative press? If this had been Obama, Sean Hannity would have been talking about it 24/7 during the last presidential campaign.
There are many passages in the speech that are of great concern to me, but this one really caught my attention.
...Legislation authored by border legislators Pat Haggerty and Eddie Lucio establishes an important study that will look at the feasibility of bi-national health insurance. This study recognizes that the Mexican and U.S. sides of the border compose one region, and we must address health care problems throughout that region. That’s why I am also excited that Texas Secretary of State Henry Cuellar is working on an initiative that could extend the benefits of telemedicine to individuals living on the Mexican side of the border....
Does Rick Perry still support an international health insurance program such as the one he laid out in his speech that day? Will someone in the media please ask him before it's too late?
You can read the entire text of Perry's speech HERE
This Perry bashing is really nutty here, yesterday, someone was saying he is a homosexual.
Forget this is about Perry or any other candidate. Do you honestly think Mexico is going to pay anything resembling a fair share? I find the idea unbelievable.
That’s disgusting!
Very pragmatic, as it should be.
AUSTIN, Texas—Rick Perry has signed a pledge to back a federal constitutional amendment against gay marriage — a reversal from a month ago when the Texas governor said he so supported individual states’ rights that he was fine with New York’s approval of same-sex marriage.
The pledge by the National Organization for Marriage states that, if elected, Perry will send a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the states for ratification, and appoint U.S. Supreme Court and federal judges who will “reject the idea our Founding Fathers inserted a right to gay marriage into our Constitution.”
Sarah Palin attended a Bilderberger meeting...consider this. The Bilderbergers just like every other organization in the US vets presidential candidates. I’m not a bit surprised that wanted to know his stances. Remember CPAC ALPAC, ALIPAC, and the many many Tea Party Org. speeches?
Ok, Bi-National Health Insurance .... what is meant by this?
In what context would a state official use that term? Since this is Texas and not the US, it could only be used in the sense that you have Insurance good for two countries.
There isn’t a National Healthcare in Mexico.
So looks like clap trap junk to me.
I looked it up, it is all U.S. Private insurers .... a private company can do what every the hell they want to
bi-national insurance is by private companies purchased by people through their work, school, or directly that covers them and the dependents in the US and Mexico
http://www.ucop.edu/cmhi/bnhealthinsure.shtml
One thing that has worked, though, is the border disease outbreak detection and warning. Those hits the local news frequently.
Do you understand what he is saying? I see others in the thread are very disturbed by the idea that there can be a “community” that happens to exist on two sides of a national border, as if a border defines a wall of separation.
Texas used to be part of Mexico. There are comunities dating back generations that are separated by the borders chosen for Texas. There are people for who the closest hospitals are across the border, for whom the closest doctors are across the border. There are places where the closes neighbor is the guy with the grazing cattle next door, whose fence happens to be on the border.
If people in those communities would like to have the ability to cross the border to go to a doctor, and it requires a new law for so that health insurance can work across the border, it is absurd that the federal government would block that. People need freedom, and that includes the freedom to buy insurance that will allow them to go to a primary care physician even if they happen to live on the other side of the border.
When Sarah Palin was a young child, her family actually want to CANADA to get health care, because the Canadian facility happened to be the closest to where they were living. Do you think that was an evil thing? (Believe it or not, there were liberals attacking the Palin family for getting health care in Canada, and it was a big fight here).
Freepers leapt to defend Palin against the scurilous charges then, so I think most of them understand that people can cross a national border to get health care.
A couple of days ago I defended the anti-palin folks, noting that they were simply posting short quips calling him names, and not spamming the threads with unrelated links.
Since then, this is at least the 4th time I’ve seen an entire post that looks like a cut-and-paste that is nothing but links to issues that aren’t associated with the article being discussed.
THank you. That clears up the issue — if people on the mexican border don’t get their vaccines, it puts the people on the other side of the border at risk, since people legally cross those borders all the time.
I wonder if some freepers forget that, in addition to an illegal immigration that happens, that millions of people legally cross our borders. They have passports, they have visas, they are allowed to come back and forth.
People from the United states for example go to Tijuana all the time, it’s like a weekend getaway. If there are communicable diseases running rampant because they don’t get vaccines, it puts us as risk. It is a benefit to the United States to define these border regions and to ensure that medical treatment is good for both sides.
So thanks again for putting to rest this stupid argument.
I also agree with your post’s pointing out that if Mexican trucks meet our safety standards, we need to live up to our NAFTA agreements, which was a legally enacted treaty and therefore is the law of the land.
Are there conservatives who believe that legally valid treaties should NOT be enforced because liberals want protectionism?
I guess that's why, after this speech, he was re-elected two times by the people of Texas, and has a majority approval rating. Glad to know you know so much better what is good for the Texas taxpayers than they do.
As a New York taxpayer, you have much bigger problems to deal with than trying to help out the poor, obviously ignorant fools in Texas that you think you know better than.
I’ve been to Niagara falls, which is in your home state. I don’t remember seeing a border fence anywhere. I do remember seeing bridges with non-stop traffic running from Canada to New York, with thousands of people pouring back and forth, spending their days on one side and going back to the other side.
I remember tour groups leaving from each side and going to the other side; people spending money on both sides. I remember places where you could use american dollars on the Canadian side.
A Border Fence is a great idea for places where you don’t want anybody crossing the border. Not such a good idea when it divides communities that otherwise would have a natural desire and purpose to crossing the border regularly.
Second, the article you posted has a false assertion. Perry's pledge is not a reversal from anything, and he already stated that a month ago when his comments were first misconstrued by the liberal press and their fawning supporters.
As the Texas Governor, under current law, he saw no problem with New York enacting their own rules. But he supports a constitutioanal amendment to insure that the federal government never accepts gay marriage (DOMA supposedly did that, but Obama is trying to get that law declared unconstitutional).
Those are not contradictory positions.
Not that we know of — was she ever invited? :-)
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.