Skip to comments.Rick Perry: A Texan’s ‘exceptionalism’
Posted on 06/25/2011 12:11:49 PM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
click here to read article
His going to prep school in Connecticut, and graduating from Yale and Harvard most definitely worked against him in ‘76 or ‘78 when he ran for office out in West Texas. Kent Hance nailed him with it time and time again while they were campaigning against each other. Since then he’s forgiven Hance, and Hance even switched from the Democrats to the GOP and became friends with him. Bush has done a good job of changing his image since the ‘70s, no denying that, but I know plenty of people who were around in the ‘70s and not impressed with him back then.
Thanks...I was trying to compress too much information into my post. LOL
Right outfit, wrong school.
I also support transportation improvements. In fact, I am, at present, engaged in mapping out a least-disruptive ROW for an interstate through a region filled with National Register-importance archaeological sites.
My main objection to the TTC was that it was never a transportation design, but was a blatant land-grab concept that put every conceivable form of incompatible transport services -- plus non-transport services (utilities) inside a fenced ROW to maximize the amount of land acquired.
Just the cost of overpasses to cross the ROW would have exceeded he cost of a normal Interstate. One question the TXDoT PR pukes could never answer in public meetings was. "Where else in Texas do you build overpasses to drive over pipelines and underpasses to pass under power lines?" (That is exactly what every crossover on the TTC would have done...)
Perry's dumb@$$3$ at TXDoT would have been better off starting off with simple roads and sneaking in other features wherever they could get away with it. Instead, they showed their whole, greedy hand to start with, and the people of Texas shouted, "Not only NO, but HELL, NO!!" And, even then, dumb@$$ Perry wouldn't give it up.
We certainly don't need that arrogance in the White Hut!
W is Texan through and through.
As is Rick Perry.
There is no need to come up with theories such as “he was raised on the East Coast or his father is NWO” to try explaining Texans varied views on illegal immigration. The state carries within it the seeds of all of the varied views, for the state is so diverse.
I know an Hispanic of the old school who lived in the Midwest for years but was born and raised in Texas. Now back in Texas, he says every illegal should be sent packing. His own ancestors have been in Texas as far back as he knows anything about them, but long, long years ago the border was passed over back and forth and back and forth, without laws to attempt regulation. Suffice it to say in his mind this Hispanic is an American, period. He does not want those here who now come over, flouting our laws, and swarming into our systems and overloading them.
W has expressed his sympathy for the struggling poor of Mexico who come here to work in order to put food on their children’s table. He has seen and met and spoken with people like this and he has too big of a bleeding heart for his own, and this nation’s, good.
Other people claim his business buddies run the whole show and that’s all he cares about...their views who themselves use illegal workers. I do not believe that is his reason. But that is merely my opinion.
Point is, we have it all. We have militants who are trying to take over Texas and America by immigrant invasion. We have old school Hispanics that are angry at these invaders and want them rounded up and deported. We have conservative evangelicals who demand border enforcement and we have liberal evangelicals and some Catholics who claim it is unChristian to turn these people back or even detain them, who house them in churches. We have criminal gangs linked to Mexico. You name it, we have it.
For Rick Perry or W, no need to look beyond Texas itself to find the seeds of whatever is their particular view.
Average Texans are very fed up with the invasion and the violence, and with the hypocrisy of Mexico in encouraging these illegals to come here while having the most severe punishment for anyone entering Mexico illegally.
I didn’t say people were impressed with him. I said they knew him in college and high school and remember him from his days at those eastern schools.
He was not like the students from the east coast...he was Texan. He stood out as different. I misspoke in saying he wore boots and bomber jacket in Yale MBA classes...that was Harvard MBA classes when he wore boots and bombers. Yale was undergrad only.
Everyone evolves over the years. He only became more entrenched in his Texas persona. W does not hold grudges and it is irrelevant that he and Kent Hance are friendly. It was a lie then that W was East Coast and it is a lie now. Is it a lie that has wide acceptance among people who swallowed the lie? Yes, you give evidence of that yourself.
It is incorrect to say that George W Bush was raised primarily on the East Coast. He was a baby when moved to Odessa, and grew up in Midland. As soon as he finished his secondary and university schools back East (because that was family tradition) he returned to Texas and lived his entire life here. Houston is in Texas. Dallas is in Texas. Midland and Odessa are in Texas. Crawford is in Texas.
Joining the Texas Guard, running for a congressional seat from West Texas, running a West Texas based oil company, owning and managing the Texas Rangers, running for TX governor and serving there, buying a ranch in Texas, buying a house in Texas, having your Presidential Library in Texas, makes you a Texan.
It is weird to be having to make these obvious points, but so be it.
I doubt Sarah worked for Gore.
Hell, I don't think much of anything has worked for Gore, from the 2000 election to Global Warming to his marriage to his second Chakra.
No, Obaaama and the Dems in Sacramento did.
You should try I-17 between Phoenix and Flagstaff sometime; and they can't add more lanes because the highway is snaking through the mountains (Flagstaff is at about 7000 feet and the ground rises from there to the Grand Canyon at 8000 feet.)
In fact, the same Executive Order instructed the Department of Health Services to make it easier for all parents to opt out.
I-35 has a 250 mile stretch which has 3 of the 15 largest population cities in the USA on it and is two lanes a side in many places. It can be a real pain at times, especially if somebody has a wreck on a UT football Saturday.
Every single pap smear that we do only looks for changes due to HPV. 99.7% of all cervical cancer is caused by HPV.
That site you reference is not reliable. With the millions of girls involved, a given number of events will happen within 30 days of any point in time.
No deaths were confirmed to be due to the vaccine. In fact, the CDC, JAMA, and the very conservative (Bush-appointed and media vilified for those conservative views) FDA panel that reviewed the VAERS in 2008 all confirm that theres no causal relationship, only temporal. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/hpv/gardasil.html
With 33 million doses, there are bound to be deaths that coincide with the timing of the vaccine use. The teen death rate from all causes is 62 per 100,000 across the US. http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/acrossstates/Rankings.aspx?ind=25 Most of those are boys, but still: In 10 million girls, 30 deaths are not outside the rate for the age group.
More likely the girls in question were at higher risk due to the population presenting to clinics giving the vaccine: those who present with worries about STDs, the newly sexually active and those entering college. They were given new scripts for birth control pills and other vaccines and meds.
Also remember the silicon, SSRI, and the general vaccine scares that have been blown out of proportion through the years and later proven to be untrue.
It would appear that the ability to regulate interstate commerce gives the feds plenty of authority to create and operate the TSA.
TSA is merely a means of implementing that clearly granted power.
One Leader recognizes another.
In the first place I doubt that any of that occurred. I’m saying that the state of Texas has no power to determine rules or operating procedures for a federal agency. If said agencies are abusing its powers there are legitimate means of stopping them.
Read the 4th part of the EO concerning Gardisil (which had already been placed on the Federal Vaccines for Children list, so it was free for all Medicaid recipients).
http://governor.state.tx.us/news/executive-order/3455/ Parents Rights.The Department of State Health Services will, in order to protect the right of parents to be the final authority on their childrens health care, modify the current process in order to allow parents to submit a request for a conscientious objection affidavit form via the Internet while maintaining privacy safeguards under current law.”
At the time, the Legislature had given all power to name mandatory vaccines to the Department of State Health Services, which is run under the Executive Branch of Texas gov’t. In order to opt out, parents were required to go to Austin every year, to get an official form with a “seal,” to request the opt out form, get the form and get it filled out and then send it back to Austin. This EO changed that.
At a minimum the feds have the authority to regulate interstate commerce which is all that is necessary to create the TSA. With more thought there are probably any number of sources I could cite for its powers.
“To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” Article I, Section 8, paragraph 3. US Constitution
“In the first place I doubt that any of that occurred”>>>
Have you been living under a rock? Seriously, here ya go:
No need to reply, apology accepted.
I own property in texas and no, it did not particularly scare me. Things like roads are what eminent domain laws are in place for. How much land do you think the state took when they built I-35 in the first place? Just a couple of acres or perhaps hundreds of thousands? I believe the plan was to have the road built at relatively little cost to the state and then allow the corporation that built it to collect tolls and maintain the road for a specified amount of time as payment for building it after which the state could do what they wanted with it. It is not like the corporation could roll up the road and take it back to Spain when they were done, once it was built it would stay. I think that choosing a Spanish company to do it was politically tone deaf but I liked that plan better than hiking everybodys taxes to pay for a state built road. No matter who eventually builds a successor road or widens the existing I-35, I would be very surprised if eminent domain isnt used to whatever degree necessary to acquire the land to do it. I am not saying I like it but that is the way it will likely be done. The only thing I know for sure is that until something is done we definitely have an inadequate main north-south road through central Texas.
All I want for 2012 is a GOP candidate with integrity.
A lot of people made the mistake of supporting Giuliani early on because of his stance on terrorism and national secuirty which was the number one issue at the time. I can forgive Perry for that. Perry is conservative on the issues that really matter - pro life, pro gun, pro tenth amendment, pro business, less government
The Congress shall have Power To...
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States
Is transportation commerce? No where does it state that the TSA has the right to grope a 6 year old girl?
It is time to DownSize DC. At a minimum it is also Time for the Congress to rein in the abuse of power in all agencies including the TSA. (they Are arrogant SOB’s)
It is TIME to eliminate entire Federal Departments. Start with the U.S. Department of Education including their SWAT team..
Perry endorsed Giuliani for 2008 president AND Perry partnered with RINO Rudy (who is persona non grata on Free Repub) to build the Trans-Texas Corridor......... which allows Mexican trucks to enter the US and traverse all the way to Canada.
DISQUALIFIER Aug. 28, 2007----In Mexico for trade talks, Perry blasts US immigration policies
Houston Chronicle, Mexico City Bureau | DUDLEY ALTHAUS
FR Posted on 08/28/2007 by Dubya
MEXICO CITY Leading a large delegation of Texas executives trying to drum up business in Mexico, Gov. Rick Perry on Tuesday criticized the U.S. Congress for failing to pass an immigration bill that would legalize millions of workers. "I don't think this is that difficult an issue if Congress would have the maturity to sit down and really discuss it and cut out all the mean rhetoric," Perry said during a break in the third day of meetings with Mexican officials and business executives. (Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
DISQUALIFIER August 24, 2007 ---- TX governor Perry rapped for paving way for construction of Trans-Texas Corridor;
allows Mexican trucks to enter the US and traverse all the way to Canada.
One News Now | Chad Groening
FR Posted on 08/25/2007 by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Texas Governor Rick Perry is being called to task by an author and investigative journalist for vetoing bills that would have blocked construction of the controversial Trans-Texas Corridor.
Dr. Jerome Corsi has been one of the leading voices warning the American public about the consequences of the Trans-Texas Corridor, which will be part of a superhighway -- purported to be four football fields wide -- that will allow Mexican trucks to enter the U.S. and traverse the core of the country all the way to Canada.
The best-selling author asserts that Governor Perry cleared the way for construction to begin in his state when he vetoed several bills passed by the Legislature that would have stalled the project.
"Governor Perry has been 100 percent gung-ho in building this road," says Corsi. "The Legislature voted a two-year moratorium, it voted a redefinition of eminent domain -- [and] Governor Perry vetoed them. [On] at least one of those measures, he waited until the Texas Legislature was out of session so it couldn't even override his veto."
Corsi says it is unfortunate that there has been political pressure to get the project started. "The Federal Highway Administration's lawyer wrote letters threatening the Texas Legislature to cut off federal highway funds if they got in the way of this Trans-Texas Corridor," he says.
Corsi believes the same pressure will be applied on other states, like Oklahoma, to go along with the project. He suggests that would mean a loss of more American jobs and could pose a threat to U.S. sovereignty.
April 17, 2011----513 People Crammed Into Two Mexican Trucks Bound for US
TUXTLA GUTIERREZ, Mexico - Police on Tuesday detained 513 undocumented migrants from Latin America and Asia who were crammed into two trucks bound for the United States, prosecutors in southeast Mexico said. The migrants, from Latin America, Japan, China, India and Nepal, "were traveling in inhuman conditions" in the southeastern state of Chiapas, near the Guatemalan border, the local attorney general's office said in a statement. Police stopped the trucks, carrying 240 and 273 people, on the outskirts of state capital Tuxtla Gutierrez early Tuesday, after they accelerated through a vehicle scanner at a police checkpoint, the statement said. Officers chased down the vehicles shortly afterward, it added.
Police detained the Mexican drivers of the two trucks, and the migrants were provided with aid and food, the statement said. Mexican lawmakers last month unanimously approved a law to "strengthen the protection and security" of migrants amid widespread abuse. Rights groups have long criticized Mexico for failing to protect tens of thousands of migrants, mainly from Central America, trying to cross the vast country to illegally enter the US each year. The gruesome discovery of 72 murdered migrants from Central and South America in northeastern Tamaulipas state last August increased pressure on the government to act. Copyright 2011 AFP. All rights reserved.
April 12, 2011----US Taxpayers Pay To Upgrade Mexican Trucks, US Trucks Not So Lucky
http://radioviceonline.com/ Steve McGough
FR Posted by Biggirl
A story broke yesterday concerning the retrofit of more than 100 trucks from Mexico that do not meet United States environmental standards. Our federal government is paying to upgrade these trucks, yet when the state of California and the EPA set new rules for US-owned trucks, they fine companies who do not comply.
This post is not about the environment, it concerns how US trucking companies are treated by the federal and state government as compared to Mexican-owned rigs. From AzCentral.com. For air-quality regulators, the border creates a legal barrier.
State and federal agencies cant force vehicles manufactured and bought in Mexico to comply with U.S. emissions rules, even though the trucks cross into this country.
So the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality tried a different approach, offering to pay Mexican truck owners to replace old mufflers with new catalytic converters that will reduce harmful diesel emissions by up to 30 percent. The project in effect circumvents the more lax Mexican rules about exhaust systems. (Excerpt) Read more at radioviceonline.com
Thanks, Liz. Perry somehow, someway is supposed to have gotten religion on illegals. I don’t buy it.
Perry “got religion on illegals” too late.
The American public on both sides of the aisle is disgusted with the illegal situation.
Perry is not the one to fix it.
First, it's not clear who you are referring to with "We." If you mean Republicans, it mostly fits, though I would disagree with you on several points.
We must defeat Obama and hold the House and take the Senate.
Let me repeat: we must defeat Obama and hold the House and take the Senate.
Was he perfect after that? Nope. Neither was Reagan after he switched.
But against Obama and the Dems of today, if it comes down to it, I would pull that lever for Rick Perry.
Or else, goodby America.
If you mean Texans, it doesn't make much sense. Texans don't hold a majority in the House and I can't see a way that Texans could ever "take the Senate."
If you mean TEA Partiers and constitutional conservatives, it also doesn't fit. TEA Partiers and principled conservatives don't hold a majority in the House, can't take the Senate and still don't have a clear candidate in the Presidential race.
For me, principles mean more than Party. I generally vote Republican. I've "held my nose" before beleiving that the Republican was the best choice, even though the "lesser of two evils" is still evil. But I've awakened. I now care about the primaries much more than before, and I will not settle for "the evil of two lessers." In 2010, I voted for the principled conservative candidate in the Republican primary, but I left my ballot blank on the United States Representative line in the general because the Republican party leadership defeated the conservative, principled candidate in my district in the primary. I will not vote against my principles ever again. If the Republican party wants my vote, they will put up a candidate who shares my values and principles. If they don't, I'll look at alternatives (even third party alternatives) or I'll leave the line blank.
I am not alone. This is the danger for Republicans who think Romney can win. I think Romney will never be POTUS.
I'm still not sure about Perry. I hear a lot that sounds good, and my research leads me to believe that I could probably support him. He's not what we really need, but he's not offensive to my principles and values either. At best, he could be another Reagan. Obama's spin machine will try to make him another George W. Bush. I fear that he could be defeated if that happens. And the ads almost write themselves for the Obama campaign. The only way to stop it would be when Obama says, "I had to clean up George W. Bush's mess," Perry can legitimately say, "So have I, and I think I'm better at it."
Still, Perry's accent even sounds like George W. Bush a little. I think it might be too soon for another Texas Governor to try for the White House.
Also, speaking now as a constitutional conservative more than as a Republican, we don't need another Reagan today, we need another Grover Cleveland. Any candidate who wants to fill that role has my vote. Just promise to write more veto letters than any other President in history has in a 2 year Congressional Session, and in a 4 year presidential term. Both records are held by Cleveland. Further, most of Cleveland's veto letters started out something like:
I see no evidence that anyone in the "Republican leadership" even knows those words or has ever considered putting them together in that order.
I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution …
This country is already lost until we find a President who can write that 500 times on 500 different veto letters.
Until then, the best course is to find local and state candidates who are willing to live within the 10th amendment, and not just demagogue with "10th Amendment Resolutions" before passing budgets that rely heavily on extraconstitutional "Federal grants."
And TEA Partiers need to pay attention to government at all level. In Florida, all officials swear an oath to protect and defend the United States Constitution. Even Voters sign an oath to protect and defend the United States Constitution when they register to vote.
We need to educate everyone that when their city council or county commission meets and discusses applying for a federal grant for a new park or sewage treatment plant, the citizens (voters) need to stand up at that city council meeting and ask, "Where in Article 1 Section 8 of the United States Constitution will Congress find the power to give us a 'grant' for that?"
I'm not sure if Perry has stood up to the federal congress that way, and to the Texas Legislature if they try to get federal "grant money" for state and local projects.
need to wake up and hold all of our "leaders" accountable to the Constitution. It has to happen from the bottom up as well as from the top down. Otherwise, you are correct, it's "Goodbye America."
The one advantage to Obama so far compared to what McCain might have inflicted on this country is that Obama has awakened many people, and these people are now reading and studying the Constitution, the Federalist Papers and the history of our founding. In the long run, this is a very good thing. If the Republicans win and people go back to sleep, that will be more damaging in the long term.
I was under the impression we were trying to shrink the involvement of the Federal government. The interstate commerce clause was originally intended to clear up regulations and taxes that some states had imposed on goods from other states under the Articles of Confederation. The idea was to free up trade, not place barriers to it, and, as someone else pointed out, travel is not commerce.
Note the heading above in Liz's ping : ‘DISQUALIFIER’. Any politician that ever called for immigration reform (code word ‘amnesty’) had better explain in detail what they meant by it or they need to be disqualified. Obviously Perry was sucking up to the Mexicans back then and thought Texas needed cheap labor at that time. Well you can bet if he became a presidential candidate he would try to avoid talking about it.
Let me play RINO here for fun since they seem to be in hiding now:
”No Liz, I am not talking about amnesty. I am only talking about a path to legalization for those ‘undocumented workers’ in this country that ‘ respect our laws‘. Let's get them to register so we know who they are. (and they can sign up for food stamps and medicaid and unemployment compensation.) We need their votes to beat Democrats and immigration reform will get them to vote Republican in the next election.’. “
You have to wonder how many of these 'Republican amnesty hispanics' voted for McCain in the primary and then Obama in the general election.
RINO TOXICITY "I am only talking about a path to legalization for undocumented workers that respect US laws."
Words like "undocumented worker" and "path to amnesty" are toxic---- will get the RINO nothing but political oblivion. LOL.
Do not forget that Rick Perry called those who wish to enforce existing law and close borders as “extremists”.
It is GWB redux.
Heh, Sorry Rick, no cigar.
“Well Mr Perry, show us that Texan exceptionalism and put the pressure on the Republican Majority Leader in your State to pass the bill that will stop the TSA from molesting our wives and pre-teen daughters!”
He did add it to the agenda. But the Texas legislator only meets for 140 days every 2 years, they got a lot to do and very little time to do it.
Don’t ask Texans to change that, cause most Texans would probably prefer the legislator meet only 2 days every 140 years. Simply put legislators do more harm then good on net. Even when they are standing up for your rights they are not too far away from usurping them somewhere else.
What is humiliating in the case of the TSA is the way the Senate backed down, under threat. Texas senators aut to be ashamed of themselves for humiliating not only themselves but the whole State of Texas with their cowardly act of backing down to the bully.
I’m thinking we might be wise to tease them about this for the rest of theses senators day’s, or at least until they find the courage within themselves to stand up to theses bullys.
“”trumping Romneys economic expertise with Texas exceptionalism:.....”
Please note: “Texas exceptionalism” NOT Perry exceptionalism.”
Truer words could not be spoken.
Texas exceptionalism is like American exceptionalism, except more exceptional. lol No one man can ever embody ether Texas or American exceptionalism.
Let us be perfectly clear about that.
The last clip was the only one I will waste my time with and it has NOTHING to do with “assaults” at the airport because of TSA. An employee texting a girl has NOTHING to do with the TSA. He, of course, is subject to state laws as they exist as this has NOTHING to do with official duties or policies as you falsely allege.
The others are similar wastes of my time so I won’t bother dealing with however you are misrepresenting them.
As I said this is a stupid law and won’t have ANY impact on federal activities.
Of course transportation is commerce. Any time the economy of a region grows improvement of transportation FOR that commerce is at the root of that growth. Transportation is part of commerce one of the most important parts.
As to “groping” that would not be allowed by any federal policy and is unlikely to have occurred in any case.
As for downsizing everyone is far that the only issue is what is to be downsized. Urkle would love to downsize our military. I’m not for that. I’m for downsizing the War on Poverty, Surrender.
That is funny, I don’t see democrats being AT ALL concerned about Illegalism. Unless it is how to increase it as much as they can get away with.
BS! It has repeatedly been done by TSA. TSA inspectors and their managers have been shown to be arrogant SOB Idiots.
I was only commenting on constitutionality not the size of the government so lets be clear about that. The contention was that there was no constitutional authority to establish the TSA. That is simply false.
Nor is it true that the Commerce clause only applied to state regulation and tazes. It was a broad grant of power. Commerce is not even possible except on a very limited basis without transportation. Only on a feudal basis, this was well understood by the Founders. It was clear that throughout history the periods of high civilization all occurred after transportation made is possible international and interregional trade. After the roads and seas had been made safe for carrying goods from country to country.
It is absurd to pretend that companies whose business is travel are not commerce or that companies whose business is moving goods from place to place are not commerce. They are controlled by COMMERCIAL law.
Sorry, but I don’t believe a word of this.
I wonder how many GOP POTUS candidates would play ball with the amnesty crowd if elected. Michelle Bachman was on Fox News Sunday today, and (surprise!) Chris Wallace asked nothing about amnesty. In 2010, she co-sponsored the anti-amnesty pledge resolution in the House, so she may be OK at least in that respect, but maybe Wallace (and the other question-askers) just doesn’t want to ask the question.
When is the last time Romney was asked about amnesty?
Even when the question comes out, the standard tactic is, “I will secure the border.” Even Obama says that.
I don’t hate the Mexican people, but I don’t want them voting here.
Bachmann has been well grounded. It’s shocking to see the level of vitriol leveled at her here.
This is one more issue that she gets, that isn’t even on other people’s radar.
I know of one person that wants to register illegals so they can stay here and work. That’s their honest not-an-amnesty solution.
Your assertion that the interstate commerce clause is a broad grant of power is simply bogus. It wasn’t. It was not interpreted that way until well after the Constitution was ratified in the 20th century. The Founders intended that the provision be used to free up interstate commerce, not tie it down in Federal bureaucracy, which they did not even foresee existing at all.
Furthermore, even granting that the TSA is constitutional, which it isn’t, its procedures are not matters of Federal law. The Constitution nowhere grants the Feds the right to do what the bill wants to forbid, and specifically it in the 4th amendment (I do not recall giving up my 4th amendment rights because I want to fly cross country), and so the Supremacy Clause does not apply. Furthermore, the TSA scans/frisks people regardless of whether they are flying interstate or simply intrastate.
The Supremacy Clause only applies to the Constitution and laws made pursuant to the Constitution. TSA scans/frisks are not laws made pursuant to the Constitution, nor are they “necessary and proper” to enforcing a law made pursuant to the Constitution. Therefore, the Supremacy Clause does not apply.
Here is one problem. A candidate says he opposes amnesty, and then after being elected, as liz and sickoflibs posted, "I am not talking about amnesty. I am only talking about a path to legalization...." In order to get elected, they avoid talking about immigration, if possible, until after being elected.
I know of one person that wants to register illegals so they can stay here and work. Thats their honest not-an-amnesty solution.
I thought about that. Even if the economy was booming, "They can stay here and work" would still lead to them voting in our elections, unless there was a Constitutional amendment to prevent it, and even then, "Wise Latinas" would try to find a way to ignore it.
Of course, it would also confirm the world's suspicions that we will never take immigration and border security seriously, and endless invasions.
Eventually, even after an amnesty in this decade, we would hear more calls for a new "path to citizenship," which our new leftist government, elected by hordes of new hard-left voters, would find hard to resist.
Those amnesty arguments are important. It’s why we simply cannot sign on to a plan to legalize the illegals staying here.
As I understand it, if you work here for six years, you are eligible to petition to get a work permit. From there, citizenship is a given, if you want it.
Just say no, to illegals remaining in this nation. PERIOD!
And they keep trying to add new "opportunities" for illegals.