Also of interest to some might be the number of illegals by state.
Posted on 08/21/2011 4:18:57 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Perry and Romney — brash populist versus starchy elite — illustrate a perpetual Republican cultural gap that may define the GOP presidential contest.
....The cultural differences, more notable for the scarcity of policy distinctions among the Republican candidates, mirror divisions within the GOP electorate and even its dominant conservatives. On one side are the hard-liners, many of them religious, who embrace the "tea party" movement's hostility to Washington and are more likely to lack college educations. On the other are the more secular and moderate, open to government action to protect the environment and regulate business and more likely to have attended college.....
In past nominating contests, electability was a chief argument on the part of establishment candidates like Romney. In the current tea-party-influenced GOP, electability means different things to different voters. "People are enthusiastic about saying, 'Let's nominate the person who's closest to our values,'" Reed said, "'because we're no longer buying into the argument that a centrist-moderate candidate is, ipso facto, more viable.'"
The results could complicate the ultimate Republican effort in 2012 to unseat Obama. Perry would be "culturally lacking" in general-election appeal, predicted David Hill, a Republican pollster in Texas and a critic of Perry. His image as "a walking, talking symbol of Texana," Hill said, is not "a salable commodity."
That sale would be particularly hard among independent suburban women and other moderates in states outside the South and Southwest.
"I don't think the women in the Midwest, women in the West, necessarily bring to the election decision a favorable attitude toward Texas men," Hill said. "I don't think a lot of them are saying, 'I hope a rancher comes into my life.'"
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
I don’t have any problem with supporting Republicans who will follow the Constitution as they swore to do.
Too bad there are so few.
Also of interest to some might be the number of illegals by state.
Right now, that's pretty much it.
The State may determine the differences between self-defense, manslaughter and even various degrees of murder.
Yes, Roe v. Wade said that the exceptions meant that we weren’t consistent on our prohibition on abortion, which was a fallacy. That ruling also said that no one knows when life begins, a truly ridiculous fallacy.
Texas deems life begins at and defines the individual as beginning at fertilization. Since “person” and “individual” are identical in our Constitution, we now, under due process, deem it a capital crime to kill a child before birth.
One of these capital crimes, with its death penalty will likely go to the Supreme Court, eventually
http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=14386
That's right good old Texas waving all the illegals into the country because we like to pay for all those socialist programs the Democrats have been using to bring them across.
I guess that's why in 1998 Gov. Rick Perry was the 1st Republican Lt. Gov. elected in Texas since reconstruction and why now, into his 3rd term as the governor of Texas we have a GOP super majority in our state government.
Yes it must be because of all the "illegals" we're importing into the country -- we're twisting the Fed's arms and keeping them from securing the border.
That must have been a thank you note Rick Perry delivered to Obama on the tarmac in Austin.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry tries to deliver to Obama a letter expressing border security concerns. Photo by Jay Janner/Austin American-Statesman/ Aug 9, 2010 -- His letter was handed to Valerie Jarrett (in pink suit).
So, why would a super-majority of those who call themselves “pro-life” not remove the unconstitutional clause in the Code that allows the killing of what you admit are persons?
You might ask the men and women on the Board of the Travis County health board, recently forced by a brand new Texas law to stop paying for abortions with tax dollars, cutting 750 or more elective abortions per year. http://www.lifenews.com/2011/08/12/austin-texas-travis-county-ends-tax-funding-of-abortion/
Or, you might ask PP about the probability that they’ll stay in the elective abortion business when they have to pay the abortionist doctor for another day in order to comply with our new Ultrasound and informed consent law.
Or, you might ask Francis Beckwith about incrementalism:
http://lti-blog.blogspot.com/2011/03/francis-beckwith-replies-to-rebecca.html
Have any of the “pro-life” organizations in Texas advocated the removal of the unconstitutional clause that allows the killing of innocent persons?
I’ve seen all those arguments. They stink. What they are in fact are excuses for the violation of the first most important part of the Oath.
Because we want to save who we can save, now.
Arizona just got relief after 2 years of court battles over their law. http://wingright.org/2011/08/14/wonderful-news-on-conscience-from-arizona/
Two years would mean the death of 1500 babies in Travis County, alone. (Just wait until we see the numbers from Parkland and Harris County hospitals!)
Now, will you stipulate -- agree and/or concur -- that when a politician, as in a governor of a state, endorses a candidate for President of the USA, that said endorser agrees with (approves of) the Policies, Positions and Beliefs of the candidate (the endorsee) he is endorsing?
Since your obvious answer should be YES how do you explain and/or rationalize Gov Perry's endorsement of one: Rudolph William Louis "Rudy" Giuliani?
1) It is a fact that: Giuliani is rabidly Anti Second Amendment.
2) It is a fact that: Giuliani is rabidly Pro Abortion.
3) It is a fact that: Giuliani is Pro Homosexual Agenda.
4) It is a fact that: Giuliani is Anti Fourth Amendment.
5) It is a fact that: Giuliani is Anti Fourteenth Amendment.
6) It is a fact that: Giuliani is Anti First Amendment.
7) It is a fact that: Giuliani is Pro Sanctuary City.
8) It is a fact that: Giuliani is Pro Amnesty for Illegal Aliens.
9 It is a fact that: Giuliani is Pro Open Borders.
10) It is a fact that: Giuliani said, "The Constitution doesn't 'work' everywhere."
Ergo, it logically follows that since Perry endorsed Rudy, Perry must have the same beliefs as Rudy. If not, then why would he endorse him in the first place?
Lastly, Perry is wrong about Illegal Immigrants Aliens being able to serve in the U.S. Military: THEY CAN'T. Not unless they lie and use forged documents to enlist, and that is a Federal Crime, punishable by doing time in Leavenworth Prison. And those are the type of people that Perry just said he thinks should be able to become U.S. Citizens?!?
Well sorry, but I don't think so.
So have a nice day. But please, watch out for the Purple Kool-Aid. I hear it's tainted.
Give it a rest.
Practically everyone in Texas was behind Giuliani in 2008.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/metro/4737069.html
Can you figure out why?
Of course they stink. Triage, lifeboats, and limits on abortion save/saved lives while admitting that others won’t or can’t be saved under current conditions.
And yet, I’ve studied triage methods and “women and children first” is the established law of the sea.
We in Texas have tested and are testing the courts.
However, if we save 1500 babies in Travis County by avoiding a two year court battle, if we run PP out of Texas as they are being run out of Arizona (after that State’s unfortunate two year delay), we have saved some we couldn’t before.
Fill in the blank. This is why I've taken to calling the incrementalists the "somewhere over the rainbow" faction.
We'll go on waiting as long as those who represent us continue to destroy the first principles of the republic and ignore their oaths.
Or until God's incomprehensible patience and mercy towards us runs out.
-- Thomas Jefferson"God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever."
And yet, you quote Thomas Jefferson who was unable to overturn slavery.
Those babies in Travis County are now.
September the 1st will see the implementation of our ultrasound bill, Lord willing that the Courts leave it alone.
-- Article VI, the United States Constitution "No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law." -- The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution "No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." -- The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution..."
Why did Arizona have to wait 2 years for its abortion law to go into effect?
(Again, those babies in Travis County - 750 a year, more than 2 a day - are NOW.)
I was wondering when that was coming. The Lord is not willing that any should perish.
Can you point in the Constitution to the clause that says that any officer of government in this country, at any level, in any branch, is required to obey judges, even when those judges make blatantly unconstitutional rulings?
Because every copy of the document I can find says that every one of them is required to swear an oath to God to support the Constitution of the United States.
“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution..."-- Article VI, the United States Constitution
Try as I might, I can't find any exceptions to that.
And the Constitution still says:
"No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.""No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law."
So, why did Arizona wait two years?
So, you propose disobedience to the Supreme Court and the Department of Justice?
What are you personally doing today to oppose those judges? (that will save 2 babies from abortion, today?)
Please, enlighten us on your strategy to personally follow through on your belief to disobey the orders of judges.
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.