Posted on 09/23/2011 11:36:05 AM PDT by iowamark
I said what I said and I am standing by it.
“Perry’s fall may however push Palin in.”
Do you really think Palin could give even better answers in a debate? Perry is just the male version of Palin. I love ‘em but they just can’t take the heat.
Stolen from Rush Limbaugh show that morning.
“Cain: Zero governing experience. Has never won a single election in his entire life.”
you want a politician and then you’ll complain you got a politician
“Got it exactly backwards. Stantorum and Gingrich are great sound bite politicians. They are great at selling other people’s ideas. Neither of then has any key concepts or leadership principals nor serious programs. “
Maybe you’re confused with Michele Bachmann but Newt is an idea machine. Even Perry got it right when he said the ultimate candidate would be a morph of Newt and Cain.
LOL - that bogus poll was exposed as being done by Perry’s polling group.
C’mon, get with the program!
He was just on radio with Hannity. He underscores it wouldn't be an issue if the Feds had secured the border.
He said it's a state education issue and Texas decided it was in its interest to try keeping these new grads off welfare and out of jail by treating them as other Texans at state schools if they work toward legalization.
He put it in context of the employer sanctions, voter id, the Ranger Recon teams, joining the defense of AZ's immigration bill and other things Texas has put in place in trying to clean up the Fed's mess.
For Texas in-state tuition was a defensive policy in the absence of federal action on the border. He explained the heartless comment as referring to leaving them to be drag on the Texas welfare and criminal justice system.
Yeah, but I think Romney has a ceiling kind of like Ron Paul. You see Ron Paul pulling respectable percentages in polls but you know he can't get any higher. ..... Meet the New Boss
I'm not sure about the Romney "ceiling". Romney crushed the last Gallup Poll against Obama:
As I noted, it was reported that Perry did not engage in any extra preparation for the debate. If Perry was resting on his laurels because he thought he had it in the bag, he needs to wake up and start addressing his debate shortcomings by study, study, study and practice, practice, practice.
Perry is actually governing and has been for almost 12 years. Maybe Perry believes that he does not need to "play the game". However, a slick talker will beat a "doer" that cannot articulate well.
Politics can be very fickle. It doesn't take much for last week's King of the Hill to become next week's fish wrapper in the trash can.
No matter how talented you may be in any given field, two things are guaranteed to bring you down:
1.) Overconfidence
2.) Lack of serious preparation
It sounds to me like the conventional wisdom in the MSM is shaping up that Perry weakened himself by shortcomings in his debating skills.
But I strongly suspect that the poor debating style is not as important as the substance of his views on illegal immigration in weakening him.
Republican politicos always seem to me to underestimate the impact of the illegal immigration issue on the grass roots.
That is because you have a combination of the liberals, the MSM and powerful business interests in favor of the illegals and only the grass roots against them.
I think with the illegals Mittens has stumbled onto an issue helping him against Perry that he probably never understood the importance of. But with Perry falling, Mittens does not necessarily occupy that space if a true conservative can manage to effectively step up and occupy the space being conceded by Perry.
He could prepare all he wants but if his stance on illegals is to educate them then he can look elsewhere for votes. .... wiggen
Sloppy performance, Grunthor. I agree.
In the so-called "Texas Dream Act", as Perry pointed out, only 4 Texas Legislators out of a total of 181 opposed it. In a conservative state like Texas, anything that gets 98% support must have something going for it. Perry, however, was just not ready with an answer to a challenge that was certain to come. In fact, Perry seemed surprised at the challenge and had nothing to offer except to blurt out the "no heart" line that is a red flag waved in front of Romney that is now posing as More Conservative Than Thou.
For example, Perry could have said something along these lines:
"Maybe the Dream Act should have been called the Sins of the Father Act. We are dealing with young adults that, through no fault of their own, were brought here as children by the Sins of their Fathers. They grew up in Texas, they know no other home but Texas and have been here for so long that they know English so well that they were accepted into college. The conservative Texas Legislature understands that. That is why 98% voted for this bill. Yes, we are all against illegal immigration. But we, in Texas, do not want to end up with college capable, uneducated, unemployed young people, who grew up in Texas and know no other home, though no fault of their own, because we want to punish them for the Sins of their Fathers."
"Sins of the Father" will take you a lot further than, "You have no heart".
If an adult tags along with other adults in a bank robbery, that adult is an accessory to the crime.
If a child is dragged along by his parent while the parent is committing a bank robbery, that child is considered an innocent bystander rather than somebody that commited an illegal act.
The child is not the responsible "illegal". The father is.
From that perspective, it can be seen how 98% of all Legislators in a state as conservative as Texas voted in favor of that poorly named law.
The two are related. See my Post 71.
When 98% of all the Legislators in a state as conservative as Texas vote for something, there must be some logic behind the high "Yes" vote count.
Explaining the reasoning ("Sins of the Father") will get you points or, at least, do no further damage.
Throwing out "you have no heart" only waves a red flag in front of those you are trying to convince and pisses them off. Just ask Grunthor.
“We are dealing with young adults that, through no fault of their own, were brought here as children by the Sins of their Fathers. They grew up in Texas, they know no other home but Texas and have been here for so long that they know English so well that they were accepted into college.”
This “Sins of the Fathers” thing is nonsense.
In the first place, this spent all their lives in Texas point is not a requirement for the tuition subsidy from taxpayers. It is only three years in Texas plus a GED. And we all know how that works. They just have to sign a piece of paper. We all know how honest people are these days. Someone here for a year who gets his GED signs a piece of paper and no one cares. The social worker bureaucracy is all on his or her side. And even if they did live here for 3 years, so what? Why should sneaking into the country and managing to avoid deportation for 3 years entitle someone to taxpayer-subsidized college education?
And where is it written in stone that they can’t go live in Mexico? There are countless American families who go to work in another country and when they return to the US guess what? THEY BRING THEIR CHILDREN BACK WITH THEM! Even if the American family has lived in that country for several years.
The illegal parents should be deported, and they should bring their children to Mexico with them. Children belong with their parents. The fact that children born in the US may have a legal right to live in the US doesn’t change the fact that children belong with their parents and when the parents are deported, the proper thing to do is take their children to live with them in their home back in Mexico.
There are other states, 13 that had/have a similar program but that isn't the issue as Perry is the Gov of one that has this program. Also, additional states have filed or are discussing this in the legislatures.
Allow In-State Tuition for Undocumented Students
Then how do you explain that 98% of the the Texas Legislators in very conservative Texas voted for it, 177 to 4?
You may not agree with the reasoning but that is the reasoning.
There was a long-time Texas resident who went through the details of the politics of that in a post last night, I don’t remember which thread.
Just because someone is a Republican in the Texas legislature does not make that person “very conservative,” there were powerful business interests pushing it, it’s not popular with the public other than illegals, and it’s not clear it could get through the current legislature if it was considered de novo now and if Perry were not pushing it.
Hate to have him as a buddy in a bar fight...all hat no cowboy.... he gets that 3 am call and he hopes we have friends?
Yeah he may turn down his next La Raza and Bilderberg appearance....
The candidate in question paid for that line. The guy he paid stole the line from Rush Limbaugh. That candidate is now DOA.
Palin beat the crap out of veteran Senator Joe Biden.
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.