Posted on 10/01/2011 10:43:51 PM PDT by American Dream 246
Matt Lewis says he’s improving on this issue. I guess, but that’s mainly because after you’ve tried to win over voters by calling them heartless, there’s really nowhere to go but up. A scene from New Hampshire this morning:
“We have, for decades, had a federal government that has absolutely failed in its constitutional duty to defend our border,” Perry said.
“I’m a governor. I don’t have the pleasure of standing on the stage and criticizing. I have to deal with these issues,” he later added.
Perry continued, “In 2001, we had this choice: Are we going to kick these children over to the curb and say you cannot have access to college? Because the fact of the matter is there’s no way they could pay the out-of-state tuition. And are we going to have them on the government dole over here because they’re not educated? Or are we going to have them in our institutions of higher learning, paying in state tuition, pursuing citizenship?”…
David Connors, the man who asked Perry the in-state tuition question, said he was satisfied with the governor’s answer.
Really? There are no jobs for illegals anywhere in Texas to earn tuition money? I was under the impression that there are quite a lot of jobs available to them, especially since Perry opposes e-Verify. This is the same sleight of hand he tried to use in the debate answer that got him in trouble, equating illegals’ opportunity to go to school in Texas with some sort of moral imperative among taxpayers to subsidize their education. (His wife, campaigning for him in Iowa, framed the choice as between tuition subsidies or welfare.) Somehow, the impoverished U.S. citizen from Mississippi is expected to pay his own way in Austin but the illegal who’s lived in Texas for three years gets a stipend from the locals. And not just in terms of lower tuition rates; apparently they qualify for financial aid too. It must be awfully confusing for Perry, as a “Texas Gaullist” and vocal champion of state sovereignty, to find that prioritizing state residency over national citizenship doesn’t play well with grassroots conservatives outside of Texas itself, but he’d better find clarity soon.
Here’s Romney’s new ad bludgeoning Perry with praise he once received from former Mexican President Vicente Fox. After you watch, read this amusing scolding (which notes some of Mitt’s own immigration heresies) from former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson, who seems genuinely surprised that Romney would pander so shamelessly on a divisive issue simply to destroy an opponent. That was the old, soulless Romney. The new, soulful Romney should be above that sort of thing. Right?
This is how I KNOW Perry is a phony/fake. No conservative would refer to 18 year olds as children. We are talking about adult foreign nationals on our soil who could apply to state universities like any other foreign national.
One, Perry is saying that those who are GED or high school educated are a drain, here, "on the government dole over here because they're not educated?" Not educated? He is talking about, and insulting, people who have a high school diploma or equivalent.
Two, he again claims the illegals are or must be "pursuing citizenship." This is misleading, at best. I find it to be totally false, and essentially a bald-faced lie.
IBTZ.
A state can’t deport anyone, but they can discourage foreigners with E-Verify. If there are no jobs, they won’t come.
Rick Perry will not even mandate E-Verify for state jobs, much less the entire state. There can only be one answer to this, he is a one-worlder and doesn’t recognize the border.
As far as I know, every state distinguishes between "residence" (which can be shorter than an overnight stay in a hotel) and "domicile." "Domicile" is "home." "Residence" is where you are.
Dork, 18 year olds are not children the last time I checked. Get a real argument.
Signed: Heartless in Virginia
They shouldnt be here in the first place. Is he really that stupid or is he putting us on?
The more I hear from this jerk, the more I dont like him.
However, the terms "postsecondary education benefit" and "residence" are not defined in the federal law. In addition, no Texas or federal court has construed these terms or considered the substantive application of the federal law to a statute similar to the Texas statutes. Thus, while a federal or state court in Texas, following the reasoning of an intermediate California state appellate court decision, could find that 8 U.S.C. 1623 preempts Education Code sections 54.052(a)(3) and 54.053(3) to the extent of the conflict with the federal law, given the paucity of judicial precedent, this office cannot predict with certainty that a court would so find.
My parents were divorced.
My dad was "disabled" from a job, and didn't pay any child support.
I worked full time at a hot dog stand, to pay may own way through Jr college, including books and gas back and forth.
Not only did I work full time, but was also a full time student. It wasn't uncommon for me to work 50-60 even upwords of 70 hours a week during winter and spring breaks. 40-50 hrs a week during the summers.
I did that for 3 years. Got an associates in auto mechanics and a certificate of completion in welding.
Got offered a job and hired by one of my welding instructors, before I finished my last courses.
Today I'm a pipefitter/ certified welder. I'm certified in multiple welding processes and have welded in oil refineries, steel mills, nuke plants and other places.
50-60 hour weeks are still typical + driving 2-1/2 hours a day round trip.
Just started going back to school (after 26 years) to become a certified welding inspector, 3 hrs a week plus 2 hrs round trip travel, on top of working 60 hrs a week.
Like you said "That might still work if one is motivated. "
You have a way with name-calling. Should I report you to the Moderator? Your comment is a straw-man argument. Get some sleep.
Are 18 year olds children, yes or no?
Let them get educated on their own dime in their own country, Perry.
Yeah, I get that a lot. So many thoughts, trying to compress them into a small area or small time frame. And my typing is pretty much one maybe two fingers each hand.
Of course, when I get into discussions at work, I have the same problem.
I think if I was growing up today, instead of the 70's and 80's, I think I'd be labled ADHD.
AT work, I have to really lock into what I'm doing, or I get bored real easy and real fast, and get distracted. But when I'm locked in, look out. Its lead, follow or get out of the way. Preferably GET OUT OF THE WAY.
In property law, that's called "adverse possession."
There are also legal doctrines that inhibit taking a legal action, because one "sat on it" for too long. "Statute of limitations" is one, pretty well known, another is "the equitable doctrine of laches."
All roughly "you snooze, you lose" principles.
I can well see a US federal court asserting some flavor of this in favor of people in the country illegally, captured and released. The feds could have deported, but chose not to; therefore, they cannot deport.
Trust in the federal government to "do the right thing" when it comes to immigration (and a few other subjects) is misplaced.
Naturally, as opposed to "rule of law."
Not that I have any respect for the law, mind you.
It is a great website, I managed to get my kid into a school rated 10 out of 10 and I urge other parents to do the same. It makes a world of difference. This is your kid, this is their life.
My daughter was being teased by the Mexicans for being smart in her old school. Why? She would come home crying all the time, she is very emotional. Now, every day, she comes home with a smile and stories to be told.
Her old school was not that bad, only 50 percent Mexican. Her new school is more evenly mixed with every ethnicity.
In her old school, the kids all had skeletons and skulls on their clothes, even infant ware. When I visited the new school, I pointed out to my wife that there were no skulls and skeletons on their clothes.
Pay attention parents. If you can get your kid into a non-union school, your kids will be way ahead. In her new school, the parents take an active part in their kid’s education. I’d expand on the differences, but that is off topic.
Then, why educate these children in our high schools? The high school education has no purpose.
What it comes down to is you are trying to punish the children for the actions of the parent. In that way you are trying to punish the parent through their children. Our society should never stoop to such tactics. We are too civil of a society and have never acted in such a low handed way before. As conservatives, we get a bad name when we call for such action.
So if a child of an illegal parent graduates from a high school with a 4.0 gradepoint, shouldn’t that achievement be rewarded with the same opportunity the rest of the students who have similar achievement?
The minority status treatment I agree is unfair. All of it. I don’t understand it and some day, this progressive smut on our society will be cleaned up by good people who know true fairness.
The true unfairness is we have not sealed our border so that good citizens have their society disrupted by the negligent control of the population. That illegal parents expose their children to the risk of consequence is a recklessness I find objectionable. They would not have acted with such a risk if the border was not so easy to cross and the society they found was not so civil.
The bottom line is that in order to have a civil society, we have to make some trade-offs that challenge us.
The Perrywinkles continue to talk out of both sides of their mouth. They say the feds are supposed to control immigration - it's not Texas' responsibility. Then they go on to yammer at us endlessly about how illegals paying in state tuition is a state's rights issue.
Perry has these people convinced that they can do whatever they want whenever they want because they are Texas and only federal laws that benefit them are the ones they want.
Whats not a straw man is that there are ONLY so many slots for in state tuitions and so many grants available. That means somebody HAS to be rejected. In order to accept illegals or their children, a citizen MUST BE REJECTED.
Is THAT "fair"???
Our nation is $14.6 TRILLION in debt. We Are adding $1.6 TRILLION every year.
Wanting to help people is admirable, BUT there is this thing called reality. That reality says that there are only so many openings in schools and there is only so much money to pay for things. Not everybody is qualified and not everyone can afford it.
THOSE are just the cold hard facts of life.
I didn't grow up with the same advantages as most of my friends. Was that "FAIR"???
Should my friends have been penalized in order to make things more "FAIR" to me???
That's an interesting slant. I'm not poor, but most of the crew I associate with would be hard-pressed to find it in their budget to pay ytthe in-state rates. Adding $100K to it would price them right out of the picture. But I suppose them illegals have a higher earning potential than the average Joe.
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.