Skip to comments.Free Republic Sacrilege: Why Perry is the Conservative and Cain is Not
Posted on 10/10/2011 9:30:26 PM PDT by beancounter13
Has a firearm, a CCL, and he uses them.
Has a long history of 2nd Amendment support:
Thinks gun control should be left to the state and local governments placing him at odds with Heller and McDonald.
Perry signed into law a regulation would have required women seeking an abortion to view a sonogram and listen to the fetus's heartbeat while a doctor rattled off a detailed description of the fetus's anatomical development — and then forcibly ponder their decision for an additional 24 hours before an abortion could be performed.
Pro-life from conception, pro-life from conception, pro-life from conception.
Gay Marriage (note the so-called 'flip-flop' actually serves to showcase Perry's support of the 10th Amendment)
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.
Supports traditional marriage, support traditional marriage
Global Warming / Cap & Trade
Long history of fighting the EPA as Texas Governor:
[The EPA] relied heavily upon findings by climate-change scientists that have been subsequently discredited by the scientists' own e-mails ....
I don't believe global war-- global warming is real. Do we have climate change? Yes. Is it a crisis, no. And this is why I strongly oppose the-- the cap in trade
Use of a liberal term (“heartless”) while discussing an issue (in-state tuition for residents of non-citizens).
Use of a liberal term (“insensitive”) in referring to a racial accusation before the facts were revealed.
I read this interview at your link when it came out and I examined Perry's answers closely. I invite other Freepers concerned with the immigration issue to do so, and there was a thread on it as well.
When Perry was about whether he supported building the fence originally envisioned by the Secure Fence Act, he did more than merely side-step the question but pretty clearly indicated that he would not build that fence, but only fence that he deems to be "strategic" which is so vague and unspecific as to sound like a typical campaign promise.
He did not challenge the premise in the question that he would make avoiding the inconveniencing of farmers his first priority.
He then went back into his stock talking point about boots on the ground. We all know that maintaining forever the annual funding for high numbers of boots on the ground is a chimera. But he rejects building out the fence, which would let us get by with a lower annual appropriation for fewer boots on the ground.
Here's what we can expect from President Perry in my view:
1. A couple of years of higher "boots on the ground" and a bit of fencing here and there for public relations purposes. The "boots" focus on criminal activity such as drug cartels and not so much on hindering ordinary illegals.
2. Further foot-dragging on requiring employers to screen employees for illegals using databases
3. After a couple of years, Perry declares the border "secure" enough, saying that it is impossible to achieve perfection.
4. Perry pushes "comprehensive immigration reform" through congress. The Republican congress is unable to resist this when it comes from someone in their own party.
His idea of legalizing them but denying them voting rights will not fly for long. Americans do not want an entire class of "second class citizens." Either they will go ahead and give them the path to citizenship at the first bite at the apple, or wait a couple of years and then do it.
Tom Tancredo begs to differ. Perry No Conservative
It’s the truth. The loser blew it with his pandering to illegals. ESAD.
Sorry, I disagree with you.
You missed my post about CEOs. They know exactly what they say, and when they say it. People don’t get to be CEOs otherwise.
I’m talking about the majority US citizens — *not* just Texans. I know you Texans want to make this into a states’ rights issue. But immigration is a Federal issue, and if a state offers in-state tuition to illegal aliens, it acts as an incentive for more illegals to enter the US (Texas, in this case).
Meanwhile, as I posted earlier, there are hundreds of thousands of foreigners who have been waiting in line for years to apply for legal entry to the US (and I personally know some of them) who are witnessing this stuff and wondering what the advantage is to doing this the legal way when those who break the law get to jump to the front of the line and get, in this case, in-state tuition rewards in Texas which my natural-born citizen children from Virginia could not even qualify for.
One simply cannot justify this to those foreigners who are for years and years waiting to gain entry to this country legally.
You are ignorant of the facts, uninformed, or a liar. Perry is not for amnesty, has said so, it is well known, inarguable, and unquestioned by those who read and and hear. Anything to the contrary is Leftist propaganda peddled by a few useful idiots on the Right.
What's with D-students and open-borders. Ted Kennedy, John McCain, and now Ricky Perry. All stupid men who barely got through college. All immigration leftists. Some kind of pattern there.
A No-Romney Zone. Wise indeed, Jim-san.
He’s tanking. Shamnesty is so 2008. He’s done.
Plenty of CEO’s have said the wrong thing when fed bad info and disinformation.
Good post. I don’t think you should or will be zotted.
Neither Cain nor Perry are perfect, but both are acceptable.
I’m for Cain at the moment.
In a final op-ed, Herman Cain noted his opposition to the 2007 Comprehensive Immigration reform plan and noted four things that congress could do concerning immigration.
These items were to secure the borders convincingly,
expand the temporary worker program for skilled legal immigrants,
establish a reliable legal immigrant identification program
and then propose a reasonable program for the 12 million (and counting) illegal persons who broke our laws to get here, but not amnesty.
In additional interviews, Mr Cain stated that comprehensive immigration reform was a "do nothing" policy which would not solve the problem of illegal immigration.
He stated that a Cain administration would do three things:
secure the border;
enforce the laws;
promote the existing path to citizenship.
” A No-Romney Zone. ....” <<<
Not for long. If the Right and the Left together can successfully kill off Perry it will be all Zone Romney. The Left and the Right are all paired up to do just that, and new found buddy team, Cain and RINO Romney. That only looks bizarre to me though. It’s no problem to those on this thread. The Left, the Right, Cain, Romney, Rinos are all guns trained on Perry. Weird.
You are tanking in kool aide. For the Left. Wipe your mouth.
Cain’s Tax Mutiny. New national sales tax on top of the income tax is a political killer
Wall Street Journal
FLASHBACK: Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrist endorses Rick Perry for Texas governor
Dalls News ^ | 24 February 2010 | GROMER JEFFERS JR
Posted on Saturday, October 08, 2011 5:32:13 PM by Clairity
“I had to come 1,200 miles to find a governor who believes in a simple principle called the rule of law,” Gilchrist said at the Crescent Hotel. “I’m here to encourage all you Texans to stand your ground and get out there and vote for this governor.”
Gilchrist later added that “Perry has a clear record of decisive action to secure our borders, stop illegal drug and human trafficking trade and is very clearly the right choice for voters in Texas to fight illegal immigration.”
In accepting the endorsement, Perry blasted the federal government’s effort to secure that nation’s borders.
“Washington’s record on border security has been one of indifference, of neglect and failure,” Perry said. “That’s why Texas has been stepping up with resources to fill the gap left by Washington.”
Perry said the state, over the last two legislative sessions, has pumped in over $225 million for border security.
“We’re not going to rest in Texas until that border is completely secure,” Perry said.
Cain wants to empower the states to deal with immigration. Might be a good idea, then the states can take care of all the expenses themselves. Take Texas and Perry he can give the illegals all the education and healthcare he wants as long as Texans pay for it with no money coming from the feds.
Secure the border with more boots on the ground
I do believe we can secure the border with a combination of boots on the ground, technology, and a fence, but we’ve got three other problems. And to get to it, we’ve got to secure the border.
Secondly, let’s promote the path to citizenship that’s already there. We don’t need a new one, we just need to clean up the bureaucracy that’s slowing the process down and discouraging people.
The third thing we need to do, enforce the laws that are there, and the way we do it, empower the states. I believe that the people closest to the problem are the best ones to be able to solve that problem. Empower the states to do what the federal government hasn’t done, can’t do, and won’t do. This is how we solve the entire problem.
Source: 2011 GOP debate in Simi Valley CA at the Reagan Library , Sep 7, 2011
We have a path to citizenship: it’s called legal immigration
Q: When Pres. Obama joked about protecting the borders with alligators and a moat, not only did you embrace the idea, you upped the ante with “a 20-foot barbed wire electrified fence.” Were you serious?
A: America has got to learn how to take a joke. But allow me to give you my real solution to the immigration problem. I happen to believe that is four problems.
1. Yes, we must secure the border with whatever means necessary.
2. Enforce the laws that are there.
3. Promote the path to citizenship that’s already there. We have a path to citizenship for illegal aliens. It’s called legal immigration.
4. And then, I happen to agree with empowering the states and allow them to deal with that issue. If we work on the right problem, we will be able to solve it.
And in the case of immigration, we’ve got four problems that we need to work on simultaneously. We can have high fences and wide open doors, all at the same time.
Source: Iowa Straw Poll 2011 GOP debate in Ames Iowa , Aug 11, 2011
# Guiding principle #2: We have got to lead this nation from an entitlement society to an empowerment society, by getting government out of the way. We’ve got to empower states to do what states do best: to solve the people’s problems at the state level. Empowerment, not entitlement
Source: 2011 Faith and Freedom Conference , Jun 4, 2011
If states don’t want to do anything about it they can reap what they sow.
Perry Comes Out Swinging on Illegal Immigration in Iowa Rick Perry Report ^ | Oct 8, 2011 | Joe Hyde
I heard a report on the radio the other morning. Within just a couple days after that Federal judge upheld most of the Alabama immigration law, *hundreds* of children were withdrawn from just *one* local school. It seems tens of thousands of illegals are on their way *out* of Alabama already. (But to where, who knows?)
Simply “enforcing the law” leads to a very beautiful thing called “self-deportation.” This can happen at the national level also, with the right leadership in Washington.
He has said a lot of good things. His “record” of saying things looks like a conservative’s dream.
Of course, he was a conservative talk show host. Rush Limbaugh also has a “record” that would be a conservative’s dream.
The question is, can we look at what he DID as a president of a company, or as a director, and see how he actually applies his principles?
For example, we know that he is a strong supporter of the FairTax (something I am at best lukewarm about). But he’s pushing 9-9-9. It’s because he says that is what he can accomplish now, and he can work it into a FairTax at a later time. The 9-9-9 imposes a national sales tax while we still have an income tax, something a lot of conservatives are extremely nervous about. Cain wins, gets 9-9-9, then an Obama wins next, and it’s a 15-15-15, or worse, they bring back the full income tax “for the very rich”.
But more interestingly, why is it that Cain is pushing this compromise plan? Because he thinks it is what he can pass in the short term? Because he really likes it? Because it can get more support among voters than the plan he actually wants? Is this a sign of political waffling? He is a smart man, but we know smart people often think that compromise is a great idea (see Gingrich for example).
Running a company under the auspices of a parent company also involves making many compromises. It’s not a place where you really can see how a person applies principles.
I think Cain will stick to what he says, although his record of saying things isn’t all that long. For example, do a google search, and find the oldest quote you can from Cain about his pro-life position.
Maybe there are people who would tell us he was pro-life in the 1990s. Or maybe not. We KNOW Romney was pro-choice in the 1990s, because we have him on record. How do we know if Cain used to have a different position, when he has only been making public comments recently?
I can prove I have been pro-life my entire life, because I was actively involved with pro-life organizations while I was still in high school. I can cite my correspondence trying to get into the Latter-Days Ministries program, I attended walk for life rallies, I passed out leaflets.
Do we have a record of Cain that would include anything like that? It would be helpful, since he hasn’t been a public official so we don’t have a voting record, to see how in his private life he acted out on his convictions.
Maybe his book has some evidences from his private life. I’ll have to read it.
From what I heard, Herman Cain’s 999 plan is phased in in two parts. The second part abolishes the income tax altogether. There will be no more income tax. No more payroll tax, no more capital gains tax and you should go read from his site the 999 plan yourself.
Here’s an off-topic scary thing. When doing what I mentioned we should do, I went to a NARAL pro-choice site ranking Cain on abortion, and they had three links for his positions. The third was supposed to be his 2004 senate campaign, and the actual link took me to the FreeRepublic discussion of his 2004 senate campaign.
So yes, even NARAL uses FreeRepublic as an authoritative resource.
Not sure source is the right word. More like ‘archive’.
Money is fungible, so the only way that would work is if pro-illegal states received not one single penny for anything in federal money. In other words, never gonna happen....
Immigration is a federal issue. We cannot allow some states to act as magnets for illegal aliens. Eventually, those illegals who flood into pro-illegal states, end up spilling over into other states as well.
They were certain that even though he didn't have the money of Isakson, he was getting popular, and would shine in the debates.
Unfortunately, in the end his campaign wasn't able to translate solid conservatism, good debate performances, and his business credentials into a primary victory.
This is also currently the earliest reference I can find to Cain speaking about abortion publicly. There could well be earlier ones. I'm still looking into Cain as a candidate to support.
Sounds like Dim Rick is running away from his earlier comments about possible legalization for illegals.
Numbers USA ranks all the candidates on immigration. Bachman is best with a B minus. Obama gets an F minus. Perry a D minus for his opposition to a fence, in-state tuition for illegal aliens, opposition to e-verify and support for some kind of legalization program (amnesty).
Also worth noting that John McCain swore his vehement opposition to Amnesty, despite having his own name on the biggest amnesty bill in human history. The dodge was that his legalization came with a token fine and some paperwork...so it was not in his view really an amnesty per se. Similar deal with Dim Rick as an earlier poster noted.
Yeah, which is which is why it is so sad when states give illegals benefits, free health care and educations. In the ling run it hurts the rest of the country. Alabama has it right!
MNB, You don’t document anything. Amnesty is a federal matter, and you know it. If you don’t like Perry, that’s fine, but be honest. Word games are for liberals, stop acting like one.
Stamping your feet and putting your fingers in your ears and pretending that Perry didn’t say exactly what I quoted him from his own document will not accomplish anything.
Meet the New Boss likes to snag unsuspecting freepers. When he gets called out, he can’t back up his claims. It’s a pattern of his, and he doesn’t seem to care.
Here is how you know where Herman Cain's heart is, here is his position: Herman Cain I MUST TELL JESUS>
And for those who keep saying Herman Cain likes romney that dog just wont hunt. Herman Cain w Mike Huckabee
Take a Ride on The Cain Train!
For those who have not yet bought Herman Cain’s new book, this was included in the book on immigration:
Our new vision means immigration through the front door and not through the back door or the side door. This nation was built on immigrants. Legal immigrants. And if we attack the right problem, actually we have four problems rather than one. Weve got to secure the border, weve got to enforce the laws that are already in place, weve got to promote the path to citizenship that is in place. Why dont you ask the millions of people who have come here legally? Theyll tell you about the path. And then the fourth thing that we have to do in order to deal with the nations illegals that are already here is to realize that the federal government is not going to solve the problem. In our new vision we will empower the states to solve the problem of those who are here illegally. Thats how we take care of that problem.
Cain, Herman. This Is Herman Cain! My Journey to the White House (pp. 218-219). Pocket Books. Kindle Edition.
1. Weve got to secure the border,
2. weve got to enforce the laws that are already in place,
3. weve got to promote the path to citizenship that is in place.
4. we will empower the states to solve the problem of those who are here illegally.
The fourth point is key. The Perrybots often repeat the talking point that the only choice is round them all up and deport them en masse or else legalize them.
NO. Support things at the state level like what Arizona and Alabama are doing in eliminating employment of illegals and denying them benefits and there will be self-deportation.
And I (this is MTNB talking) believe we all need to lobby Congress for a law reversing the Supreme Court decision requiring the states to give K-12 education to foreign nationals in the country illegally. That decision was dealing with a Texas state law. If we get a law passed at the federal level, which is entitled under the Constitution to make law on immigration, I believe the Supreme Court would defer and the earlier ruling would no longer apply.
No mention of taxpayer subsidized instate tuition and financial aid for ILLEGAL aliens or amnesty?
Perry's a pro-ILLEGAL alien candidate. That's not a red flag, it's a non-starter.
We should not split our vote with these two or Romney wins.
Which claim did I not back up?
Care to say? Hmmmm?
I have documented that Perry supports amnesty.
Amnesty is allowing people who have broken the law to not have to pay the penalty called for by the law.
Legalizing the legals = Amnesty.
That is just how it goes for those of us watching the race closely. The candidates get asked the same few things over and over and they attempt to give the same answers in an increasingly adept way. By the time the voting starts they will have their lines well learned and many people will be seeing those lines delivered for the first time and make their choices then. The folks who have to worry are the die-hard Perry supporters since he has not yet demonstrated the ability to improve his poorly-articulated answers.
DITTO: We should all vote for Cain, lest Romney wins. I'm down with that.
This is Slick Rick at his finest!
He always takes the position that "amnesty" when he is talking means "voting rights."
So in his mind, if we legalize the illegals, but don't give them voting rights, it's not amnesty!
But people who don't talk like double-talking professional politicians know that amnesty means taking someone who has broken the law and deciding not to enforce the penalty required by law.
I like Cain and I've been watching him closely. I have seen him flub some questions but I do think he's improving and he seems not to flub the same question over and over.
It is way worse than that. Perry should have known that he would be asked about social security, Gardasil, and in-state tuition for illegals in the first debate and yet he flubbed all three answers. Then he flubbed all three answers again in the second debate. Then he did it again in the third debate. It is hard to overstate how incompetent this is.
Why do you pretend that Cain does not have decades of non-governmental experience?
I think I would go nuts if I ran for office! I can’t think of anything worse than saying the same things over and over for months on end!
Insensitive is not liberal, if he called it racist that would be liberal. He answered the question put to him, if he didn't people would be saying he's avoiding the question...I liked his answer, Cain acting grown up and politically incorrect...not afraid to answer after having the race card thrown at him by some idiot reporter. Meant to embarrass him, wonder what the other candidates would say to that question, but of course they will not be asked it, they are white....and it might embarrass them to answer. That is having the race card played against Cain because of his race...
Yep......either that or they really haven’t listen to what he says....
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.