THE BELOW IS FROM MEX-OWNED NEW YORK TIMES, THE MOUTHPIECE FOR LA RAZA PROPAGANDA! ALL AMERICANS THAT THINK LAWS APPLY TO LA RAZA ILLEGALS ARE EVIL ACCORDING TO THIS PUBLICATION!
WHILE THE VAST NUMBER OF AMERICANS STRUGGLE TO PAY FOR THE EVER INCREASING COST OF EDUCATION THEIR CHILDREN, PERRY, LIKE ANY LA RAZA DEM, WAS OFFERING SPECIAL DISCOUNTS TO LA RAZA! WE CAN’T END THE MEXICAN INVASION, OCCUPATION AND EVER EXPANDING WELFARE STATE UNTIL WE STOP SENDING INVITATIONS OUT TO ILLEGAL TO COME LOOT!
“In 2001, he signed into law a bill making Texas the first state to grant in-state college tuition rates and financial aid to immigrant children, regardless of their legal status. In 2009, roughly 1 percent of Texas college students — about 12,000 students — benefited from the law.”
THE TEXAS TRIBUNE
Grist for Left and Right in Perry Immigration Record
By JULIÁN AGUILAR and EMILY RAMSHAW
Published: September 8, 2011
Ann Coulter, the conservative pundit, has called Gov. Rick Perry “a little bit too much like George Bush” on immigration — and she does not mean it as a compliment. Tea Party loyalists have decried Mr. Perry’s opposition to a border fence and Arizona-style enforcement laws. And Mitt Romney has taken not-so-veiled jabs at Mr. Perry, criticizing officials who provide “incentives that promote illegal immigration.”
Expanded coverage of Texas is produced by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit news organization. To join the conversation about this article, go to texastribune.org.
A curated site for information on Gov. Rick Perry’s political career and policy positions: texastribune.org/perrypedia.
As Mr. Perry edges into front-runner status for the Republican presidential nomination, his opponents are trying to plant seeds of doubt about how tough the border state’s governor has been on illegal immigration — from his compassion for immigrant students to the tightrope he has walked between securing the border and protecting Texas’ symbiotic relationship with Mexico.
Critics hope his track record, which some have generalized as tough on security and gentle on people, will be a complicating factor for the Republican faithful.
“You can’t even have an honest discussion about the economy without taking into consideration illegal immigration,” said Katrina Pierson, a member of the Dallas Tea Party’s steering committee. “Governor Perry has not met the standards, for me, to be the president of the United States if he can’t even address the real issues in Texas.”
The governor’s campaign counters that a serious discussion about immigration reform cannot take place until the Mexican border is secure.
“The Obama administration has failed to do so, but as president, Governor Perry will deploy adequate resources, manpower and technology to get the job done,” said Katherine Cesinger, a spokeswoman for Mr. Perry.
Mr. Perry’s first immigration-related move as governor was probably his most controversial. In 2001, he signed into law a bill making Texas the first state to grant in-state college tuition rates and financial aid to immigrant children, regardless of their legal status. In 2009, roughly 1 percent of Texas college students — about 12,000 students — benefited from the law.
Two years later, Mr. Perry joined forces with Vicente Fox, then the president of Mexico, to advocate for overhauling guest-worker laws. When the fiscal conservative commentator Lou Dobbs questioned him on immigration on CNN in 2003, Mr. Perry said that Texas had a “close, complex” relationship with Mexico, and that businesses relied on immigrants for affordable labor.
To that end, Mr. Perry has split with the platform of the Texas Republican Party, asserting that an Arizona-style immigration enforcement law — in which the authorities are required to question people about their legal status — is not a good fit for Texas.
“We have to understand why millions of people come here and why many more have died trying,” Mr. Perry said in his 2007 inaugural address. “It is for something as basic as the freedom to find a job and feed their families.”
Mr. Perry’s compassion ends where he believes Texas’ security concerns begin. He has never wavered in his desire to secure the 1,200-mile Texas-Mexico border with manpower, not “preposterous” fencing, or in his frustration with the federal government, which he believes has not adequately protected Texas from the drug violence raging across the Rio Grande.
In 2005, Mr. Perry announced a $10 million state program to increase border patrols and upgrade radio systems along the border. A year later, he unveiled plans to install hundreds of video cameras, creating a multimillion-dollar “virtual” wall that in its first four years proved overly ambitious, netting few arrests. Though Mr. Perry expressed support for improving guest-worker programs in 2003, when President George W. Bush pushed for it in 2005, the governor’s frustration with the federal government kept him from supporting it.
Meanwhile, Mr. Perry has remained at war with the Obama administration over his request in 2010 for 1,000 National Guard troops along the border; he got 250. In August, he asked the federal government to reimburse Texas $350 million, the estimated cost of imprisoning illegal immigrants in state lockups.
The immigration debate has at times been a minefield for Mr. Perry, who has had to balance the ardently anti-immigration views of his base with the backing of his major donors, some of whom often rely on immigrant labor. And the governor’s rhetoric — and his tone — has ebbed and flowed, coinciding with his re-election bids and a State Legislature that is growing ever redder.
In 2009, he endorsed legislation, which has since passed, requiring Texans to present a form of photo identification to vote, although some opponents said it singled out minority voters.
And this year, in the lead-up to his run for president, Mr. Perry deemed a measure to outlaw so-called sanctuary cities in Texas a legislative emergency. The bill would have stripped state financing for municipalities that barred local law enforcement from inquiring into the immigration status of individuals detained for any crime.
Though Mr. Perry tried to differentiate the bill from the strict Arizona law, the legislation ultimately died, largely because of an 11th-hour push from Republican businessmen — some of the governor’s financial backers — who opposed it.
Despite his recent efforts, Mr. Perry has largely remained opposed to legislation backed by the most conservative lawmakers, including efforts to repeal the tuition law and measures that would end birthright citizenship for children of illegal immigrants.
This stance has been highly unpopular with the Tea Party. “Governor Perry has been governor for 10 years,” said JoAnn Fleming, the chairwoman of the Texas Tea Party Caucus Advisory Committee, “and we’ve not had enough interior enforcement of immigration laws.”
But it has not won him many fans among progressives either, whose strategy is to keep the memory of sanctuary cities fresh in the minds of Hispanic voters until the 2012 general election.
“No candidate will be more effective at alienating Hispanic voters than Rick Perry,” said Shannon Perez, the political coordinator in Texas for the Service Employees International Union.
And neither side particularly trusts the conservative business community. Last week, an e-mail surfaced from some of the Republican donors who urged Mr. Perry to back down on sanctuary cities, offering the governor’s critics low-hanging fruit. In the message, Norman Adams, a co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy, congratulated members for helping raise $205,000 for Mr. Perry’s presidential campaign and said their efforts were the key to courting Hispanic voters.
For Mr. Perry, criticism from both sides of the political spectrum is hardly new. In past races for governor, former Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison accused him of being lax on immigration — to no avail.
On the presidential trail, and as recently as the Republican presidential debate on Wednesday, Mr. Perry has taken heat from Mr. Romney, who, trailing Mr. Perry in several national polls, has made a point of reminding voters that as Massachusetts governor, he vetoed legislation that would have provided in-state tuition to illegal immigrants and strengthened the authority that state troopers have to enforce immigration laws.
Mr. Perry has said that young students should not be punished for their parents’ decisions, that a border fence will do nothing but bolster the “35-foot-ladder business, and that Arizona-style enforcement laws are not appropriate for Texas, a state that is 38 percent Hispanic.
But his latest talking points also include opposition to amnesty and to national legislation that would provide a path to legal residency for some children living in the country illegally.
jaguilar@texastribune.org
eramshaw@texastribune.org
*
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/rick-perry-la-razas-republican.html
*
THE BEST WAY TO KEEP YOUR CORPORATE PAYMASTERS HAPPY AND GENEROUS $$$ IS TO PUT AN ILLEGAL IN A JOB TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED!
*
VIDEO
Rick Perry AGREES with Obama: Open Borders for America!
(Video: Please favorite, share, comment, everyone needs to see this fast.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwD84nKA5y0&feature=player_embedded
The ALIPAC Team
www.alipac.us
If you forward our emails to others, please remember to remove the info at the bottom so nobody unsubscribes you from our lists.
*
JOE LEGAL vs JOSE ILLEGAL… WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE? JOSE ILLEGAL GETS THE JOB, AND JOE ILLEGALS GETS THE TAX BILL TO PAY FOR JOSE ILLEGALS’ ANCHOR BABY BIRTHING!
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/joe-american-legal-vs-la-raza-jose.html
*
IS RICK PERRY NOT LA RAZA’S REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR OPEN BORDERS, AMNESTY AND CONTINUED NON-ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAWS PROHIBITING THE EMPLOYMENT OF ILLEGALS?
VIVA LA RAZA? THE MEX OCCUPATION COSTS LEGALS $20 BILLION IN MEXIFORNIA, WHERE ACCORDING TO ATTORNEY GENERAL KAMALA HARRIS, NEARLY HALF OF ALL MURDERS ARE BY MEXICAN GANGS.
llegal Immigration Fighters Have No Confidence in Rick Perry
Friends of ALIPAC,
We do not endorse in the Presidential races, but we do educate the public about the real records of politicians running for that office.
Tonight, a biased Associated Press article is heading for papers across the nation. It should be all over the place tomorrow.
We will provide you with Rick Perry's accurate record on illegal immigration along with all of the other candidates running. Candidates will go into one of three catagories. Amnesty Supporter, Law Enforcer, or Unknown.
Texas Governor Rick Perry is clearly in the Amnesty catagory due to his support for Dream Act Amnesty and In-state tuition for illegal aliens in Texas. Perry has also bashed Americans that want fencing along the Southern Border. While he has called on Washington, DC, to do more to secure the border, he has often used such rhetoric to conceal his own failures to act against illegal immigration as Governor of America's second most populous state!
Perry has positions on immigration that are almost identical to the pro-Amnesty positions of George Bush and John McCain.
Please read and and share this biased Associated Press article we have retitled.
(Far right questions Rick Perry on immigration)
Renamed
Illegal Immigration Fighters Have No Confidence in Rick Perry
http://www.alipac.us/article-6484-thread-1-0.html
*
FIGHTING FOR THE AMERICAN WORKER IS LAMAR SMITH
BELOW IS ONLY ONE MORE EXAMPLE OF HOW BARACK OBAMA IS SABOTAGING OUR BORDER SECURITY TO APPEASE HIS LA RAZA PARTY BASE AND KEEP THE NATION FLOODED WITH “CHEAP” LABOR ILLEGALS, MANY OF WHOM ARE CRIMINALS!
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/08/halt-act-to-stop-obamas-open-borders.html
*
FAIR Legislative Update August 1, 2011
House Immigration Subcommittee Holds Hearing on HALT Act
On Tuesday, the House Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement held a hearing on H.R. 2497, the “Hinder the Administration’s Legalization Temptation” or “HALT” Act. The HALT Act, introduced by Judiciary Chairman Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), would suspend President Obama’s use of “prosecutorial discretion”—the ability of the executive branch to decline to enforce immigration law against individuals—by preventing him from:
• Granting deferred action, parole, or extended voluntary departure to illegal aliens other than those being tried for a crime or acting as a witness at trial, those needed for significant law enforcement or national security purposes, or those whose life is imminently threatened (§§2(b), 2(f));
• Waiving the three and ten year bars to admission for aliens who have been illegally present in the U.S. (§2(a));
• Cancelling the removal and adjusting the status of illegal aliens ordered deported (§2(c));
• Designating additional countries as qualifying for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) (§2(d)); and
• Granting work authorization to illegal aliens (§§2(e), 2(g)).
(See FAIR’s Legislative Update, July 18, 2011)
Rep. Smith outlined the need for the HALT Act’s restriction of the Obama Administration’s use of prosecutorial discretion in his opening statement. “What had once been rumor fueled by leaked administration memos is now official Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policy as of last month,” he said referencing two June 17th, 2011 memos issued by ICE Director, John Morton, authorizing ICE personnel to decline to enforce immigration laws against certain classes of illegal aliens, such as those who would qualify for amnesty under the failed DREAM Act. (See FAIR’s Legislative Update, June 27, 2011) “Unfortunately, the ICE memos make clear that DHS plans not to use but to abuse these [prosecutorial discretion] powers. If the Obama Administration has its way, millions of illegal immigrants will be able to live and work legally in the United States. This unilateral decision will saddle American communities with the costs of providing education and medical care to illegal immigrants.”
Several witnesses testifying before the Subcommittee agreed with Rep. Smith’s call for limiting the Administration’s authority, expressing concern that the President is bypassing Congress. Senator David Vitter (R-LA), author of the Senate version of the HALT Act (S.1380), asserted in his written testimony: “In 1996, Congress clearly limited the Administration’s parole authority to be used ‘only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit. However, these memos make clear that DHS plans to abuse these powers to grant mass legalization without any Congressional authorization.” (Testimony of Sen. David Vitter, July 26, 2011) Likewise, Jessica Vaughan, Director of Policy Studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, stated that forms of relief granted through the use of prosecutorial discretion is “designed to be used for exceptionally compelling cases, and were not intended as a way for the President, his appointees, or government staff to bypass Congress and its unique authority to make immigration law.” (Testimony of Jessica Vaughan, July 26, 2011)
Chris Crane, President of a national ICE union representing roughly 7,000 employees, also testified in support of the HALT Act, describing the problems caused by the latest string of Morton memos. “The purpose of this policy is to prohibit officers and agents from arresting individuals from certain groups... From an enforcement standpoint, the biggest dilemma facing officers and agents in the field may be how to apply the policy to the hundreds of thousands of aliens encountered each year.” (Testimony of Chris Crane, July 26, 2011) Last summer, the union Crane represents issued a vote of no-confidence in ICE Director John Morton, and former Assistant Director of the ICE Office of Detention and Policy and Planning, Phyllis Coven. (See FAIR Legislative Update, Aug. 9, 2010)
Margaret Stock, the only witness who opposed the HALT Act, alleged, “Our immigration system is dysfunctional and irrational, and the situation only promises to get worse without comprehensive action by Congress.” (Testimony of Margaret Stock, July 26, 2011) “Our nation’s ever more complex and restrictive legal immigration system makes it nearly impossible for most people to immigrate to the United States legally, and provides no means for people to enter or stay in the United States legally in many compelling circumstances,” she added. (Id.) Ms. Stock, an adjunct professor and retired army colonel, also testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in support of the DREAM Act last month.
No comments:
Post a Comment