Two cheers for Joe Nocera
[Posted by Karl]
The New York Times — and Joe Nocera’s column specifically — is not a place you would expect to mark the 24th anniversary of the Senate’s rejection of Robert Bork’s nomination to the Supreme Court as a bad thing. Nocera writes that Bork’s views “cannot be fairly characterized as extreme” and that “[t]he Bork fight, in some ways, was the beginning of the end of civil discourse in politics.” He describes the left’s approach to the fight:
There was tremendous fear that if Bork were confirmed, he would swing the court to the conservatives and important liberal victories would be overturned — starting with Roe v. Wade.
But liberals couldn’t just come out and say that. “If this were carried out as an internal Senate debate,” Ann Lewis, the Democratic activist, would later acknowledge, “we would have deep and thoughtful discussions about the Constitution, and then we would lose.” So, instead, the Democrats sought to portray Bork as “a right-wing loony,” to use a phrase in a memo written by the Advocacy Institute, a liberal lobby group.
The character assassination began the day Bork was nominated, when Ted Kennedy gave a fiery speech describing “Robert Bork’s America” as a place “in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters,” and so on. It continued until the day the nomination was voted down; one ad, for instance, claimed, absurdly, that Bork wanted to give “women workers the choice between sterilization and their job.”
Conservatives were stunned by the relentlessness — and the essential unfairness — of the attacks. But the truth is that many of the liberals fighting the nomination also knew they were unfair. That same Advocacy Institute memo noted that, “Like it or not, Bork falls (perhaps barely) at the borderline of respectability.” It didn’t matter. He had to be portrayed “as an extreme ideological activist.” The ends were used to justify some truly despicable means.
Unsurprisingly, Nocera’s column is itself under attack in the leftosphere from hacks like Steve Benen, who implicitly concedes in his relativism that he is incapable of evaluating Bork’s jurisprudence, but argues that the characterization of Bork as “extreme” is justified based on his policy disagreement with Bork’s positions. Benen either does not know or does not care that Bork sometimes did not personally hold the positions Democrats ascribed to him, or that Bork’s legal positions were shared by Justices Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, John Marshall Harlan II, Louis Brandeis, and Benjamin Cardozo, among others. There are principled objections to be made to Bork’s jurisprudence — I recall making some myself at the time — but the attacks on Nocera’s column stem from the same “ends justify the means” philosophy at the core of the attacks on Bork himself. (Perhaps Nocera ought to consider that such distortions are a natural outgrowth of a philosophy that treats a constitution of limited powers as elastic enough to justify ordering people to buy certain products or services by virtue of living. But I digress.)
So why only two cheers for Nocera? After all, today’s column seems t0 reflect that Nocera has learned something from the criticism he got after comparing Tea Party Republicans to terrorists. The answer is that Obama’s re-elect strategy will almost certainly depend on demonizing the GOP’s eventual nominee as “extreme.” If Nocera is willing to criticize the politics of personal destruction in real time, as opposed to 24 years later, he will deserve that third cheer.
–Karl
Ding!
Karl (37b303) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:19 amKarl – People vote Democrat because they believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit
daleyrocks (e56eef) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:26 amsome fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters. Judges such as Robert Bork do not fit that mold.
Judges such as Robert Bork do not fit that mold.
This is one of the reasons why Judge Bork’s endorsement of Mitt Romney is significant, in my opinion.
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:34 amdaleyrocks,
It’s not just to get unpopular positions past voters. It’s also to get those positions into con law, so that it takes an amendment or a political sea change to get them out. Public opinion was headed pro-choice when Roe was decided; Dems need it on the books (what’s left of it) because public opinion is now headed the other way.
Karl (37b303) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:36 amTwo points strike me: the first being that ubiquitous default claim of eventual outcome – forced back alley abortions will return; and the second done being the still current reality of Republican reaction to the left’s games: shock at the relentlessness and unfairness of attacks.
It’s ironic because Bork happened 24 years ago and the right still doesn’t seem to grasp, comprehend and know how to effectively fight back against the ongoing viciousness and lack of moral compass the left operates with.
We currently have candidates facing unfair and unjustified hateful attacks and yet still we play nice and end up allowing ourselves to be so manipulated by the media as well as the left.
The left sets up these ugly pointless debates via the media weeks before (pitting the particular candidates, throwing out the bait of some old questionable decision made by one (see: Romney’s yard crew), and then let them take said bait – and they do). We was Perry and Romney go for each other rather than listen to Newt who wisely and wryly observed that this set-up is simply playing into the hands of the left. The attacks should continually be against Obama, on *his* failed economy, foreign policy, domestic policy, national security, etc., etc.
The right is so easily played. Still.
Dana (4eca6e) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:37 amYou mean Bork is no more radical than Kagen or Sotomayer?
AZ Bob (2ca156) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:39 amNot to worry. If Obama loses, Nocera will be right there, criticizing the politics of personal destruction . . . starting the day after the election.
Progress takes time, you know.
Icy (4c94d3) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:40 amI watched the entire Bork hearing, and found it instructive on three counts: 1) it was a great survey course of Constitutional Law; 2) it showed me the difference between high school civics and reality, and 3) I learned just how crooked the LA Times reporting was as they ignored, distorted and plain made up their reports the next issue.
Kevin M (563f77) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:40 amThe problem with the Right engaging in Borking is that it requires a monolithic Press willing to disinform the public according to your agenda.
Kevin M (563f77) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:44 amThe Bork hearings were the first of the new era of left wing advocacy that was willing to go through someone’s trash to find a harmful item. We have not recovered.
Mike K (9ebddd) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:46 amDana,
I respectfully disagree about the debates. Newt’s admonition sounds great… but only if you think the Democratic MSM complex is not going to raise the attacks in a general election. Whether it’s the Romney yard crew or the WaPo’s hit piece on Perry’s hunting lodge, GOP voters better know what attacks are coming, and how the candidates respond to them. I get why Newt — who has his own share of baggage — might not want to talk about attacks, but I don’t really buy it.
Karl (37b303) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:47 amI disagree that everyone on the right is being played. Successful arguments are based on logic, not emotionalism. It’s harder to do but victories based on logic — instead of emotion — are more successful and lasting.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:23 amI agree with Karl. It’s not such a bad thing for candidates to lay out their cases against eachother.
Many cite Reagan’s 11th commandment not realizing that Reagan was willing to make a strong case against other politicians in the primary.
The primary is the right time for these candidates to cite problems with their competitors. Seeing Romney hit Perry for his comments on social security is very informative. Seeing Perry and Romney argue about immigration doesn’t do either of them any good, but I have no problem with that.
If they can’t take the heat, they have no chance against the liberal attack machine.
Newt’s attitude about this reminds me of Mccain’s attitude in the general election in 2008.
As nice as it would be to nominate someone with this professional and presidential attitude, I think we need someone with more Palin in them, willing to roll up their sleeves and hit back.
I think debates where every candidate recites platitudes about Obama would be lazy and even cowardly. These candidates have real differences.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:31 amDustin,
Adding to your point, Reagan ran in ’68 to “Stop Nixon” and then in 1976 against an incumbent GOP POTUS. Not very 11th Commandment-y, really. RR invoked it when he was the frontrunner and GHWB was going on about “voodoo economics” (also not 11th Commandment-y).
Karl (37b303) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:44 amWhether it’s the Romney yard crew or the WaPo’s hit piece on Perry’s hunting lodge,
Jaysus… I better check my yardcare guy’s immigration status!
Hilario … venir aquí … ¿Tiene usted una tarjeta de residencia?
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:46 amThe attacks should continually be against Obama, on *his* failed economy, foreign policy, domestic policy, national security, etc., etc.
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:48 amIf you’ve been informed that the non English speaking folks working 11 hour shifts at your mansion are illegals, and you assure you will make sure the problem is resolved, yes, of course you should check their status unless your word means nothing to you, much as it appears to mean to Romney.
And no, we shouldn’t ignore the flaws of these candidates just because they aren’t Obama. What a cop-out. Let’s compare their records.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:55 amColonelHaiku
Bork’s name resonates with conservatives so it is a valuable endorsement, just as it was in December 2007 when Bork endorsed Romney and in August 2011 when Romney announced Bork would lead his judicial advisory committee. I think liberals subjected Judge Bork to reprehensible tactics during his confirmation hearings but, ironically, conservatives might have lost Heller had Judge Bork been on the Court. Here’s how Judge Bork analyzed the Second Amendment in a 1989 lecture at UC Irvine:
Prof. Reynolds linked to other concerns about Judge Bork’s reasoning here.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:58 am“liberal lion”
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:02 am“liberal lying lion”
Teddy Snagglepuss
yes, of course you should check their status unless your word means nothing to you
You will now be expected to check the status of every employee of every restaurant, gas station, and – in fact – every business establishment you frequent, unless your word means nothing to you.
Impressive, sir.
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:05 amthe flailing about
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:08 amthe moronic posturing
THE EPIC FLAILING
Ridiculous, ridiculous, ridiculous strawman.
Romney’s church buddy made an absolute mockery of the law, and had government contracts as well as working for Romney’s home. Romney said he would resolve this, and he failed to for at least a year.
And this isn’t some cook in the back of a restaurant. Romney saw these people every day at his home working 11 hour shifts, jokingly saying ‘buenos dias’ to them.
This is so different from patronizing a gas station.
But you know that. We both know how you would react if Perry were the guy with an illegal working on his rose bushes.
Romney’s doubly screwed because of his pathetic comment that the reason he shouldn’t have illegals on his property is because he’s running for office. Not because it’s wrong. Not because it’s illegal. Just because he’s running for office. He knows his church buddy has government contracts (we all read the articles by now, right?), and he’s only concerned with his property and his political liability.
This is the guy who flip flopped to pose as someone who takes illegal immigration very seriously, and the point here is that he clearly doesn’t take much of anything seriously.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:14 amColonel Haiku,
Every so often, the media in my town reports how law enforcement has busted a convenience store, restaurant, or landscaping company for doing something illegal — like selling liquor to minors or hiring illegal immigrant workers. I won’t do business with those companies when I learn what they’ve done. Romney does.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:14 amHey, I’m still waiting for you to explain how I was dishonest to note Perry cut education spending.
We all see Texas succeeding, and many are so obsessed with Romney they actually want to deny what is the GOP’s best argument against democrat policies.
One of these candidates walked the walk.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:17 amMy $.02… I find it laughable that anyone thinks this yardcare thing is an issue, Dustin… as does every major conservative pundit I read. That you think it has traction says something about your intellectual abilities.
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:20 amThe primary is the right time for these candidates to cite problems with their competitors. Seeing Romney hit Perry for his comments on social security is very informative. Seeing Perry and Romney argue about immigration doesn’t do either of them any good, but I have no problem with that.
I agree that the primary is the time for actual comparison of ideas and policy, however, when candidates reduce themselves to almost parodies of themselves as with the immigration kerfuffle, they both looked desperate and ineffectual. And the left laughs and hopes to see more of it. The last thing we’re thinking about is Obama’s pro-illegal immigration stand and the goals he is working toward with regard to them. Both candidates looked like fools, to me, and neither proved their point.
Dana (4eca6e) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:20 amSuccessful arguments are based on logic, not emotionalism. It’s harder to do but victories based on logic — instead of emotion — are more successful and lasting.
Well that’s sort of the point: Perry and Romney were both very emotional in their self-defense and attacks, and both ended up not making a successful case.
Dana (4eca6e) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:27 amRe the value (or lack of) of the debates, I think Ron Paul makes a bit of the point,
Paul also lamented the “uselessness” of some of the arguments in the GOP primary debates.
“I mean, arguing over who mows Mitt Romney’s lawn,” Paul said. “In the midst of a crisis, a sovereign debt worldwide crisis, the biggest in the history of the world, and the financial system of the world is about to collapse. We’re about to have another devaluation of … our credit rating. This is serious, and no control in the spending.”
“We’re going to have to get a hand on this,” Paul added. “We have to quit worrying over who’s mowing Mitt Romney’s yard.”
Dana (4eca6e) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:30 amI certainly don’t give a flying fig about who did Romney’s gardening, but you know who WILL make big hay out of it:
Icy (4c94d3) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:46 amThat’s right; the same lamestream media that refused to investigate Tony Rezko, the guy that in-effect bought Obama’s house for him.
It’s a shame, but Perry’s attack on Romney were very smart politics, given Romney’s apparnetly insincere carping on illegal immigration to attack Perry. That’s probably shut down, and yes, Perry didn’t gain anything other than shutting Romney down.
Do you respect Perry on immigration now? Not as a result of this attack, which is quite reasonable of you. But was Perry getting any respect for his mild attitude in his first two debates? I don’t think so. He was being attacked from every direction on every issue because he’s the guy who has a record of doing what he says he’ll do. Scary stuff to the establishment.
These debates are more and more like a game. It’s sad. But the game will continue into the general election. The Mccain attitude won’t work.
Right now, the easiest way to handle every issue is to spit out a platitude about Obama to easy cheers. That doesn’t help us in the primary. The election season is ridiculously long and there is more than enough time to explain Obama’s problems. In fact, I suspect the case will mostly be made in the last two weeks of October 2012, and Perry has that answer that he’s walked the walk on job creation.
Romney not being sincere on anything seems very important to me. I don’t understand why it wouldn’t be worth discussing. Ron Paul is dead wrong.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:51 amIllegal immigration is a problem because people give illegals jobs.
Often, there’s a reason they are willing to hire illegals who don’t even speak English. So they can get away with awful working conditions and low pay, such as was the case at the Romney family’s mansions in MA.
Folks should be fully aware that there is something scandalous about having illegals do your lawn care. Romney admitted he thinks there’s something scandalous about it when he exclaimed how he’s running for office ‘for pete’s sake’ and therefore (not because it’s wrong or illegal) he can’t have any illegals.
At the very least, it shows that Romney failed to resolve the issue like the slick politician he portrays himself as. I also think it shows Romney says foolish things when he’s surprised with a curveball.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:55 amWe have seen with the Francia Roig hit piece on Rubio, that facts are not a bar to an attack. We saw
ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:58 ama decade ago, with the Hatfield book, a former ex con attempted bomber (does that sound familiar) can
libel a presidential candidate, without any real
repercussions. And with the McGuinness book, proof
of malfeasance, are not grounds for retraction.
Every once in a while, Ron Paul gets something right. The focus needs to be on Obama’s failed policies and presidency.
The candidate who is most able to highlight these:
* why the policies are wrong
* why they have led to where we now find ourselves
* what is required to correct the situation
* what/where the short term focus needs to be
* what/where the long term focus needs to be
is the candidate that Republicans should line up behind.
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 12:01 pmYou may be right, Dana, but I’m not in favor of eliminating all passion from campaigning. It’s good for Republicans to be passionate about what they believe, as long as their policies are based on logic instead of what feels good that particular day.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/23/2011 @ 12:07 pmIllegal immigration is a problem because people give illegals jobs.
It’s also a problem because many see fit to offer enticements and subsidies that reward unlawful behavior.
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 12:19 pmWhy is it that the right has no one capable of meting out unfair and unjustified hateful attacks?
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 10/23/2011 @ 12:19 pmless gold offered should translate into less enticement to illegally cross the border to work to send money back to the home country and siphon off our dwindling taxpayer-funded largesse.
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 12:22 pmI was just about to mention this.
You have run Perry over the coals for defending a policy of educating the children of those who illegally immigrated here.
That’s a pretty strong view.
And yet you defend a guy who actually, provably provided jobs to illegals, knowing they were illegals, and whose only reason not to, by his own words, is that he’s running for office ‘for pete’s sake’.
So Texas is left with a bunch of illegal kids, and a very popular solution to this mess we can’t fix perfectly is to educate those who say they want to be citizens. That’s not acceptable to Col Haiku. But how dare anyone criticize someone who actually employs illegals because Gas Stations!!!
They come here for jobs, Haiku. They don’t come here for anything else. The other stuff is an incredibly notional incentive, and I disagree with the incentive, but they came here for the jobs like they got from Romney. Romney kept that service, knowing the owner loves to mock our laws, and his only defense is he wanted the guy to use the illegals on other mansions and government contracts, and leave Romney’s mansion clean when Romney is running for office, at least. Only Romney failed to follow through with verification. He knew this guy was a sleazeball and patronized him instead of showing leadership on an issue he merely pretends to champion today.
I think it’s positively hilarious that you condemned Perry for the TX Dream act but also see very little problem with Romney’s illegal servants working 11 hour shifts a year after Romney knew they were illegals.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 12:33 pmbtw, nothing hateful about noting Romney’s hiring practices.
We’re holding Romney up to his own standards. As usual, he contradicts them.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 12:34 pmOften, there’s a reason they are willing to hire illegals who don’t even speak English. So they can get away with awful working conditions and low pay, such as was the case at the Romney family’s mansions in MA.
— Dustin, I am all for deportation over illegal employment, and Romney is NOT my preferred candidate, but let’s have some clarity within the debate, eh?
Icy (4c94d3) — 10/23/2011 @ 12:50 pmAre you saying that employers are intentionally hiring illegals that don’t speak English BECAUSE the language barrier prevents them from complaining about poor working conditions? Doesn’t the mere fact that they are ILLEGAL prevent any complaints from being filed?
And just how “awful” do you imagine the working conditions at the Romney mansion (singular as far as I know) were?
the disservices done to our little country by the white trash Kennedy clan of massachusetts – they are many
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:02 pmThe unemployment rate in Texas is 8.5% – more than twice as high as when Perry took office. When Governor Perry took office in December 2000, the unemployment rate was 4.2%.
The unemployment rate in Texas has been at 8% or above for twenty-four consecutive months.
The unemployment rate in Texas is at a level not seen since June 1987 – nearly a quarter of a century ago.
Twenty-six states had a lower unemployment rate than Texas.
When the national economy struggled to add jobs in August, Texas struggled even more. “The new figures from the Texas Workforce Commission included some disturbing trends: There was a net jobs loss of 1,300 in Texas during the month of August, even worse than the latest national figures…”
Fort Worth Star-Telegram Headline: “Texas records net loss of jobs in August”
The unemployment rate in Texas has grown much faster than the national unemployment rate since January 2009. Between January 2009 and August 2011, the national unemployment rate has grown by 16.7%, increasing from 7.8% to 9.1%. Between January 2009 and August 2011, the unemployment rate in Texas has grown from 6.4% to 8.5% – a 32.8% increase.
“Texas’ poverty rate is higher than the rest of the country’s – and growing faster than the national rate.” “A report from the Austin-based nonprofit Center for Public Policy Priorities said that despite the additional jobs created in recent years, Texas’ poverty rate is higher than the rest of the country’s – and growing faster than the national rate. The poverty rate in Texas jumped to 18.4 percent in 2010 from 17.3 percent in 2009, compared to national rates of 15.1 percent in 2010 and 14.3 percent in 2009.”
“The statistics mean that in 2010, 4.6 million Texans were living in poverty – earning $22,113 a year or less for a family of four.”
“Texas Governor Rick Perry likes to brag that his state is an economic powerhouse. But don’t tell that to the nearly one in five Texans who are living below the poverty line.”
http://www.careerpolitician.com/2011/10/17/no-texas-jobs-miracle/
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:17 pmPerry signed a bill in June 2001 that made Texas the first state to offer in-state tuition to illegal immigrants. “A bipartisan coalition in Texas pushed for new policies there, culminating in June (2001) when Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican, signed a bill to make Texas the first state to offer undocumented immigrants in-state tuition.”
“In 2001, Texas became the first state in the country to pass an in-state tuition law. the law created a national movement.” (Katherine Leal Unmuth, “Number Of Illegal Immigrants Getting In-State Tuition Rises,” The Dallas Morning News, 3/15/10)
Perry: “I’m for leaving the law like it is because i think it serves a good purpose.”
Perry, on those who oppose in-state tuition discounts for illegal immigrants: “i don’t think you have a heart.” PERRY: “If you say that we should not educate children who have come into our state for no other reason than they’ve been brought there by no fault of their own, I don’t think you have a heart. We need to be educating these children, because they will become a drag on our society.” (GOP Presidential Debate, Orlando, FL, 9/22/11)
Perry criticized federal border fence legislation, saying “we know how to deal with border security, and you don’t do it by building a fence.” “Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Tuesday criticized the proposed border wall between the U.S. and Mexico … Perry told reporters that the border barrier – whose construction was approved by Congress last fall and signed into law by President Bush in October – sends a ‘bad message’ and it ‘absolutely won’t work.’ … ‘We know how to deal with border security, and you don’t do it by building a fence; you do it by putting boots on the ground,’ Perry said.” (Jeremy Schwartz, “Governor Hails Economic Ties But Blasts Border Wall,” Austin American-Statesman, 8/29/07)
The law Perry criticized authorized 700 miles of fencing along the southern border. “The Senate on Friday approved the building of 700 miles of fence along the nation’s southwestern border, fulfilling a demand by conservative Republicans to take steps to slow the flow of illegal immigrants before exploring broader changes to immigration law.”
NOTE: Then-Senator Barack Obama actually voted for the bill.
Governor Perry: “We’re spending millions down there building this fence, and I’ll guarantee you, you know, the 15-foot ladder business is going to get good on that 14-foot fence.” (Fox News’ “On The Record,” 5/25/11)
Governor Perry called the idea of a fence along the southern border “idiocy.” “Texas Gov. Rick Perry criticized the U.S. Congress on Tuesday for failing to make progress on immigration reform, suggesting its members lack ‘maturity’ and calling the proposed construction of a fence along the U.S.-Mexico border ‘idiocy.’” (Paul Kiernan, “U.S. Congress Lacks ‘Maturity’ To Solve Immigration, Perry Says,” The Associated Press, 8/28/07)
Yet, Perry himself wrote that illegal immigration skyrocketed in Texas during his governorship. “An estimated 1.8 million illegal immigrants are currently residing in Texas, compared with 1.1 million in 2000. In ten years, that represents an increase of 54 percent, or 70,000 persons each year coming to our state illegally. … Those levels of unchecked illegal immigration are unsustainable. We expend vast resources on illegal immigrants and our own security.” (Rick Perry, Fed Up!, 2010, p. 120)
http://www.careerpolitician.com/2011/09/26/thank-you-governor-perry/
http://www.careerpolitician.com/2011/10/17/rick-perry-just-like-obama-on-illegal-immigration/
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:19 pmWhy doesn’t Wall Street Romney just run on his record of inventing Obamacare instead of pissing all over everybody?
That’s a huge achievement.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:20 pmAs he runs for president, Perry says those illegal immigrants who benefit from in-state tuition rates in Texas are “pursuing citizenship.” “The in-state tuition bill, Perry said, was in response to a bigger issue that ‘the United States has failed in its constitutional duty to defend our border.’ … Are we going to have them on the government dole over here, because they’re not educated?’ Perry asked. ‘Or are we going to have them in our institutions of higher learning, paying in-state tuition, pursuing citizenship…?’”
Neither state government nor state-run colleges and universities ensure that illegal immigrants who benefit from in-state tuition rates actually apply for legal status. “Illegal immigrants who pay state-resident tuition rates to attend Texas colleges are required under a law signed by Gov. Rick Perry to promise that they will apply for legal status. The arrangement saves them thousands of dollars, but no one – not the colleges, not the state higher education agency, and not the Legislature or governor’s office – checks whether those students are holding up their end of the bargain.” (Sommer Ingram, “Texas Doesn’t Track Legal Status Of Immigrant College Students Under Perry-Backed Law,” The Dallas Morning News, 8/17/11)
In 2010, Perry wrongly said that the state was keeping track of the students’ legal status, saying: “It is my understanding, yes sir, absolutely.” “Perry said during a 2010 gubernatorial debate that the Texas Education Agency, which oversees primary and secondary education, follows up with the students. ‘It is my understanding, yes sir, absolutely,’ Perry said when asked if the state follows up to verify that the application has been made for residency.” (Sommer Ingram, “Texas Doesn’t Track Legal Status Of Immigrant College Students Under Perry-Backed Law,” The Dallas Morning News, 8/17/11)
NOTE: Perry made the same claim in 2007, saying “here’s what people have missed on the in-state tuition: They must be in process of getting citizenship before they’re eligible for that.” “Perry added that he wants Texas to continue allowing undocumented immigrants to pay in-state tuition. Legislators have filed several bills that would eliminate that provision. Texas was the first state to pass a law allowing undocumented immigrants to pay in-state tuition rates. ‘Here’s what people have missed on the in-state tuition: They must be in process of getting citizenship before they’re eligible for that.’” (Brandi Grissom, “Perry Touts Border Security Measures, Outlines New Goals,” El Paso Times, 1/15/07)
“Under the law, students don’t have to actually have applied for citizenship – they only have to promise they will.” (Clay Robison and R.G. Ratcliffe, “Perry Sticks By Immigrants’ Tuition Breaks,” San Antonio Express-News, 1/12/07)
http://www.careerpolitician.com/2011/10/10/perrys-truth-problem/
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:21 pmmy yard guy only knows enough spanish to order food and drinks, ask where the bathroom is, understand when someone is saying bad things about him in spanish and to return the favor when someone is.
after all, we won that war and i can’t be bothered to learn any more spanish, since the language of this country is english.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:22 pmI think it’s a proven fact that Wall Street Romney hates the illegal dirty mexicans more than Mr. Governor Perry. But so does Mr. Cain, and unlike Wall Street Romney Mr. Herman Cain never hired dirty illegal immigrant mexicans and brought them into our neighborhoods… right where our children play hopscotch and kickball and various other innocent children’s games.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:25 pmfor example the Xbox and also the Plants vs. Dinosaurs
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:27 pm“…Romney family’s mansions in MA…”
Dustin, was Romney residing in his personal home, or one provided by the State (Governor’s Mansion)?
Col, in 2000, I think it can safely be said that every state had better UE #’s than they do now.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (2ddc62) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:27 pmThe point to argue is the UE number relative to the National UE and the amount of change, and to other similar sized states.
oh. My friend P says it’s Zombies.
Isn’t it always?
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:28 pmRead the Globe’s coverage, which makes clear they were working 11 hour shifts on two Romney family mansions. Mitt and one of his son’s.
I think employers hire illegals because they can squeeze far more out of them for far crappier wages. I note they didn’t speak English, and that Romney knew this (the buenos dias joke), because that combined with their schedule and pay and the fact the news even quoted Romney’s church pal mocking documentation shows that anyone would have realized these were illegal workers.
Someone who claims to take this issue seriously would have known enough to resolve this problem.
I imagine the conditions were awful. I’ve dealt with a lot of illegal immigration employers as a student, particularly with respect to Target, who also used the romney excuse (it was just our contractor, not us!) and the conditions include grueling hours and hard work at terrible pay.
If you haven’t read the Globe’s 2006 and 2007 articles on this, you should.
I’ve linked them before and assumed folks interested in arguing about this have read them. That’s where I’m getting some of my facts.
One in particular is that Romney’s friend had government contracts too, and Romney knew all about this guy’s disdain for the law, yet continued the business relationship.
Is this a huge felony on Romney’s part? I don’t see it that way. Perry’s hyperbole about this was over the top. But it does show Romney is full of crap to claim to take this issue seriously.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:28 pmYeah, Colonel, you forgot to quote the other part of that website:
Yeah, reeeeaaaalllll objective there, dude. :-/
Darth Venomous (c8614a) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:29 pmOh, and I want to note that the TX Dream act was lawful, and Romney’s lawncare was unlawful. That’s a huge distinction.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:31 pmAs to the “Borking” of politicians in America:
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (2ddc62) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:32 pmThe Left has created this monster, and once they lose their media monopoly/megaphone, and the “silent majority” become aware of the duplicitousness of the Left/Media combine, and have access to the truth, they will die by their creation.
It is always the case, and will be ever so.
And frankly, given common sense, those wishing to argue that Romney’s mansion’s lawn care had decent conditions should show some evidence for that claim.
What little we know paints a lousy picture. Of course one big bonus for the criminals who employ illegals is that we are unlikely to know the worst of it.
Illegals wouldn’t be here, but for the jobs. Those complaining about the incentive of the TX Dream act have to admit that providing jobs to illegals is a much more direct incentive.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:38 pmIllegals wouldn’t be here, but for the jobs.
And this situation has been aided and abetted by bi-partisan support in Congress’ since the Simpson-Mazzoli Act made the employment of “non-documented” persons illegal; and Congress has repeatedly refused to fund any enforcement mechanism, first under Democrat Majorities (1986-1994/2007-2010), and then under the GOP (1995-2006/2011-current) – Senate mileage may vary.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (2ddc62) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:48 pmOh, and I want to note that the TX Dream act was lawful, and Romney’s lawncare was unlawful. That’s a huge distinction.
— Also, these two controversies are exactly equal in the eyes of voters.*
those wishing to argue that Romney’s mansion’s lawn care had decent conditions should show some evidence for that claim. What little we know paints a lousy picture.
Icy (4c94d3) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:52 pm— You are the one making the accusation. You prove that conditions were “awful”.
*That was sarcasm, DB
Icy (4c94d3) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:53 pmAnd frankly, given common sense, those wishing to argue that Romney’s mansion’s lawn care had decent conditions should show some evidence for that claim.
Unbelievably bereft of any sign of even normal intelligence.
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:54 pmBork was college President at Carleton, possibly the best small school in Amerikkka when I was matriculating across town at a rather less selective school.
Orrin Hatch was the only sapient GOP mind on the Judiciary Committee then too.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/23/2011 @ 1:54 pmAt the tender age of 14, I once helped my father remove a 75′ by 35′ patch of ivy at our house during the heat of an Anaheim summer. It took two days of sun-up to sun-down effort, and it was back-breaking work.
Looking back on it, I am
shockedstunned at how my own father exploited me.And I’m not even an illegal immigrant!
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:00 pmAll I received for my effort was a thank you from my slave-master dad and all the A&W Root-Beer® I could drink!
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:03 pmI imagine the conditions were awful.
— Exactly. You assume and assert the worst in order to add some heft to your argument. Doesn’t “Romney knowingly hired illegals,” make the basic point in a clear, concise manner? When you say “Romney knowingly hired illegals AND he treated them like crap,” it pretty much looks like you’re just trying to one-up the Colonel when it comes to which candidate is “worse” on immigration.
Icy (4c94d3) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:07 pmI’m sorry that happened to you Mr. Colonel
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:07 pmMonty Python’s Flying Circus –
“Four Yorkshiremen”
[ from the album Live At Drury Lane, 1974 ]
The Players:
Icy (4c94d3) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:09 pmMichael Palin – First Yorkshireman;
Graham Chapman – Second Yorkshireman;
Terry Jones – Third Yorkshireman;
Eric Idle – Fourth Yorkshireman;
The Scene:
Four well-dressed men are sitting together at a vacation resort.
‘Farewell to Thee’ is played in the background on Hawaiian guitar.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
Aye, very passable, that, very passable bit of risotto.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
Nothing like a good glass of Château de Chasselas, eh, Josiah?
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
You’re right there, Obadiah.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Who’d have thought thirty year ago we’d all be sittin’ here drinking Château de Chasselas, eh?
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
In them days we was glad to have the price of a cup o’ tea.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
A cup o’ cold tea.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Without milk or sugar.
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
Or tea.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
In a cracked cup, an’ all.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Oh, we never had a cup. We used to have to drink out of a rolled up newspaper.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
The best we could manage was to suck on a piece of damp cloth.
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
But you know, we were happy in those days, though we were poor.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
Because we were poor. My old Dad used to say to me, “Money doesn’t buy you happiness, son”.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Aye, ‘e was right.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
Aye, ‘e was.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
I was happier then and I had nothin’. We used to live in this tiny old house with great big holes in the roof.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
House! You were lucky to live in a house! We used to live in one room, all twenty-six of us, no furniture, ‘alf the floor was missing, and we were all ‘uddled together in one corner for fear of falling.
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
Eh, you were lucky to have a room! We used to have to live in t’ corridor!
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
Oh, we used to dream of livin’ in a corridor! Would ha’ been a palace to us. We used to live in an old water tank on a rubbish tip. We got woke up every morning by having a load of rotting fish dumped all over us! House? Huh.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Well, when I say ‘house’ it was only a hole in the ground covered by a sheet of tarpaulin, but it was a house to us.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
We were evicted from our ‘ole in the ground; we ‘ad to go and live in a lake.
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
You were lucky to have a lake! There were a hundred and fifty of us living in t’ shoebox in t’ middle o’ road.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
Cardboard box?
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
Aye.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
You were lucky. We lived for three months in a paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six in the morning, clean the paper bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down t’ mill, fourteen hours a day, week-in week-out, for sixpence a week, and when we got home our Dad would thrash us to sleep wi’ his belt.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at six o’clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of ‘ot gravel, work twenty hour day at mill for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would thrash us to sleep with a broken bottle, if we were lucky!
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
Well, of course, we had it tough. We used to ‘ave to get up out of shoebox at twelve o’clock at night and lick road clean wit’ tongue. We had two bits of cold gravel, worked twenty-four hours a day at mill for sixpence every four years, and when we got home our Dad would slice us in two wit’ bread knife.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o’clock at night half an hour before I went to bed, drink a cup of sulphuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad and our mother would kill us and dance about on our graves singing Hallelujah.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
And you try and tell the young people of today that ….. they won’t believe you.
ALL:
They won’t!
CONCORD, N.H. – In spite of his thundering speeches against big government, Governor Rick Perry of Texas has a troubled relationship with the Tea Party movement, a rift increasingly obvious as he gets closer to a presidential bid.
Tea Party groups from New Hampshire to Texas are joining to criticize Perry’s record on immigration, public health, and spending, as well as his former affiliation with the Democratic Party.
“It’s real easy to walk into church on Sunday morning and sing from the hymnal,’’ said Debra Medina, a Texas Tea Party activist who challenged Perry in the 2010 Republican gubernatorial primary. “I saw a guy that talked like a Tea Party candidate, but didn’t govern like one. I still don’t think he governs like the conservative he professes to be.’’
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=boston%2Bglobe%2Bcoverage%2Bon%2BRick%2BPerry&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCMQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Farticles.boston.com%2F2011-07-20%2Fnews%2F29795236_1_debra-medina-texas-conservatives-governor-rick-perry&ei=PoOkTva-DoyJhQeDpP3uBA&usg=AFQjCNHkBIg3YPPD3MESXP8bF-gvXjJxyg
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:12 pmWhen Sarah Palin endorsed Mr. Governor Perry she said he was the mostest Tea Party one!
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:14 pmhttp://youtu.be/y1_NhnXMCKw
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:19 pmAnd I showed they were 11 hour shifts, and I think that’s a pretty good indication.
I don’t understand. Romney provided jobs to illegal aliens, knowingly. I’ve demonstrated why I think the job’s conditions sucked. Outdoor work for 11 hours at a time is very difficult. The pay they were getting was awful.
I’m not ‘trying’ to show which candidate is worse. It’s quite obvious which was worse. One provided jobs via a guy he knew was breaking the law. The other did … what? Nothing, as far as I can tell, aside from defending a law he couldn’t have changed even if he had wanted to.
No contest.
And yeah, I continue to assert, given common sense, that the job conditions were awful. If your opinion is different, say so. You aren’t saying that, though. You’re just saying I haven’t proven what can’t be proven, but what we all would guess is probably correct.
This reminds me of your lame attack on my ‘Romney Dynasty’ point, where Haiku tried to claim there wasn’t one because of a google search. I reacted by noting there were tons of articles available via google, and you bashed ME rather than the guy relying on google searches and even complained that my search terms were ‘disingenuous’ when they were plainly a lot more honest than Haiku’s (which were picked specifically to exclude everything).
When I asked you a polite yes or no question, suddenly you didn’t even want to talk about the issue anymore. No answer.
You tell me, Icy, do you think Romney’s illegal immigrant lawncare workers had awful working conditions? You already know there was high turnover, some quite and returned to Guatamala, and those who were there were required to work 11 hour shifts. It seems like 100% of the indications we’re getting suggest it was pretty bad, and 0% suggest it was pretty good. Where am I mistaken?
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:23 pmGreat. So if Perry employed illegals, I could just dismiss the issue because you did two days of child-level lawn care.
Something tells me you wouldn’t actually dismiss it.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:26 pmJust continue the silliness… that’s entertainment!
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:27 pmI intend to continue bringing this up, Haiku. Don’t worry. And your spam tactics show you would rather the thread be unreadable than actually attempt to defend Romney’s choices.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:29 pmThis Democrat schtick has worked for 24 years. No reason it won’t work again.
kansas (313837) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:29 pmThe Boston Globe breathlessly reports: “Texas conservatives recently shared material on Perry’s record with the New Hampshire Tea Party Coalition, which dedicated a section of its website to the Texas governor. The coalition offers links to negative media coverage and videos about the man who it says “was Al Gore’s Democrat chairman’’ in 1988. Perry switched to the Republican Party in 1989, around the same time as other conservative Democrats.
The organization also distributed a series of e-mails to supporters, including one warning, ‘We should be aware there is more to him than meets the eye.’ “
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:30 pmI’ll continue to not worry about your silliness, Dustin. Insert your head up your exhaust port and repeat, as necessary.
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:32 pmHere’s what Haiku is citing.
Haiku, do you agree with the contents of this website?
That Perry is a ‘bilderberger’? Are his Texas policies really best summarized as “socialism, fascism or communism? ”
The site claims this list isn’t an attack. Is that true, Haiku? Do you stand up for your links? I recall another of your links claimed Perry was a eugenicist in a secret society (Bilderberger).
Remember when you told me to burn in hell and call me “dead”? Then you complained that I wasn’t being civil because I called you a moron.
You have no argument other than to spam kook Ron Paul links or to personally insult me. I invite you to try to elevate the discussion to an adult level if you’re capable of it.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:41 pmI’ll continue to be a romneybot.Dustin Insert Romneys head up my exhaust port and repeat,as necessary
FIFY
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:42 pmhttp://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=boston%2Bglobe%2Bcoverage%2Bon%2BRick%2BPerry&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCMQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Farticles.boston.com%2F2011-07-20%2Fnews%2F29795236_1_debra-medina-texas-conservatives-governor-rick-perry&ei=PoOkTva-DoyJhQeDpP3uBA&usg=AFQjCNHkBIg3YPPD3MESXP8bF-gvXjJxyg
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:48 pmhttp://www.careerpolitician.com/2011/10/10/perrys-truth-problem/
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:48 pmhttp://www.careerpolitician.com/2011/09/26/thank-you-governor-perry/
http://www.careerpolitician.com/2011/10/17/rick-perry-just-like-obama-on-illegal-immigration/
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:49 pmCareerPolitician.com could use more facts, Haiku. For instance, Texas has had more net migration from other states since 2006, including 141,000 in 2007-2008, 143,000 in 2008-2009, and 130,000 in 2009-2010. (Census.gov data for state-to-state migration is here.)
Of course, this is nothing new for Texas:
On the other hand, CareerPolitician.com is right that Perry doesn’t get all the credit for Texas’ positive business climate since Texas population and jobs have increased for 21 years. But at least give Perry credit for knowing not to mess with a good thing.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/23/2011 @ 2:55 pmWell said, DRJ.
Like Calvin Cooledge, sometimes a leader has to know when to just stand there and observe as a seeming problem self-destructs.
First, do no harm!
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (2ddc62) — 10/23/2011 @ 3:05 pmPerrybots are really sickening oh my god your opposition to Rick Perrys stanc eon illegals makes you a heartless nazi rethuglican.
Heres hoping the perrybots all take a walk off a long cliff.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 3:06 pmstance on*
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 3:07 pmI was less than impressed by the third grade schoolyard fight between Perry and Romney on the “illegals on the grounds crew” issue.
But I was particularly unimpressed by Romney’s initial flat denial that he’d hired illegals, followed by his subsequent explanation. His initial denial left the impression that he knew absolutely nothing about it–then he had a chapter and verse explanation.
Well that’s a sort of Clintonian “depends upon what the meaning of is is” on Romney’s part. We deserve better from Mitt.
Comanche Voter (0e06a9) — 10/23/2011 @ 3:27 pmDustin, Dustin, Dustin–“outdoor work for 11 hours is awful”?
Try telling that to an Iowa farmer in harvest season–or any other farmer who works from can see to can’t see and beyond.
Comanche Voter (0e06a9) — 10/23/2011 @ 3:29 pmGotta love the perrytards accusing others of being liberal.
These people call Michelle Malkin far-right don’t forget.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 3:32 pmIcy, I probably should have made a point a little more clear.
I’m not trying to have a personal dispute with you, just to be clear, and I respect your opinion quite a bit.
You had a personal opinion you were either unable or unwilling to prove, and I have a personal opinion that I can’t prove beyond admitting this is simply how I view something.
OK, sure. A lot of people work that hard. I think it’s particularly difficult, and if your illegal lawn care crew is working that hard for low wages, it’s an indication that the conditions are pretty bad, but not proof.
Every time I’ve encountered illegals working that hard, it’s turned out the employer is exploiting their illegal status in ways he wouldn’t be able to exploit legal workers.
Can I prove this happened in this case? Of course not. The indications are pretty clear.
But this is just my opinion. Your mileage may vary. That Romney’s lawn care crew worked illegally is not my opinion. That’s from Romney’s own mouth.
The guy isn’t even able to run a household without breaking the law.
This is a person who has noted he doesn’t stand with the NRA and then said the NRA stands with him, and a person who has said he supports Roe v Wade and then said he doesn’t. He’s the guy who said he wanted Romneycare to become nationwide, and then said he didn’t.
I won’t say we deserve to be lied to, but we can expect Romney to betray anything he’s currently running on, the second it inconveniences him.
That’s why I say the point of Romney hiring illegals is not the Romney is a criminal, but that he’s not credible. That’s the only point I’ve been trying to make about this guy. We can do better.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 4:04 pmPost #18… DRJ: I’d take a Robert Bork over an Anthony Kennedy any day of the week.
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 4:06 pmDRJ’s point resonates with me largely because I don’t pretend any of these politicians are brilliant leaders who are the solution to anything and everything.
The times Perry has screwed up have been when he tried to use government in a way it probably wasn’t needed at all (fortunately these are exceptions to a long record of staying out of the way if he can manage).
Now is not the time to pick the best leader to manage the messy huge government. Perhaps Romney would be the right choice if that was all the GOP aspires to. What I want is someone who will stand firm and strong on cuts.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 4:06 pmI don’t make a habit of linking kooks, so I guess I don’t know how Haiku would react, but my guess is he wouldn’t have a favorable response if I just started linking pretending a bunch of nutcases were credible just because they criticize Romney. Indeed, I’m sure I could find plenty of kooks bashing Romney on grounds I don’t find credible, and when that has come up, I’ve argued in Romney’s favor.
Truthers are not credible, Haiku. Ron Paul’s minions claiming to own the Tea Party aren’t very credible, either. The idea we can cite a Texan who doesn’t like Perry can’t possibly overcome the fact Perry has never lost an election.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 4:11 pmyou and me baby we ain’t nothing but mammals
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/23/2011 @ 4:18 pmPerry has flamed out because he canNOT think on his feet. His position on in-state tuition runs counter to everything the Republican party stands for. He is a Johnny-One-Note on the economy, he has no gravitas in respect to foreign policy and his washy-washy record as governor of Texas has left a bad taste in the mouths of Texas conservatives.
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 4:20 pmAgain, the focus needs to be on Obama’s failed policies and presidency.
The candidate who is most able to highlight these:
* why the policies are wrong
* why they have led to where we now find ourselves
* what is required to correct the situation
* what/where the short term focus needs to be
* what/where the long term focus needs to be
is the candidate that Republicans should line up behind. We do not need a candidate who has trouble speaking in clear, concise sentences and who appears confused more often than not.
ColonelHaiku (e0595a) — 10/23/2011 @ 4:23 pmIrony it’s what for dinner, is the way I would define partisans of the standard bearer for health care takeover, criticking Perry, using the AP Minitrue slug, (The Globe didn’t even bother to do it’s own reporting) but heck if performance is this poor, by the time the primary comes around, I’ll write in a candidate.
ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/23/2011 @ 4:25 pmThese days anybody who’s smart enough to be a truly successful US president and fully knows what has to be done, is too smart to run for president.
elissa (b5ab10) — 10/23/2011 @ 4:44 pmJimmeh Carter deserves to be raked over the coals for the iranian hostage crisis.
Notice how i didn’t say Raped over the coals.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 5:06 pmPerry can’t think on his feet very well but I’d still vote for him
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/23/2011 @ 5:12 pmThe following were considered great debaters who became president:
JFK, FDR, LBJ, Clinton, Reagan
the following were considered terrible debaters without communication skills, quick wit:
Lincoln, Jefferson, Washington, Ike, Nixon, Teddy R, GWB
– Source University of New Orleans History Department – (BTW I disagreed with my professor about Teddy even to the point that I pointed out he was totally and completely wrong and lowered my grade to a C – you dont argue with Ambrose
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/23/2011 @ 5:13 pmYes Happy I agree.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 5:18 pm______________________________________________
In a follow-up question after the lecture, Bork was asked whether his statement would apply to all gun control.
“Probably,” he replied. “It doesn’t mean it’s a great idea. It’s probably constitutional.”
Comment by DRJ
Wow, that pretty much illustrates how easy it is to get trapped on the proverbial “slippery slope.” But why in hell does that all too frequently end up benefiting some idiotic position on the left or the POV of a liberal? IOW, it’s easier to slip and slide to the far left — eg, “abortion rights” now meaning pretty much that a young girl in ultra-blue-state California can get a doctor to vacuum her uterus without the legal consent of the parent or guardian — instead of to the far right — eg, well, since no good case exists nowadays in the Western World, I guess the illustration of what’s going on in the Sharia-law-ized Middle East.
Mark (411533) — 10/23/2011 @ 5:24 pmMajor Facepalm
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204618704576643421997594608.html
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/23/2011 @ 5:29 pmwhy in hell does that all too frequently end up benefiting some idiotic position on the left or the POV of a liberal?
Because, far more than the Right – or Conservatives – the Left reflexively cries out “there oughta be a law”, and then proceeds to implement one, regardless as to whether or not it will actually accomplish its intended purpose, and oblivious of the unintended consequences.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (2ddc62) — 10/23/2011 @ 5:32 pmJudicial choices are proscribed by the Missouri plan, but where is the evidence that Romney would
ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/23/2011 @ 5:50 pmappoint, not to mention support during the tough
times, anyone of the caliber of Bork. consider that Sununu even more conservative Governor, recommended
Souter.
See Hollywood conservatives are blacklisted from their profession and the left is gleeful.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 6:06 pmian
who did he appt in Mass?
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/23/2011 @ 6:13 pmOh thats right mostly democrats – thats who Romney appointed in Mass only 9 GOP out of 36 total appointments
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/23/2011 @ 6:16 pmhttp://whynotromney.blogspot.com/2011/03/romneys-spotty-record-on-judicial.html
ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/23/2011 @ 6:19 pmNot only that the left uses Mccarthyesque tactics on the right while villifying the guy.
Btw i;mn shocked that the NYT allowed this to run.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 6:20 pmI’m*
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 6:21 pmI think employers hire illegals because they can squeeze far more out of them for far crappier wages.
I had the same gardener for 30 years. He spoke English and hired lots of young guys who didn’t. I would not be surprised if they were illegal. I never saw unsafe practices. I know of many yard care contractors who do not use illegals but they are mostly commercial and work on public parks.
I suppose if I were running for office, I would have to do something different. After I moved up here to the mountains, I had the young guys next door do many of the same jobs. They volunteered when a 100 foot tree fell last spring. unemployment is high up here. I didn’t pay them any more than I would have paid my former gardener.
It’s all relative.
Mike K (9ebddd) — 10/23/2011 @ 6:26 pmHowever it can’t be said that his predecessor was really any better,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_H._Marshall
ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/23/2011 @ 6:29 pmEWhy do they do this, talk about an ‘unforced error’
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2011/10/23/2011-10-23_rick_perry_questions_president_obamas_birth_certificate_in_interview_with_parade.html
ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/23/2011 @ 7:11 pmyeah, ian. Perry’s answers there are perfectly fine for you and me, but are just as you say, an unforced error, since he is not you or I.
Why should democrats demand the Republicans certify Obama’s certificate? I have no idea why they would be required to promise it’s valid. But while Perry’s did try to say ‘this is a distraction’, and didn’t try to raise the issue, he needs a canned answer for these things. From the sound of it, he’s still actually thinking about the questions he hears and answering.
That should be refreshing, but these days, it’s kinda alarming.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 7:20 pmObama isn’t even on the ballot.
Let’s not give Romney or Perry a pass for the primary. Let’s not act like there is insufficient time to have a general election debate. If anything, it’s far too long an election season.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 7:22 pmIf Obama’s so bad, why would we need to prove it endlessly? Let’s not act insecure about our views.
If the reason someone is saying ‘the focus must be on X’ is that they want the focus to stop being on a politician running for president, that person is no patriot. This is a serious matter.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 7:24 pmIt really is the electoral equivalent of the ‘Running Man,’ Dustin, and there’s no guarantee
ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/23/2011 @ 7:25 pmthe survivor is Achwartzenegger’s character.
Who is Margaret H. Marshall?
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 7:41 pmAnthony Lewis’s wife, the judge behind the same sex decision in Massachussetts
ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/23/2011 @ 7:42 pmWhen considering Romney, the gun control candidate, it’s worthwhile to consider how fundamental a freedom he would infringe to pander up a few votes.
Makes you wonder what else he would negotiate with Pelosi and Reid in order to get some signature accomplishment, even if of dubious Romneycare level merit.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 8:04 pmNewt came out for Ethanol Subsidies scratch him off my list.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 8:31 pmWho IS on your list, DohBiden?
Icy (8b1256) — 10/23/2011 @ 8:47 pmI guess we’ll have to wait for the perfect candidate then.
Kevin M (563f77) — 10/23/2011 @ 8:47 pm#69
I showed they were 11 hour shifts, and I think that’s a pretty good indication.
— Oh no! Eleventy hour shifts? That slave-driver!
You’re just saying I haven’t proven what can’t be proven, but what we all would guess is probably correct.
— Maybe you should speak for yourself instead of “we all”.
I reacted by noting there were tons of articles available via google, and you bashed ME rather than the guy relying on google searches and even complained that my search terms were ‘disingenuous’ when they were plainly a lot more honest than Haiku’s
— It’s kinda sad that you still don’t get it. You claim that Haiku was the one “relying” on Google searches when it was YOU that kept repeating the false “800,000 hits” number. And it is YOU that is using similar tactics now, amping up your point on the hiring of illegals with the “awful conditions” argument just as you amped up your “Romney dynasty” argument with the “everybody’s talking about it” argument.
You tell me, Icy, do you think Romney’s illegal immigrant lawncare workers had awful working conditions?
Icy (8b1256) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:14 pm— Full-time work in a good neighborhood? How awful!
Perry Or Cain at the moment.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:33 pmABO if Romney gets the nom.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:33 pmhonestly the Perrytards get on my nerve but It is ABO indeed.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 9:34 pmGood!
Icy (8b1256) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:05 pmUh ok.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:06 pmNazis and Communists support OWS.
Nazis and Communists use dot be in competition.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:13 pmused to*
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:14 pmI asked you several times, very politely, if you would use Haiku’s search terms to seriously seek information on the issue.
You replied you no longer wanted to talk about it, but if you’re honest, you know damn well that searching for Haiku’s terms in quotes would only serve to eliminate almost everything on the subject.
So no, I’m not using ‘tactics’. I’m using honesty. I explained this to you and it’s clear I’m correct. I never said that the number of results shows significance. Why would it? You’re the one saying that was my argument, which is why I quoted myself explaining this was not a serious matter prior to any of your comments on it.
In short, you’re dead wrong on that.
But my point here is that your opinion there is completely subjective.
My view that an 11 hour shift on a routine basis is quite bad.
Not a direct answer. Just like last time I simply asked you a straight question.
But that’s OK. In my opinion, Romney wound up with illegals instead of legal workers because it was a lot cheaper that way. And in my experience, folks who give illegals 11 hour shifts are probably treating them poorly. I think it’s pathetic that someone as wealthy as Romney couldn’t be bothered to employ a legal American worker (And yes, as my articles show, he knew they were illegal).
Romney’s lawn care was treated far worse than they would have been had he gone the legal route. Your objection to my point amounts to an irrelevant gripe about my opinion not being proven or something all people would say (and yet I’m not stopping anyone from saying they would personally enjoy that kind of work).
This is very similar to your complaint about the Romney dynasty. Sure, my argument is based on facts. I link sources, even Romney himself, but you are upset about something completely ancillary. It was Haiku who chose to rely on google searches to prove there was no Romney dynasty. the reason you won’t answer my yes or no question is that we both know no honest person would have used his search term in quotes in order to actually learn about that topic. But you’re upset about something that is completely subjective.
The problem I’m seeing lately is that a lot of whiners are upset that Romney, whom they are sure is the nominee, would be criticized with mere opinions. If someone wants to criticize Romney, they had better have factual proof! Well, no, that’s BS, though. I personally think Romney treats people poorly, has no problem seeing American laws broken (even when he later pretends to care about those same laws), and generally has no character, perhaps because his background was to be raised by politicians (I think most politicians are quite self centered, and this is a major reason our country is the way it is).
It turned out you didn’t really have a problem with my point re the google search (Which was quite confined to noting Haiku’s report there was nothing on the internet about a Romney dynasty was inaccurate to the extreme, and he knew it).
You actually just thought there was no reason to talk about dynasties.
In this case, you just think there’s no reason to talk about what kind of soul treats illegal immigrants the way Romney did.
I get it. I disagree. I am not trying to be disrespectful, but you’re wrong.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:29 pmWhat makes you think it’s a good neighborhood? sounds like it was full of scumbags taking advantage of their fellow man. I’ve been to Boston, and it’s not a very nice place. It’s a state that revels is compromising basic human rights like your second amendment, with all the racial and criminal problems that naturally leads to in America.
But it sure sounds like grueling physical labor to me. I guess that’s because I’m not carrying anyone’s water (certainly not Perry’s).
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:35 pmOne difference between myself and a few others…
If Daniels or Perry or someone I liked was discussed with a completely good faith opinion with obvious basis in reality, even if subjective, I wouldn’t pretend that was a ‘tactic’ or ‘disingenuous’. I would even acknowledge to whatever extent I found that opinion worthwhile.
But I suspect if Perry were the frontrunner, he would be getting a lot of the defenses Romney is getting, and I think that kind of partisanship is one of the core reasons this country is screwed up.
Dustin (b2fb78) — 10/23/2011 @ 10:40 pmKooky, TEA Party extremist endorses Romney:
“Christine O’Donnell has already contributed $250 to Mitt Romney and additionally spoke favorably of him in a recent interview with ABC News…”
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/christine-odonnell-romney-unmovable-oak?utm_source=Washington%20Examiner%20Politics%20SUNDAY%2010/23/11%20-%2010/23/2011&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Washington%20Examiner:%20Political%20Digest
Well, there goes the neighborhood.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (2ddc62) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:24 pmAlright, who thought for a split second Arab Spring was a good thing?
Fess Up.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/23/2011 @ 11:38 pmSomeone told me it was a new detergent for washing camels.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (2ddc62) — 10/24/2011 @ 12:11 amIowa, South Carolina, Nevada and Florida are all led by Cain.
George Will says the GOP has now decided Romney is their Michael Dukakis.
Could be over quickly. Especially so if Perry goes after the black dude instead of the Democrat.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/24/2011 @ 12:12 amgary
the primaies are alooong way off. Cain maybe forced to explain the second phase of 9 9 9 which is the worlds largst tax of 30% on everything
whenpeople hear 30percent – thats how manypoints he’ll drop
Paul’s support also evaporates at poll time in most states – so these double digit numbers for that quack will dissappear as well.
Its along way off
EricPWJohnson (c5f1fc) — 10/24/2011 @ 2:02 amI asked you several times, very politely, if you would use Haiku’s search terms to seriously seek information on the issue.
— Just for you I did a search for “Romney” “dynasty”. That generated about 2 pages worth of mostly liberal whining about the ‘dynasty’. As Benny Hill would say, “Big ——- deal.”
You replied you no longer wanted to talk about it, but if you’re honest, you know damn well that searching for Haiku’s terms in quotes would only serve to eliminate almost everything on the subject.
— Actually, it eliminates everything OFF-TOPIC. As I wrote above, searching for “Romney”+”dynasty” gives a more realistic result.
So no, I’m not using ‘tactics’. I’m using honesty. I explained this to you and it’s clear I’m correct. I never said that the number of results shows significance. Why would it? You’re the one saying that was my argument, which is why I quoted myself explaining this was not a serious matter prior to any of your comments on it.
— I was the one reminding you that you kept repeating that 800,000 number several times. You did it because you thought the number itself made a significant point. My response was, and is, that the number is completely meaningless.
In short, you’re dead wrong on that.
— Sure. I’m wrong, and you do not consider it a serious matter. And yet, you just will not let it drop.
But my point here is that your opinion there is completely subjective.
— A high percentage of the opinions expressed on this blog are subjective. The ‘opinion’ that your 800,000 number, along with the claim that it means something significant, is meaningless? No, not subjective. Accurate.
My view that an 11 hour shift on a routine basis is quite bad.
— Welcome to the blue-collar world, sir. Those of us that have worked those kind of shifts for 20 years or more salute you.
– Full-time work in a good neighborhood? How awful!
Comment by Icy — 10/23/2011 @ 9:14 pm
Not a direct answer. Just like last time I simply asked you a straight question.
— You’re criticizing me for using sarcasm in my answer? Ya know, people that waste time during a debate by complaining “you’re not debating the right way,” are prone to losing the argument.
But that’s OK. In my opinion, Romney wound up with illegals instead of legal workers because it was a lot cheaper that way. And in my experience, folks who give illegals 11 hour shifts are probably treating them poorly.
— Are you quite sure it isn’t because they’re doing jobs that many Americans are highly reluctant to do? Do you know what I call someone that works 11-hour shifts? Fully employed.
I think it’s pathetic that someone as wealthy as Romney couldn’t be bothered to employ a legal American worker (And yes, as my articles show, he knew they were illegal).
— I would not characterize it as “pathetic”. Certainly it was wrong.
Romney’s lawn care was treated far worse than they would have been had he gone the legal route. Your objection to my point amounts to an irrelevant gripe about my opinion not being proven or something all people would say (and yet I’m not stopping anyone from saying they would personally enjoy that kind of work).
— Well, first of all, not for one moment did I assert that you were attempting to stifle dissenting opinions. Secondly, you claimed that their working conditions were “awful”; I questioned, and still question, just how “awful” conditions were.
This is very similar to your complaint about the Romney dynasty. Sure, my argument is based on facts. I link sources, even Romney himself, but you are upset about something completely ancillary.
— You act as if the ‘Romney dynasty’ is something that Romney & his people are trying to keep ‘secret’. Very silly.
It was Haiku who chose to rely on google searches to prove there was no Romney dynasty.
— And your response, including your oft-quoted and totally misleading 800,000 number, was at best misleading.
the reason you won’t answer my yes or no question is that we both know no honest person would have used his search term in quotes in order to actually learn about that topic.
— Anyone that wants to “learn” about the ‘Romney dynasty’ can read about it on wikipedia . . . or on Romney’s campaign website . . .
But you’re upset about something that is completely subjective.
— For someone that claims this isn’t personal, you seem determined to ascribe a certain emotion to me. Sorry, but when using a search engine it is actually less subjective and more objective to use precise, carefully chosen, terms.
The problem I’m seeing lately is that a lot of whiners are upset that Romney, whom they are sure is the nominee, would be criticized with mere opinions. If someone wants to criticize Romney, they had better have factual proof!
— I don’t want to be a part of your ongoing Perry vs Romney feud with Colonel Haiku. However, the only reason I jumped in on that one issue is BECAUSE you were misstating the facts on a particular point.
Well, no, that’s BS, though. I personally think Romney treats people poorly, has no problem seeing American laws broken (even when he later pretends to care about those same laws), and generally has no character, perhaps because his background was to be raised by politicians (I think most politicians are quite self centered, and this is a major reason our country is the way it is).
— I agree with a lot of what you say. I also care greatly about Romney’s track record & policy positions, and not a whit about his family’s political dynasty.
It turned out you didn’t really have a problem with my point re the google search (Which was quite confined to noting Haiku’s report there was nothing on the internet about a Romney dynasty was inaccurate to the extreme, and he knew it).
— No, I actually joined the discussion BECAUSE I saw your rejoinder to Haiku as being disingenuous.
You actually just thought there was no reason to talk about dynasties.
— Tangentially, as I reiterated above.
In this case, you just think there’s no reason to talk about what kind of soul treats illegal immigrants the way Romney did.
— No, I am questioning your claim that Romney’s illegal workers toiled under slave-like conditions. I am NOT saying that the issue shouldn’t be discussed, just asking for proof of the “awful” conditions.
I get it. I disagree. I am not trying to be disrespectful, but you’re wrong.
— Stating it doesn’t make it true. Give us PROOF of the awful conditions.
What makes you think it’s a good neighborhood? sounds like it was full of scumbags taking advantage of their fellow man. I’ve been to Boston, and it’s not a very nice place. It’s a state that revels is compromising basic human rights like your second amendment, with all the racial and criminal problems that naturally leads to in America.
— Wow! Class-envy much?
But it sure sounds like grueling physical labor to me. I guess that’s because I’m not carrying anyone’s water (certainly not Perry’s).
Icy (8b1256) — 10/24/2011 @ 2:52 am— Hopefully you won’t break a nail while not carrying the water. It’s tough to deal with a broken nail during an 11-hour workday.
Has along come along from a long way off to spend a lot of time keeping alot company?
Icy (8b1256) — 10/24/2011 @ 2:57 amIcy
you’re up early!
EricPWJohnson (c5f1fc) — 10/24/2011 @ 2:59 amIcy
The issue is arising about Judicial appointments -its not been asked by any of these moderators in any debates
To be fair to all – Romneys had to be approved right?
Perry could only appt interim (they are elected in Tx as you know)
And the rest havent had the opportunity
But I would want to know their thoughts
EricPWJohnson (c5f1fc) — 10/24/2011 @ 3:05 amI love how everything is due to Race to the left who routinely criticize Herman Cain because he is black.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/24/2011 @ 5:04 amOf course Eric.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/24/2011 @ 5:15 amhttp://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/10/24/romneycare-provides-free-health-care-to-illegal-aliens/
ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/24/2011 @ 8:38 amIcy
you’re up early!
Comment by EricPWJohnson — 10/24/2011 @ 2:59 am
— Icy stayed up late
Icy (8b1256) — 10/24/2011 @ 9:50 amThe New York Times had a (disapproving) article about what the Republican candidates are saying about federal courts.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/us/politics/republicans-turn-judicial-power-into-a-campaign-issue.html?sq=supreme%20court%20candidates&st=cse&scp=2&pagewanted=all
Some of these things are not possible or realistic, but the article wasn’t completely fair.
I mean stating as fact that the supreme Court handed the presidency to George W. Bush and writing In attacking the courts, the Republican candidates sometimes seem to hedge their vows to remain faithful to the Constitution. Many of their proposals aimed at curtailing the power of the courts would require the document to be amended.
And I think actually the authors were a bit confused themselves and wound up citing twio priovbisions of the constutution without explaining what it meant.
But anyway here’s what it said:
Gov. Rick Perry of Texas favors term limits for Supreme Court justices. Representatives Michele Bachmann of Minnesota and Ron Paul of Texas say they would forbid the court from deciding cases concerning same-sex marriage.
Which is one place the authors later got confused. It has been argued Congress can prevent review of certain issues. What Congress probably really can do is force the Supreme Court to be the only court to hear certain cases
“Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, and former Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania want to abolish the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, calling it a “rogue” court that is “consistently radical.”
The article seemed to think that Newt Gingrich proposed that people on the west coast be left without any kind of appeals court at all!
Still, the suggestions from Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Santorum concerning the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which hears cases from federal district courts in nine Western states, are particularly bold. In February, Mr. Santorum told a Tea Party group in South Carolina that he would “sign a bill tomorrow to eliminate the Ninth Circuit,” adding: “That court is rogue. It’s a pox on the western part of our country.”
Criticism of the Ninth Circuit as too liberal is commonplace, and calls to split it into two or more parts have been floated for decades. But the idea of leaving the western third of the nation without a federal appeals court of its own appears to be a new one.
And although the Constitution forbids Congress from cutting federal judges’ pay, Mr. Gingrich has proposed ways that the power of the purse could be used to discipline that court.
“Congress can say, ‘All right, in the future, the Ninth Circuit can meet, but it will have no clerks,’ ” Mr. Gingrich told the Values Voter Summit. “ ‘By the way, we aren’t going to pay the electric bill for two years. And since you seem to be rendering justice in the dark, you don’t seem to need your law library, either.’ ”
Somehow I think Newt Gingrich’s proposal has got to be a bit more developed than just leaving the western third of the nation without a federal appeals court. They could have tried contacting the campaign to see hiow he explained that.
On Mitt Romney, it said:
At a conservative forum in South Carolina, he dismissed the idea of a Congressional confrontation with the Supreme Court over abortion, saying, “I’m not looking to create a constitutional crisis.”
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 10/24/2011 @ 10:10 amNo, you don’t facts get in the way of the ‘narrative, now Newt said this in a very tone deaf
ian cormac (0fc95f) — 10/24/2011 @ 10:27 amsense, that lends veracity to this hack account.
Its the end for Romney – Romney care free to illegals
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/24/romneycare-subsidized-care-for-illegal-immigrants/
EricPWJohnson (2a58f7) — 10/24/2011 @ 10:29 amI want to revisit an old, overdone issue — Perry’s in-state tuition rates for illegal immigrants who reside in Texas — by comparing it to the point Eric raised: RomneyCare’s subsidized health care for illegal immigrants. Both Perry and Romney were faced with difficult financial situations created by the federal government’s failure to control the border. Perry wanted to minimize making illegal immigrants dependent on welfare, especially those who are already living in Texas and probably won’t be deported. Thus, Perry’s plan gave illegal immigrants (if they resided in Texas for 3 years and graduated from a Texas high school) access to in-state college tuition rates.
Similarly, Romney wanted to help stabilize overloaded Massachusetts’ emergency rooms that were required to provide emergency care to illegal immigrants. I understand trying to deal with exploding ER costs, although I wouldn’t do it with legislation like RomneyCare.
Overall, though, I think both Perry and Romney were making difficult decisions in light of federal laws that put them in difficult financial situations. So the question is: Will Romney supporters be as hard on their guy as they were on Perry?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/24/2011 @ 10:56 amAre you up late because you’re working or moving, Icy?
DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/24/2011 @ 10:56 amLast day on vacation, DRJ. Flying back to Midland-Odessa tonight; then packing up and moving my stuff to Tucson. Fun, fun, fun!
Icy (8b1256) — 10/24/2011 @ 11:18 amDRJ
i dont think tht was the case – the law section 18 of the Mass health care act specifically named illiegal immigrants to receive ALL BENEFITS at nocharge
Romney signed it into law after vetoing it the first time because it didnt have the illegal care clause in it
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/24/2011 @ 11:41 amDRJ
But the nefariousness of Romney knowing that Perry had nothing to do with illegal immigration and his other blatant lies should be noted like the 4 aces comment and the million Texas kids without insurance, that not Perry’s fault – thats the parents fault.
Shame on Mitt
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/24/2011 @ 11:52 amMitt’s still digging (and Ed and Tina risking losing their spots at Hot Air – shameless shilling isnt going to fly with the owners of that blog)
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/24/romney-its-my-successors-fault-if-illegal-immigrants-benefited-from-romneycare/
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/24/2011 @ 11:56 am139. I thought so a week or so back, after the Romney lovefest, Cain would sink back into the swamp from whence he came.
No sign of it, people are cutting him slack as a novice politician.
They are deciding far more quickly than I could.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/24/2011 @ 12:29 pmRove, Krautscheisster, et al., are on Cain like, well, you know.
These are endorsements anyone would die for.
Cain just needs to move on from tax reform to repealing Urkel’s Presentency.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/24/2011 @ 12:33 pmGary
Polls didnt predict Huckabee and Obama winning Iowa in 2008 at this time – in fact they had Clinton or Edwards in Double figures in Oct
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ia/iowa_democratic_caucus-208.html#polls
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/24/2011 @ 12:38 pmGary
And the Republicans – all these polls show the difficulty when soo many strong candidates are in the race that polls essentially weeks out – have it wrong in Oct they were 15% to 20% off
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ia/iowa_republican_caucus-207.html#polls
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/24/2011 @ 12:45 pm“I want to revisit an old, overdone issue — Perry’s in-state tuition rates for illegal immigrants who reside in Texas — by comparing it to the point Eric raised: RomneyCare’s subsidized health care for illegal immigrants. Both Perry and Romney were faced with difficult financial situations created by the federal government’s failure to control the border. Perry wanted to minimize making illegal immigrants dependent on welfare, especially those who are already living in Texas and probably won’t be deported. Thus, Perry’s plan gave illegal immigrants (if they resided in Texas for 3 years and graduated from a Texas high school) access to in-state college tuition rates.
Similarly, Romney wanted to help stabilize overloaded Massachusetts’ emergency rooms that were required to provide emergency care to illegal immigrants. I understand trying to deal with exploding ER costs, although I wouldn’t do it with legislation like RomneyCare.”
DRJ – Hospitals are legally required to provide care for the indigent and/or uninsured in this country, whether illegal alien or not. It represents a substantial burden on our health care system in terms of unreimbursed care. My understanding is that prior to RomneyCare, 8% of MA residents were uninsured. In Texas, I think the number is something like 24%, but feel free to correct me if I’m wrong. The idea is get illegals out of emergency rooms for non-emergency treatment and into clinics or doctors offices to reduce costs, not provide a freebie health care program. Michelle Obama was in charge of a similar patient shifting program at the University of Chicago Hospital before she became the First Lady. Seems like a non-event to me, contrary to EPWJ’s usual spin.
I still do not understand Perry’s rhetoric on making college accessible for illegal aliens so they will be productive members of society if they are not allowed to work in this country. The explanation does not hold together.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/24/2011 @ 5:02 pmPerry didnt allow it – he had nothing to do with the bill, and just a few kids out of 1.4 million get the small amt – not the 100 grand just a few hundred dollars as out of state tuition in texas is not the cost but a premium to fund state teachers retirement
On the other hand = Romney care was his sole doing
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/24/2011 @ 5:40 pmIf Perry had nothing to do with it he could have disagreed with it and kicked the asses of those who drafted the legislation…………figuratively of course.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/24/2011 @ 5:46 pmDoes Texas not provide medical care for illegal immigrants? The Romney campaign has cited examples that include a $62M cost to the Texas Emergency Medicaid fund for the care of illegal immigrants and $33M that the Texas Children’s Health Insurance Program (T-CHIP) is estimated to have spent on perinatal coverage for illegal immigrants.
ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/24/2011 @ 5:49 pmdoh
it affected just a handful of student – less than a thousand out of over 1.4 million and he didnt sign it
Numbers I got show less than 2500 students in 9 years got the waiver for more than a year out of 4 million attending college
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/24/2011 @ 6:00 pmcol texas charges them – and they are very aggressive in collecting
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/24/2011 @ 6:01 pmI doubt it and I doubt you can prove that, Eric.
ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/24/2011 @ 6:02 pmchips is not open to illegal immigrants – never was
your boy is done
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/24/2011 @ 6:03 pmCol
Romney knew all this when he did his hail mary against Perry attacking him because he was desperate to keep perry from running away
he was wrong – yes all states are saddled with caring for illegal immigrants Romney knew that and should have kept his mouth shut on that
but he was in dire trouble and now is again
Romney just proved Perry right
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/24/2011 @ 6:08 pmTo qualify, a child must be:
Age 18 or younger*.
*Children up to age 20 can qualify for Medicaid in some cases.
A Texas resident.
A U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident.
What if I am not a U.S. citizen?
ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/24/2011 @ 6:13 pmWe do not ask about the citizenship or immigration status of the parent. Only the child must be a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident in Texas to be considered for CHIP/Children’s Medicaid coverage.
Who can apply?
Any adult who lives more than half the time with an uninsured child may apply. This includes parents, stepparents, grandparents, other relatives, legal guardians, or adult brothers or sisters.
ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/24/2011 @ 6:15 pmAnyone age 19 or younger who lives on their own can apply.
A pregnant person of any age can apply for CHIP perinatal services for her unborn child
it never stops being about the mexicans does it?
Team R has its priorities all effed up.
Debt spiral of death hello?
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/24/2011 @ 6:34 pmThe more Romney attacks Perry, the more I like Perry.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/24/2011 @ 6:51 pmdaleyrocks:
I agree with you and that’s why I didn’t criticize Romney for trying to find an answer to that problem. However, as I said above, I don’t think the best answer is comprehensive, mandated RomneyCare legislation. Texas has done the same thing with County-run free or reduced cost clinics.
You’re right to a point, but we’re talking about 10%+ of our population who have lived in Texas most of their lives and probably won’t leave. Why not let them take a heating/air conditioning repair course at the local community college so they can support themselves and their families as independent contractors? It’s not an ideal solution but it’s better than dooming them to day work, random housekeeping or landscaping jobs, or crime. Maybe there are some states that can afford a permanent underclass but we can’t.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/24/2011 @ 6:54 pmit borders on collective punishment, this idea of slamming the door on an individual’s educational opportunities
we’re better than that
or at least Texans are
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/24/2011 @ 6:59 pmDRJ
Romney could have made all his points against Perry by acknowledging the things Texas was forced to do by an absentee federal government and reinforced the msg that when he was president Perry had an ally in the whitehouse – instead he decided on another path i guess emboldened by the movement that gardisil thing got with Bachmann
This isnt the Mitt of 2008, I blame Huckabee’s lying about his record and Mitts during that race, Mitt seems to be going away from the things that made mitt mitt
EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7) — 10/24/2011 @ 7:00 pmThe more Perry attacks Romney, the less I like Perry.
ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/24/2011 @ 7:26 pmIt was silly for Perry to attack Romney on immigration. It’s not gonna help him I don’t think it’ll just mean he’ll have to talk about immigration more.
But he’s supposed to be talking about creating jobs.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/24/2011 @ 7:42 pm“You’re right to a point, but we’re talking about 10%+ of our population who have lived in Texas most of their lives and probably won’t leave. Why not let them take a heating/air conditioning repair course at the local community college so they can support themselves and their families as independent contractors? It’s not an ideal solution but it’s better than dooming them to day work, random housekeeping or landscaping jobs, or crime. Maybe there are some states that can afford a permanent underclass but we can’t.”
DRJ – That’s why it seems like Perry’s rhetoric is assuming some sort of path to citizenship or legal residency status. I’m not disagreeing with you, but that’s the conclusion I get from his words – that he’s assuming these people will be remaining in this country one way or another.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/24/2011 @ 8:11 pmPerry’s voluntary 20% flat tax seems kind of dumb at first glance.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/24/2011 @ 8:20 pm159., 160. You’re saying in 2008 either the polls we’re crap–always a distinct possibility until 2 weeks before an election–or the situation was fluid, or some combination.
I’m saying we’re seeing an unexpected stretch of statis, lack of fluidity.
Rather like the drift here at ‘Rico’s.
Newt has emerged from his coma but that hardly resembles life.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/24/2011 @ 8:20 pmI’ll glance again later
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 10/24/2011 @ 8:20 pmStasis
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/24/2011 @ 8:21 pmI don’t think Perry is assuming there will be another amnesty, daleyrocks, but he probably does assume Texas’ illegal immigrants will be here for the next 10-20 years. And they will be, if history is our guide.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 10/25/2011 @ 5:57 am“but he probably does assume Texas’ illegal immigrants will be here for the next 10-20 years. And they will be, if history is our guide.”
DRJ – Not a very optimistic view, but as you say, based on history, potentially realistic.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/25/2011 @ 6:23 amI find it fascinating that a governor who has a state to run isnow responsible for national policy that is:
Largely uniforced
Enforcement is uneven
Enforcement is solely the purview of the Federal authorities and courts
Yet any attempt to deal with the reality that these people are here to stay and they have been given amnesty through the inaction of decades of administrations is considered pro amnesty by those eho seek to demagogue the issue for short term political gain
Overspending is the problem facing America not the 250 year practice of illegal immigration
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 10/25/2011 @ 6:58 am“I find it fascinating that a governor who has a state to run isnow responsible for national policy that is:”
“Overspending is the problem facing America not the 250 year practice of illegal immigration”
EPWJ – How many comments about illegal immigration did you write in this thread? It seems like your focus is very, very flexible.
Nice straw man attempt on the holding the governor responsible for federal law. 0 points for originality. 2 1/2 points for execution.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/25/2011 @ 8:03 amSome people are unsure of the concept of Federalism, and think that we live in a EU-SuperState where all policy decisions are made and directed from DC.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (d0e7e2) — 10/25/2011 @ 9:13 am20% flat tax is better than 9-9-9
/Perrytards
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/25/2011 @ 9:14 amEnforcement is solely the purview of the Federal authorities and courts
— Tell that to Sheriff Joe, buddy.
Icy (99e0c6) — 10/25/2011 @ 9:32 amSince a rate of taxation is assumed to be already built into the price of every commodity we buy, the average consumer is only affected by the 9% of the Sales Tax, and Personal Income Tax.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (d0e7e2) — 10/25/2011 @ 9:33 amIn light of that, 9-9-9 is better (at 18%) than a 20% Flat Tax.
But, in all things, the Devil is in the Details; and the details are written in the House Ways & Means Cmte.
Icy, are we talking about the REAL Sheriff Joe (in Phoenix AZ),
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (d0e7e2) — 10/25/2011 @ 9:35 amor are we talking about Sheriff “Slow Joe”?
Consumer Confidence today stands at 27%, full on depression sentiment.
Tomorrow EU throws in the towel on Greece, Italy’s government falls.
Next twit to admonish us to stick to the economy gets bitch slapped.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/25/2011 @ 10:05 amgary, a question:
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (d0e7e2) — 10/25/2011 @ 10:07 amWhat economy?
The real Sheriff Joe; the one that says, “if you are within my jurisdiction, and you’re illegal, we’re gonna nab ya!”
Icy (99e0c6) — 10/25/2011 @ 10:12 am194. Any economy. Name one that’s in good shape.
We here expect 4 more quarters of recession with Greek default. China’s stock market is crashing. There is no good news anywhere in the world.
I can’t imagine that Foreign Policy or Social Issues should be off the table because someone somewhere might be unaware that the economy is freaking awful and government is at fault.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/25/2011 @ 10:23 amI don’t think the EU crashing or any of the other has any affect except to lower prices as the dollar gains tremendous strenght and recovers much of what it lost during the decade of the Euro
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 10/25/2011 @ 10:33 am197. The euro is not at risk simply because the EU breaks, short of dissolution.
Greece, Portugal and others ought never have been included in economic union because they are unable to deflate their own currency.
Morgan Stanley, for one, will fail following Greek default. AIG will fail all over again. Remember TARP? Do you think we can cross that Rubicon again?
CA, tits up. Who’s going to loan that sh*thole money?
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/25/2011 @ 10:42 amgary
Those banks can fail, no problem. Overseas assets are seperated from local assets, true many investors will lose everything – but thats what happends when you invest in socialism
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 10/25/2011 @ 11:04 am199. And we will see a further collapse of credit, not just to banks, to business and to the almighty consumer.
Look at the Great Depression GDP curve, it was a long decline. Superimposed over the current decline(careful to use real dollars) we are simply repeating the scenario.
Beginning with Nixon’s departure from the gold standard, our dollar is now worth 20 cents.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/25/2011 @ 1:33 pmName one that’s in good shape.
Canada’s doing well, as is our own North Dakota.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (d0e7e2) — 10/25/2011 @ 1:44 pmBut those silly buggers in both places are mucking about in the ground actually retrieving oil from Mother Nature’s hiding places.
201. Alberta that is. Yes, Canada’s unemployment is much better than ours but it’s public debt is like 85% of GDP.
ND’s per capita State expenditures are among the highest in the nation per sayanything blog today. A conservative state except as guaged by its public employees.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/25/2011 @ 2:15 pmgary,
we left realistically the gold standard in WWI – and afterall Gold is measured in dollars – no dollars measured in gold
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 10/25/2011 @ 2:42 pmHow do you guys feel about John Kerry wanting to replace the dollar bill with the dollar coin?
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/25/2011 @ 2:44 pmJoe Biden-Hey Patterico stand up………..oh god love ya.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/25/2011 @ 2:50 pm203. August 15, 1971 Nixon ended direct convertability of dollar to gold. Perhaps gold-backed dollar would have been better vernacular than gold standard.
Fiat currency began, inotherwords, for this episode of currency collapse.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/25/2011 @ 3:10 pmIt is possible that when the economy collapses the states might take up secession.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/25/2011 @ 3:16 pmgary
there is not enough gold in the world to back currency exchanges going back to Napoleonic times – too many people not enough gold
only 50 to 65 million ounces a year are mined and 20 million is lost in industrial production so that would leave about 40 million ounces – lets just say that 2000 dollars an ounce is the price then instead of a 40 trillion dollar would GDP divid 40 trillion by 40 million ounces its a big number like about a million dollars a troy ounce
thats how far the gap is 998,000 dollars an ounce
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 10/25/2011 @ 3:21 pm40 trillion world GDP sorry
EricPWJohnson (d84fb0) — 10/25/2011 @ 3:22 pmI do not appreciate liberals or conservatives telling me what to do.
I do not appreciate the left bankrupting us.
DohBiden (d54602) — 10/25/2011 @ 3:50 pmComment by DohBiden — 10/25/2011 @ 2:44 pm
Been there, Done that, during the Carter-I Administration – except nobody had the guts to pull in the Dollar-bills.
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (d0e7e2) — 10/25/2011 @ 3:57 pmThe conversation then was to replace the Dollar-bill with the Deuce, but then the vending-machine industry invented the Dollar-bill reader,
so they didn’t need machines that would accept Dollar-coins
FIAT MONEY
ARMAGEDDON!!!!!!!!!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/25/2011 @ 3:58 pmNor Luap, save us while there is still time.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/25/2011 @ 3:59 pmFIAT MONEY?
Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (d0e7e2) — 10/25/2011 @ 4:03 pmIs that what they pay J-Lo with for those commercials?
Money = Debt
Bwahahahahaha!!!!!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 10/25/2011 @ 4:11 pmFiat Money!
http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1326543735602&id=86081b15869b9b5d63dd2861447e0341
ColonelHaiku (fbf87d) — 10/25/2011 @ 4:14 pmYou children can giggle all you want but the printing presses are already running.
The yen is at a post WWII low vis a vis USD. Swiss franc is pegged to euro and emerging economies currencies are in free fall.
Seventy per cent of all sovereign reserves are USD. What do you suppose the effect of $5 Trillion getting dumped into circulation in a year’s time will be?
In the trouble of 2008 half of emerging economies exhausted their reserves trying to strengthen their currencies.
Egypt has 50% inflation this year in food prices. Turkey has a current account deficit of 11% of GDP. Mexico has lost 20% of its purchase parity in 2 months.
You children are so ignorant you can only giggle like school girls.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/25/2011 @ 5:44 pm208. Gold, silver, copper, oil, wheat, corn, rice, cotton,… All are sitting on freighters waiting for contracts to expire and prices to surge.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/25/2011 @ 5:48 pmCourtesy of Monty at Ace’s, whose Doom column should be your first read every morning:
http://my.freeze.com/NA_newtab_i_IE.html?fr=freeze&type=W3i_NA,173,0_0,Tab%20Search,20110939,6893,0,8,0
This is remedial stuff, from Chris Martenson, a frequent feature at zerohedge–your second read in the AM, first on weekends when Monty is doing light news like a book column.
You should also be getting around to Mish, featured at Townhall and HotAir.
Knuckleheads. We’re well past the opening acts, the heroine gets it by March, China will be afire.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 10/26/2011 @ 7:21 am