Perry: I shouldn’t have called people heartless for opposing in-state tuition for illegals

posted at 4:16 pm on September 28, 2011 by Allahpundit

Via Newsmax, skip to 5:25 for evidence that his wife was right when she told Iowans this morning that he’ll be better prepared for the next debate. He’s smoother this time, emphasizing that it’s a highly bipartisan position in Texas and notably avoiding any insinuations about how evil those wingnuts in his base are. (Also: No rambling about saving a pretzel for the gas jets.) He might also note at the next debate that he’s hardly alone among prominent Republicans in backing the idea:

In 2001, Perry signed the first state law in the country that allowed the children of illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition rates. Former Florida state Rep. Juan Zapata said the Texas law was “the model” for legislation that he repeatedly—but unsuccessfully—pushed in his state. Two of his key allies then are now among the GOP’s most sought-after stars: [Jeb] Bush, the subject of perpetual draft movements to run for president, and his fellow Floridian, Sen. Marco Rubio, a sure bet for the GOP’s vice presidential shortlist in 2012.

“I think that is a fair policy,” Bush said in an e-mail to National Journal on Tuesday, adding that the students who benefit from the tuition breaks find themselves in the United States through “no fault of their own.”…

Rubio, the son of Cuban exiles, was the co-sponsor of such a bill in 2003 and 2004, before he became speaker of the Florida state House. Bush, whose wife was born and raised in Mexico and who speaks fluent Spanish, also championed the legislation…

“In times of cutbacks, it would not be as high a priority as it would be in times of abundance,” [Bush] said. In the email, he also insisted he would have required “many years” residency in state for students to be eligible for the tuition breaks. The Texas law, as well the Florida proposals, had a three-year residency requirement.

Rubio was asked about in-state tuition for illegals in Florida a few weeks ago and argued that the bill he sponsored as a state legislator was narrow in scope, requiring a certain GPA to qualify for lower tuition rates. Okay, but in-state tuition for illegals in Texas ended up being pretty narrow too, applicable to just one percent of the state’s college students. If the defense is, “well, it might be bad policy but it doesn’t affect many people,” that ain’t much of a defense. Ace is worked up, meanwhile, that part of Perry’s damage control here is that he cares too darn much, but that’s no obstacle to primary success. Remember back during the 2006 immigration debate when McCain started throwing around analogies involving people riding in the “back of the bus”? He was “passionate” too, in the most demagogic way. He waltzed to the nomination.

Two clips for you here, the first of Perry’s chat with Newsmax and the second of Christie — who has his own troubles on immigration — taking a shot at tuition breaks for illegals last night.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

I notice you didn’t answer my question from my last post – do you have any idea why I find you to be an emotionally manipulative person?
Bizarro No. 1 on September 29, 2011 at 2:20 AM

(Channeling my inner Kim)
Why…why…why..but…but…but…you should be banned from HotAir!!!!!

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 2:24 AM

Shame on you, sharrukin, for getting someone with a sucker’s bet!
:D

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 2:22 AM

I’m A Bad Bad Man.

sharrukin on September 29, 2011 at 2:26 AM

(Channeling my inner Kim)
Why…why…why..but…but…but…you should be banned from HotAir!!!!!

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 2:24 AM

LOL

I don’t know if this will surprise you, but I have had people here say they were going to report me to Ed/Allah, only because I said something they didn’t like. Each time I was thinking to myself, “What do you believe you are going to accomplish, you big baby – it’s not like you’re reporting me for violating HA’s TOS!” :)

Bizarro No. 1 on September 29, 2011 at 2:52 AM

Shame on you, sharrukin, for getting someone with a sucker’s bet!
:D

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 2:22 AM

I’m A Bad Bad Man.

sharrukin on September 29, 2011 at 2:26 AM

Y’know the funny thing in the question I’ve posed here? If Perry had actually apologized – instead of offering up the usual liberal weasel excuses – that would have garnered respect. But even with the most friendly of softball “interviews”, such as in the video here, he was just unable to to do so.

I think the fact that even Ace’s blog – probably the “Perry Central” of the internet, notes re: Perry on illegals: “the idea that we can just “intuit” everything like goddamned Emo Jedis… I’m really getting tired of it. We seem determined to replicate the worst parts of liberalism” should serve as a heads up.

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 2:54 AM

I don’t know if this will surprise you, but I have had people here say they were going to report me to Ed/Allah, only because I said something they didn’t like. Each time I was thinking to myself, “What do you believe you are going to accomplish, you big baby – it’s not like you’re reporting me for violating HA’s TOS!” :)
Bizarro No. 1 on September 29, 2011 at 2:52 AM

Hellyea – if we were all booted for writing something that some hot house flower disagreed with then the place would be mighty empty! I’ve disagreed with most everyone on something or another sometime – and I suppose it’s that way with everyone – but, eh, it’s part and parcel of the being on the interwebz. Ya gotta learn to blow it off cuz the next day you’ll often find yourself agreeing with the SOB you had just argued with the day before, lol.

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 3:02 AM

Y’know the funny thing in the question I’ve posed here? If Perry had actually apologized – instead of offering up the usual liberal weasel excuses – that would have garnered respect.

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 2:54 AM

I will be honest I am a little more cynical. I look at what a politician has done and then measure their words by that cloth.

Words alone, apology’s, don’t mean much, any more than a mumbled apology from a kid caught sneaking cookies does. They aren’t sorry about what they did. They are sorry they got caught. Their behavior is the best measure as to what they really believe.

And yeah, the emoting in place of thinking kinda annoys me as well.

sharrukin on September 29, 2011 at 3:08 AM

Y’know the funny thing in the question I’ve posed here? If Perry had actually apologized – instead of offering up the usual liberal weasel excuses – that would have garnered respect. But even with the most friendly of softball “interviews”, such as in the video here, he was just unable to to do so.

I think the fact that even Ace’s blog – probably the “Perry Central” of the internet, notes re: Perry on illegals: “the idea that we can just “intuit” everything like goddamned Emo Jedis… I’m really getting tired of it. We seem determined to replicate the worst parts of liberalism” should serve as a heads up.

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 2:54 AM

You’re right about Perry here, of course. Too bad his minions don’t understand it.

For Perry to give the kind of apology he needs to, he’d first have to face up to some offenses which would disqualify him with the public, politically speaking, like his crony capitalism for instance. It’s the same kind of dilemma Christine O’Donnell had/has with her past, her lawsuit being one example of what I’m talking about.

Eliot Spitzer is actually better off in this way than either of them are, which is both funny and sad at the same time.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 29, 2011 at 3:17 AM

For Perry to give the kind of apology he needs to, he’d first have to face up to some offenses which would disqualify him with the public, politically speaking, like his crony capitalism for instance. It’s the same kind of dilemma Christine O’Donnell had/has with her past, her lawsuit being one example of what I’m talking about.

Eliot Spitzer is actually better off in this way than either of them are, which is both funny and sad at the same time.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 29, 2011 at 3:17 AM

I think it’s becoming more and more likely that Perry will turn out to be the Christine O’Donnell in the current pack of candidates. Looks okay from a distance, but lots of problems when viewed close up.

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 3:48 AM

The issue isn’t going to go away. The Lt. Gov. is coming out against Perry’s immigration stance in a piece to air on Sunday. The Lt. Gov. is running for the empty KBH senate seat.

bigmike on September 29, 2011 at 4:21 AM

through “no fault of their own.”…

Pinhead!! It’s not about whether it’s their fault, it’s a question of whether it’s OUR RESPONSIBILITY. Someone getting hit by a meteor isn’t his fault, either. Does that mean the public is required to pay higher taxes to support him for the rest of his life too?

And to think he was my choice until that statement.

Dirty Creature on September 29, 2011 at 7:00 AM

Bizarro No. 1 on September 29, 2011 at 3:17 AM

Apology for what? It is apparent not one of you has read the bill, not one of you has taken the time to understand the underpinnings of the bill…just the knee-jerk, it’s the illegals.
Not one of you know the fiscal impact of the bill.
I asked a question, several times, not one correct answer.
How many illegals does this bill affect?
…and please not the “one is too many”, I see that kneed jerk a mile a way, fiscal impact on the state of Texas is what is important, long term and short term.
Now the other question that all you “conservatives” also dodged…
Do you believe in state rights?

right2bright on September 29, 2011 at 7:27 AM

I think it’s becoming more and more likely that Perry will turn out to be the Christine O’Donnell in the current pack of candidates. Looks okay from a distance, but lots of problems when viewed close up.

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 3:48 AM

Your “lots of problems” are mainly created in your mind…you do know that every candidate has “problems” they are human…one by one you will tear down the candidates so your (you hope) will be left standing…and lo and behold, yours won’t be, because others will do to your candidate what you are doing to Perry.
Tell me your candidate, and I will show you what they have done which is a “candidate killer”…
Perry has governed for over 10 years, this bill was passed by a huge majority, 177 to 4, what bill in what state has a better record?
Hardly a “controversy” with that kind of support…
Why? Because if you read it (and you haven’t) it makes sense, and if you read the reasons, it makes more sense, common sense.

right2bright on September 29, 2011 at 7:31 AM

Okay, so Kim Priestap claims people who criticize Perry are poor spouses, and bluefox thinks people who criticize Perry should be banned from Hot Air. Effective ways to silence the opposition, but not really all that subtle.

Hey, you know what might be subtle and effective? Calling them heartless.

MadisonConservative on September 29, 2011 at 8:56 AM

Apology for what?

right2bright on September 29, 2011 at 7:27 AM

Calling conservatives heartless. Oh, wait…you see no problem there.

MadisonConservative on September 29, 2011 at 8:57 AM

(Channeling my inner Kim)
Why…why…why..but…but…but…you should be banned from HotAir!!!!!

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 2:24 AM

That was a sad attempt at impersonating me. I never have and never will suggest someone be banned for expressing his opinion, no matter how ignorant or asinine that opinion may be.

Kim Priestap on September 29, 2011 at 9:58 AM

That was a sad attempt at impersonating me. I never have and never will suggest someone be banned for expressing his opinion, no matter how ignorant or asinine that opinion may be.

Kim Priestap on September 29, 2011 at 9:58 AM

No, you just suggest that someone must be a bad spouse because they don’t accept the apology of a politician that you love so much.

MadisonConservative on September 29, 2011 at 10:05 AM

For Pete’s sake, I thought we were on the same side and had the same goals. But you wouldn’t know it from some of the comments that make Perry sound like he’s worse than Obama. There are times when I feel like I have to look at the url just to make sure I wasn’t reading a Daily Kos diary entry. And just a few months ago Hot Air commenters were begging Perry to get in the race because of great things he did in Texas.

Kim Priestap on September 29, 2011 at 1:29 AM

Kim, you’ve done a great jobs presenting some of the the real facts about the complicated situation here in Texas with regard to the border. You might have noticed that most of the people taking such an intractable position on this are not from Texas; there is a reason for that, and it isn’t because we all loooooooove Rick Perry. It is because in our state, we often live & work side by side with people who came here illegally, and their children- so they have a face, we know them and they are real people to us. Pretty damn hardworking people, too.

I am a Texan of 30 years and I believe the legislature felt they were doing the right thing for Texas in enacting the in-state tuition rule for children of illegals. (I know I don’t speak for all Texans.) I also believe the main issue in this election is, and will continue to be JOBS and the economy- not these side issues the other candidates, the media and a lot of the posters here are attacking Perry over.

And this is just speculation but I think being so close a lot us us have had that thought cross our minds, “Damn, I’m lucky. What if I had been born on the other side of the border? What would I do?” and maybe concluded we would have swum the Rio Grande ourselves as opposed to living in that hellhole that is Mexico. I know I would have. Regardless, this problem has been going on for decades so it will not be fixed overnight, and we know that here.

However it is really frustrating & futile to try to reason with certain of the posters here. It has no effect, and if you stick to your position long enough you will be attacked personally. It’s unfortunate but that’s how just about every thread ends up here these days. But don’t let it bother you, and thanks for the informative posts!

kg598301 on September 29, 2011 at 11:52 AM

It has no effect, and if you stick to your position long enough you will be attacked personally.

kg598301 on September 29, 2011 at 11:52 AM

You should stick to hiding behind your gender, which people don’t know because nobody here knows you.

Too bad HA doesn’t have Moderators, you and the other haters would be banned so intelligent people could discuss politics.

bluefox on September 29, 2011 at 12:33 AM

You don’t know how to accept an apology gracefully when it’s been offered gracefully, do you? I would hate to be your spouse. Make a wrong move or say the wrong thing and you won’t ever let him/her forget it.

Kim Priestap on September 28, 2011 at 10:53 PM

MadisonConservative on September 29, 2011 at 12:13 PM

Okay, so Kim Priestap claims people who criticize Perry are poor spouses, and bluefox thinks people who criticize Perry should be banned from Hot Air. Effective ways to silence the opposition, but not really all that subtle.

Hey, you know what might be subtle and effective? Calling them heartless.

MadisonConservative on September 29, 2011 at 8:56 AM

Since you can’t respond to my comments honestly, you mischaracterize them, I’m guessing, to generate sympathy for yourself and other anti-Perry commenters and antipathy toward me. Well, if that’s all you’ve got to offer, that’s all you’ve got.

You know I wasn’t referring to people who merely criticize Perry or any other a candidate for that matter. You know I was talking about someone who harangues, brow beats, and insults incessantly and without end another person for a mistake or misstep, even though that person apologized for the mistake or misstep. I was talking about someone who has been holding a grudge and refuses to let go. You know this, but you’ve chosen to lie about my comments anyway. All because I’m a Perry supporter and I push back against the lies, mischaracterizations, and distortions that have been said about him. I’d react the same way if those lies, micharacterizations, and distortions were said about any other Republican candidate.

Now, let’s get down to the heart of my comments from last night that were directed toward commenters who harangued, brow beat, and insulted Perry incessantly for his mistakes, even though Perry apologized for them (I understand that you don’t think it was an apology because it wasn’t contrite enough).

It is not unreasonable to presume that a person’s behavior and speech online are in line with his behavior and speech in his or her private life. Why? Because we have seen it play out that way. Here’s just one example: Alec Baldwin’s insults about and toward conservatives on Twitter are consistent with the insults that he left for his own daughter on her voice mail a number of years ago. He expresses his anger toward conservatives – people he doesn’t like but doesn’t even know – in the same way he directed his anger toward his own daughter.

I’m sure we all can think of news stories and articles that will have more examples of people whose bad behavior online turned out to be congruent with their behavior in their private lives.

As for the self-serving motives you assigned to my comments (nice straw man you got there), you look foolish accusing me of trying to silence opposition. If these folks want to continue piling on, more power to them. But constantly haranguing anyone like that isn’t criticism. It’s malicious.

I’m sure it was an act of futility. Many of those who engage in the nonstop ankle-biting hide their identities behind pseudonyms, so they can act like juveniles as often as they wish without consequence.

Kim Priestap on September 29, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Since you can’t respond to my comments honestly, you mischaracterize them…

Kim Priestap on September 29, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Watch while I “mischaracterize” your comments again:

You know I was talking about someone who harangues, brow beats, and insults incessantly and without end another person for a mistake or misstep, even though that person apologized for the mistake or misstep.

Kim Priestap on September 29, 2011 at 12:20 PM

I guess they don’t take kindly to being called heartless racists.

They can be funny that way.

sharrukin on September 28, 2011 at 8:36 PM

Look at that endless, incessant insulting of Rick Perry. Just awful. How dare sharrukin criticize Perry? He should just shut up and be grateful that Our Lord and Savior Perry even lowered himself enough to “apologize” to such swine. Indeed, when Perry called his opponents heartless, or when he implied they judge people by their last names, or are “anti-life”, Perry was right on, because Perry can do no wrong. And if he does, and you don’t immediately forgive him, you’re a bad spouse.

MadisonConservative on September 29, 2011 at 12:28 PM

Anyway, just wanted to say…stellar performance from Perry fanatics in this thread. Reminds me of Ron Paul fanatics…Romney fanatics…Palin fanatics…etc…

MadisonConservative on September 29, 2011 at 12:35 PM

MadisonConservative on September 29, 2011 at 12:28 PM

You demonstrated the points in my argument beautifully. Thank you.

Kim Priestap on September 29, 2011 at 12:41 PM

You might have noticed that most of the people taking such an intractable position on this are not from Texas
kg598301 on September 29, 2011 at 11:52 AM

Unfortunately, Perry’s pro-illegal policies don’t impact Texas only. Why should taxpayers across America have to pick up the illegal tab – welfare, violent crime, food stamps, free healthcare, education etc – just because y’all don’t believe in the law, having thrown the gate wide open and offering incentives to “come on in”?

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 3:40 PM

Unfortunately, Perry’s pro-illegal policies don’t impact Texas only. Why should taxpayers across America have to pick up the illegal tab – welfare, violent crime, food stamps, free healthcare, education etc – just because y’all don’t believe in the law, having thrown the gate wide open and offering incentives to “come on in”?

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 3:40 PM

I just disagree so much with both of those premises that I’m not going to answer that question, it’s like being asked how long you’ve been beating your wife. Texans DO believe in the law, and we DO believe in securing the border. My post had to do with in-state tuition rates for children of illegals, not securing the border. In the context that these kids are already here. It is reality, not your perfect world but reality. This is what we live with every day, it is not a concept. Do you see the difference between those two issues?

A lot of people sure swing to the extremes on this subject, they just don’t seem capable of seeing anything but black and white, they are so emotional about it they can’t think straight. That is not meant to belittle you or anyone else. Maybe if you read my post again a little more objectively?

kg598301 on September 29, 2011 at 5:04 PM

A lot of people sure swing to the extremes on this subject, they just don’t seem capable of seeing anything but black and white, they are so emotional about it they can’t think straight. That is not meant to belittle you or anyone else. Maybe if you read my post again a little more objectively?

kg598301 on September 29, 2011 at 5:04 PM

I’m sure the world can greatly benefit from your totally overwhelming and astounding self-proclaimed a-emotional self-righteousness, what with Mother Teresa having passed on and all. And I can indeed understand why you are terrified to address the question re: the bizarre wont to inviting and encouraging criminal activity. The only thing Americans ask of you, given your wont, is that you pick up the tab for it.

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 8:37 PM

Hellyea – if we were all booted for writing something that some hot house flower disagreed with then the place would be mighty empty! I’ve disagreed with most everyone on something or another sometime – and I suppose it’s that way with everyone – but, eh, it’s part and parcel of the being on the interwebz. Ya gotta learn to blow it off cuz the next day you’ll often find yourself agreeing with the SOB you had just argued with the day before, lol.

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 3:02 AM

Disagreements in and of themselves don’t bother me at all because, when you think about it, everyone is going to end up disagreeing with each person in their lives at some point – disgreements are a given when living in society, offline as well as on-!

The mission, if a person chooses to accept it, shouldn’t be to have surrounding oneself with like-minded people opinion-wise as a goal, it should be to weed out argumentative people from polite ones, like how it’s pleasing to be around people who can hold their liquor while avoiding those who can’t! :)

PS I didn’t realize ’til now that your post at 2:24 AM
was mocking bluefox’s at 12:33 AM, where he said, Too bad HA doesn’t have Moderators, you and the other haters would be banned so intelligent people could discuss politics. LOL!!! I missed that exchange the first time around.

What a loser you are, bluefox. You’d be happier in the company of people like Bev Perdue and Peter Orszag than you would people who truly appreciate the concept of ‘free exchange of ideas’.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 29, 2011 at 10:03 PM

Apology for what? It is apparent not one of you has read the bill, not one of you has taken the time to understand the underpinnings of the bill…

I was referring to Perry’s inability to give a sincere apology for his mindless demagoguery about people who disagree with him about the I.I. issue; he’s not going to be able to give a credible apology until he shows he’s willing to face all of his political sins, and, going by his current rhetoric, not only is he not in the same ballpark yet that way, he’s not even in the same galaxy.

just the knee-jerk, it’s the illegals.

You say this as though there’s something wrong with it in an arrogant, unreasonable manner.

Why should someone tolerate illegals just because others do? That doesn’t show strength of leadership at all.

What I find interesting is that I don’t have contempt towards those who disagree with me about this simply because of the disagreement, unlike you, Dick Perry, and his other minions. You should be concerned with taking the log out of your own eye first, dude. :)

Not one of you know the fiscal impact of the bill.
I asked a question, several times, not one correct answer.
How many illegals does this bill affect?
…and please not the “one is too many”, I see that kneed jerk a mile a way, fiscal impact on the state of Texas is what is important, long term and short term.
Now the other question that all you “conservatives” also dodged…
Do you believe in state rights?

right2bright on September 29, 2011 at 7:27 AM

btw, even though the question you asked me hasn’t been a topic I’ve been commenting upon, since you asked me, I’ll answer.

If someone were to say, “one is too many”, I’d agree with that person over you because it’s not respectable to say, fiscal impact on the state of Texas is what is important, long term and short term.” Sorry, but I call BS on that – principle trumps financial concerns, no ifs, ands, or buts. People like you who rationalize about this are part of the group of “conservatives” that’s been unwittingly enabling the Leftist tendency shift of the US.

Bizarro No. 1 on September 29, 2011 at 10:55 PM

The mission, if a person chooses to accept it, shouldn’t be to have surrounding oneself with like-minded people opinion-wise as a goal, it should be to weed out argumentative people from polite ones, like how it’s pleasing to be around people who can hold their liquor while avoiding those who can’t! :)
Bizarro No. 1 on September 29, 2011 at 10:03 PM

AwHell, t’aint no mission, Bizarro. Ya just ‘cept that folks are gonna disagree an’ ya gets over it.
:D

whatcat on September 29, 2011 at 11:58 PM

I didn’t realize ’til now that your post at 2:24 AM
was mocking bluefox’s at 12:33 AM, where he said, Too bad HA doesn’t have Moderators, you and the other haters would be banned so intelligent people could discuss politics. LOL!!! I missed that exchange the first time around.
Bizarro No. 1 on September 29, 2011 at 10:03 PM

Ah, well, my “s-tag” variety witticisms sometimes take a while to set in. It’s only important that I get them the first time around, lol, at least then I’m amused!
:D

whatcat on September 30, 2011 at 3:03 AM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5