An Interview With Rick Perry On Illegal Immigration

Right Wing News has just released a 10 question interview with Rick Perry on illegal immigration.

In this interview, Rick Perry is asked all the questions on illegal immigration that people have wanted to hear him asked. Over the course of the interview, Perry revealed a lot of new information on how he'd handle the illegal immigration issue if he becomes President. Although he might disagree with this characterization, his positions on the issue seem to be well to the right of where many conservatives believe he is on illegal immigration.


Here are just a few excerpts from the interview.

•  If Rick Perry becomes President of the United States, would that fence on the border be completed in your first term?

"I think what caused the hang up was that after it was passed, it was amended to give Homeland Security complete discretion on how, when and whether the fence ever gets built. Obviously with this president, that means it will never be completed.

If I’m elected, I will direct my Secretary of Homeland Security to expedite construction of strategic fencing along the border, especially in high traffic areas where manpower alone is insufficient to do the job."

• Was the Obama Administration right to sue Arizona over their immigration law?

"I respect the right of all states to develop their own solutions, whether they use the Texas model or the Arizona model. I applaud my fellow governors who are showing leadership on this issue, because President Obama certainly has not."

• Can you explain your "I don’t think you have a heart" comment from the last debate?

"On the issue of all Texas residents paying in-state tuition, I regret the comment from the debate. It was a poor choice of words, and it wasn’t fair to those who disagree with the policy."

• Would you like to get rid of E-Verify and if so, what would you replace it with?

"I agree that some kind of electronic verification system is needed so we can make sure employers comply with the law not to hire illegal immigrants. E-Verify is a federal government created and run program, and as a result there have been a number of problems with it so far. The Department of Homeland Security estimated the system could fail to identify more than half of all illegal immigrants. But just because it has problems doesn’t mean we should throw employee verification out. It means we should make it work. ...So as president, I’d work to put in place an E-Verify system that’s more accurate, less burdensome and really delivers the results we need it to."

• Do you support the  Federal DREAM Act?

"I too oppose the federal DREAM Act and will oppose it as President."

•  Would you support comprehensive immigration reform?

"The debate on immigration reform is meaningless until the federal government secures the border. There’s just no point in passing new immigration laws when we can’t even enforce the ones we’ve got. Once our borders are secure and we’ve fixed the problem with visa “overstays,” then we can seriously address our broken immigration system. But step one is to secure that border so we have the ability to enforce the law."

These represent only part of the interview questions and answers. It is worth your time to read the entire interview.  Click here to go to Right Wing News for the entire interview

The Rise and Fall of Rick Perry->And The Lid Teaches His Friend Jazz The Facts About Israel

Participating as a guest on the Rick Moran show is a guilty pleasure, and last night's show was probably one of the most enjoyable ever.  Rick, who is an editor at both PJM, American Thinker and runs his own blog Right Wing Nut House is very masterful at getting his guest to think and interact and last night the interaction between Stephen Green the famous Vodkapundit, my good friend Jazz Shaw who blogs at the Hot Air Green Room and myself was pretty spirited.   Make sure you listen to the last segment where we discuss the Middle East.  For those of you who don't know both Jazz and me, we agree 95% of the time, that 5% is mostly comprised of the Middle East. While Jazz will probably still disagree, I didn't argue with Jazz's opinions but the facts that he based his opinions on.

(if you cannot see media player below Please Click Here)

The Rick Perry Secession Myth-He Never Advocated Secession

One claim that has been pushed by progressives is that Rick Perry suggested that Texas secede from the union.  Like many many progressive memes, that simply is not the truth but a liberal spin on what came out of the Texas governor's mouth.

The rumors began with a grain of truth, after a tea party rally in 2009, Perry said

We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we're a pretty independent lot to boot."

He started by saying We've got a great union. There's absolutely no reason to dissolve it. He never said Texas wants to pull out, or that he wants Texas to pull out. Anybody who says anything different is just plain lying. 

Read the full exchange Perry had with Reporter Associated Press reporter Kelley Shannon:

Shannon: Some have associated you with the idea of secession or sovereignty for your state.
Perry: I think there’s a lot of different scenarios. Texas is a unique place. When we came in the union in 1845, one of the issues was that we would be able to leave if we decided to do that.

You know, my hope is that America and Washington in particular pays attention. We’ve got a great union. There is absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what may come out of that? But Texas is a very unique place and we’re a pretty independent lot to boot.

A report by they liberal leaning Fact Check.org points to another incident drummed up by some liberals

Some Perry critics have also pointed to another statement from Perry, this time to a group of tech bloggers taking a tour of his Capitol offices the month before the tea party interview. At one point, according to audio posted on YouTube, Perry tells the group, "When we came into the nation in 1845, we were a republic. We were a stand-alone nation. And one of the deals was, we can leave any time we want. … So we're kind of thinking about that again."

The line was met with laughter, suggesting it was not meant as a serious position statement.

"You do that and I'll move in!" someone is heard to joke back, to more laughter.

A year after the AP interview Perry was asked by Newsweek about  the incident:

 Exactly one year ago today you were on the steps of Austin City Hall, talking about the possibility of secession.

I said that we live in an incredibly wonderful country, and I see absolutely no reason for that to ever happen. But I do understand people's concern and anger about what this administration is doing from an economic standpoint—in particular, the long-term debt that's being created for not only them but for future generations.

 As Rick Perry becomes a more formidable candidate for President there may arise many reasons to vote for him or not, but advocating secession should not weigh in on your vote either way.  The truth is that was decided by the Civil War, and Perry has never advocated Texas leave the United States.

Rick Perry To Announce At Red State Conference on Saturday

The Republican field is about to get a bit stirred up on Saturday as source within the Perry staff have leaked that the Texas Governor will be announcing his presidential bid at the Red State conference this weekend.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry will make "a definitive announcement that he is in the 2012 race for the presidency Saturday," aides told Fox News.

The language is significant. For several days the Perry camp has said he would signal his intentions and announce later.

"This is it," the sources explain. No exploratory committee, no more deliberation.

Perry will spend most of next week on the road officially campaigning.

Team Perry acknowledges they had only been hinting about a run earlier, but now tells Fox News first that Saturday is the official launch.

Perry will almost immediately become one of the GOP frontrunners according to polls, he probably has the most well-rounded support of any of the candidates for the nomination. But many have jumped into the race as a frontrunner and quickly faded from view when voters learn more about them.  

More to come

Sheila Jackson Lee at Today's Muslim Hearing "Investigate The Right Wing Extremists""

Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Tx) is beginning to sound like a broken record and warped one at that. Today was the third installment of Peter King’s (D-NY) Muslim Radicalization hearings. While all of the committee members where focused on the threat of the potential radicalization of American Muslims, the Texas moonbat thought continued her tradition of making at least one ignorant outburst during each of King's hearings.

This time she argued that there should also be a set of hearing about those right-wing extremists.

“I would add to that, that I would like to have a hearing on right-wing extremists, ideologues who advocate violence and advocate, in essence, the terrorizing of certain groups."

For those of you who are thinking that Lee was reacting to last weeks horror in Oslo, the answer is no she does it all the time.

During the first day of hearings back in March Jackson Lee asked  LA County Sheriff Baca a question about his deputies’ outreach to minority groups. When Baca mentioned that he had a Muslim officer accompanying him, Lee began clapping.

That drew a reprimand from Peter King, who admonished all member and guests to avoid "outbursts" that's when Jackson-Lee's famous temper took over.

But the best part was the dead pan comment of the next congressman. "That's a tough act to follow."

If you cannot see two videos in this post click here.



The second hearing on Muslim radicalization saw Jackson Lee insisting on asking about the non-existent Christian militants who were trying to undermine the government.   King replied by reminding the Congressional Nutjob:

I would just remind the members of the minority for four years they controlled this committee and they could have had hearings on any of these issues at any other time if they wanted to. I never heard any mention of any of these groups at these hearings until we held our first hearing on Muslim radicalization. I wish you would have been as attentive during the previous four years.

 In other words....TAKE THAT!


After today's Jackson Lee demand for an inquiry into those right wing radicals who have been blowing up all those locations in America, she used much of her remaining time to question panelists with expertise on radicalization about the alleged hacking into telephones of 9-11 victims by the now-closed News of the World tabloid in England.

Look at the bright side, at least she didn't talk about Vietnam again.

Ron Paul Congressional Hypocrite

Congressman Ron Paul is bad for America on so many levels. There were the anti-black/ anti-Semitic Newsletters which were published under his name (which he claimed he never read). And yes there were those really whacko public statements like; the federal reserve was behind Watergate, that Lincoln was wrong to push us into a Civil War over slavery, or his assertion that condemning the HAMAS terrorist rocket attacks promotes violence. But those items only suggest that the Texas Republican Congressman is a bigot as well as a bit of a lunatic, which not bad by today’s congressional standards.

On top of all that, Congressman Paul is a hypocrite.

Ron Paul is believed to be a “fiscal conservative” and if you ask him he will tell you that he has never voted for an earmark. That statement is 100% correct. What Paul does is to make sure that the earmarks he wants are put into a bill, and then he votes against the bill. Its the best of all possible worlds. He gets to bring home the bacon on a local basis and makes the anti-earmark claim on a national basis.

For example in last year's 111th Congress, Ron Paul sponsored or co-sponsored 17  earmarks totaling almost $24 Million dollars

During the 2009 Fiscal Paul sponsored or co-sponsored 23 earmarks totaling almost $81  million dollars. That's almost $105 million in earmarks over two years. Can you imagine if he wasn't a fiscal conservative?


In 2009 Paul appeared on Neil Cavuto’s Fox News show to defend his earmarks.
If you cannot see video below click here

CAVUTO:Congressman, the rap is that you’re a porker, that — that a lot of pork, $73 million-plus, went to your district. Is that true?

REP. RON PAUL, R-TEXAS: Well, it might be. But I think you’re missing the whole point. I have never voted for an earmark. I voted against all appropriation bills. So, this whole thing about earmarks is totally misunderstood.

The Congressman believes that the earmarks are just fine as long as he is open about them. These earmarks may very well be legitimate programs, but by specifying the location and the recipient of the program there is no thought given to “is this the most efficient place to house this program?” Money can be sent to a place that does not have the best resources or personnel to implement the earmark, causing a program to be more expensive than if it were done in someone elses district.

Paul may be very transparent about the hypocrisy of requesting an earmark then voting against the bill (because he knows it will pass), but his twisted logic doesn’t make it any less hypocritical.

Whenever I post something negative about Ron Paul (which is just about every time I post about him), I get the NASTIEST comments and emails. He doesn’t have a lot of supporters but those that do are very well organized and support him do so with a passion. The problem is Ron Paul does not represent himself truthfully. Along with his history of being a “drooling crazy” type and a bigot, the man is the typical Washington DC spin-master, saying one thing but doing another. He has a good fiscal script but frankly we have all seen that movie before and it got old a long time ago.

Major Oil Find in Texas, 3,000 Wells in 12 Months (Unless Obama Stops This Also)

Texas has a reputation of doing things in a big way and this time is no different, one of the worlds largest oil fields have been found right here in the U.S. in the western part of Texas.
And companies are rushing to get it out of the ground. More than a dozen companies plan to drill up to 3,000 wells around here in the next 12 months.

Eagle Ford the name of the Texas field, is just one of about 20 new onshore oil fields that industry sources say could collectively increase the nation’s oil output by 25 percent within a decade.

The "problem" is, at least to environmentalists, the oil fields are of the "shale oil" variety, and the way to get it it out of the ground is by fracking a process that makes environmentalists nervous. Fracking involves injecting water, with sand and other additives, into the rock to push the oil and/or gas into accessible pockets. Improvements in technology allow drilling horizontally from a single, above-ground well, reducing the above-ground hit on the environment.

Based on the industry’s plans, shale and other “tight rock” fields that now produce about half a million barrels of oil a day will produce up to three million barrels daily by 2020, according to IHS CERA, an energy research firm. Oil companies are investing an estimated $25 billion this year to drill 5,000 new oil wells in tight rock fields, according to Raoul LeBlanc, a senior director at PFC Energy, a consulting firm.

“This is very big and it’s coming on very fast,” said Daniel Yergin, the chairman of IHS CERA. “This is like adding another Venezuela or Kuwait by 2020, except these tight oil fields are in the United States.”

In the most developed shale field, the Bakken field in North Dakota, production has leaped to 400,000 barrels a day today from a trickle four years ago. Experts say it could produce as much as a million barrels a day by the end of the decade.

The Eagle Ford, where the first well was drilled only three years ago, is already producing more than 100,000 barrels a day and could reach 420,000 by 2015, almost as much as Ecuador, according to Bentek Energy, a consultancy.

That's only four years from now, but don't start celebrating yet environmentalists are trying very hard to stop the use of fracking. According to a recent report released by Congressman Issa, the Obama administration is doing its best to make it difficult to use the fracking method of extracting oil and gas.

Despite the success of fracking, federal agencies appear to be in a race to see which one can regulate it first. The Department of Interior announced last November that it will consider regulating fracking on federal lands. The EPA, which concluded seven years ago that fracking "poses little or no threat" to drinking water supplies, is revisiting the issue. Having found no evidence that fracking chemicals reach drinking water, EPA now wants to study the entire lifecycle of the water used. In addition, DOE has convened a study group to review the fracking process. In a written statement, DOE Secretary Steven Chu stated, “I am looking forward to hearing from this diverse, respected group of experts on best practices for safe and responsible natural gas production.” Although the study groups members are certainly highly respected, a survey of their biographies indicates none has recent industry experience with the advancements in the technology.

Additional regulation of fracking is unnecessary because, as EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson pointed out, fracking is not an unregulated activity. Federal regulation by EPA, DOE, and DOI would cause needless delay and uncertainty along with multiple additional layers of red tape. Ultimately, federal intervention will chill investment and decrease energy independence.  Quite the opposite - the states, not the federal government, have always regulated the process and have done so with a solid track record. Officials in state after state have gone on the record to say that fracking has not caused any problems and any reports to the contrary are inaccurate.

Oh and there is that other "thing." According to the Washington Examiner, the 3-inch dunes sagebrush lizard could hinder drilling in West Texas, as it could be named a new endangered species. If put on the list in December, drillers fear the lizard’s new status would slow down or halt drilling in the area.

Based on his track record of preventing drilling in the guild and the canceling of shale drilling contracts in Utah, it will not be surprising if President Obama finds a way to stop this drilling also.