Rick Perry vs. Donald Trump
Trump picks fight with Governor Perry on illegal immigration
Donald Trump thought it was a good idea to pick a fight with former Texas Governor Rick Perry, apparently.
Rick Perry failed at the border. Now he is critical of me. He needs a new pair of glasses to see the crimes committed by illegal immigrants.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 5, 2015
“Failed at the border” is a pretty serious charge, and one that the good Gov decided to address.
“Hey Donald, I saw your tweet the other day but I think you might need to borrow my glasses to get a good look at the steps I took to secure the border while I was the Governor of Texas. I cant support what you said, but no one knows the concern Americans have about our porous border than I do.”
Was Perry smart to provide Trump any kind of legitimacy by responding? Noah Rothman of Commentary weighs in:
While it might not have been advisable for Perry to respond directly to Trump in any fashion, thus inevitably elevating him to a stature he does not deserve, the contrast the former Texas governor drew couldn’t be more stark. While the reality television star sells disenchanted Republican primary voters on the notion of a great wall of the Rio, constructed at no taxpayer cost, which would alone succeed at keeping border-crossers out where other barriers have failed, Perry identified the effective, human elements necessary to halt the flow of illegal immigrants into the U.S. He also projected a sincerity Trump lacked when accurately noting that citizens of Mexican descent are an integral part of the American social fabric. Such comments may sound trite, but these are the wages demanded of a party that elevates a figure like Trump to frontrunner status – however fleeting that condition might be.
Trumps remarks on illegal immigration have drawn a fair amount of scrutiny since he began his presidential bid in June. Among many accusations, he’s suggested that the Mexican government is “pushing the bad ones” to America. “What can be simpler or more accurately stated? The Mexican Government is forcing their most unwanted people into the United States. They are, in many cases, criminals, drug dealers, rapists, etc,” Trump wrote to Business Insider.
After his remarks, the Washington Post alleged illegal immigrants are working to finish a Trump company hotel.
Trump garnered headlines — and prompted several business associates to sever relations with him — when he launched his bid for the Republican presidential nomination last month with a controversial description of drug dealers and “rapists” crossing the border each day into the United States from Mexico.
But a Trump company may be relying on some undocumented workers to finish the $200 million hotel, which will sit five blocks from the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue, according to several who work there. A Trump spokeswoman said the company and its contractors follow all applicable laws. But in light of Trump’s comments, some of the workers at the site said they are now worried about their jobs — while others simply expressed disgust over the opinions of the man ultimately responsible for the creation of those jobs.
Follow Kemberlee Kaye on Twitter
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Yeah, just what we need to fix our budget: a guy who filed for bankruptcy FOUR times, and even bankrupted a casino with state-limited competition. A casino!
Career crony capitalist, tried several times to get his government friends to use eminent domain on his behalf, supported universal health care as an entitlement and proposed to pay for it with new corporate taxes, and donated to the Clintons among many other Democrats.
Some people apparently are smoking the medical-grade stuff.
Uh, Trump never filed for bankruptcy; his companies did. In the case of the casino, he had sold his interest in the project at least a year earlier.
BTW, bankruptcy is a constitutional right. It’s in there, and it ain’t in the penumbras and emanations – it’s in the text.
Quite true.
But Trump is a “man of business” only in the same sense that Elmer Gantry was a “fine Christian gentleman”.
In fact, pretty much exactly like that.
Oh tay, Estragon.
I’ll bite. Who is your pick for POTUS nomination? Rand Paul? Jeb Bush? Chris Christie?
Seriously, I think you fail to realize that having Trump in the running is exactly what the American people need to hold Establishment RINOs accountable. I am not even sure Trump wants the nomination but he has a lot to say and it needs saying.
barking up the wrong tree. Trump has zero chance of winning anything, as does Perry. I will never understand the GOP penchant for self-destruction, but I would wager that when the current Clown Car of 16 crashes, Shemp Bush will emerge as our “choice.” An empty sack of potatoes, as long as it has a (D) on it, will beat him easily.
If it does boil down to Hillary and Shemp, I predict the lowest voter turnout in our country’s history….sure, we get exactly the government we deserve, but no country deserves these two cretins.
Because he will not, and likely should not, be the nominee, does not address the accuracy or inaccuracy of what he said.
We do know that the Mexican government provides guidance to facilitate illegal immigration to the US. I don’t know one way or the other whether the Mexican government selects criminals and sick people to make the trip. It would not surprise me if they did.
Da Donald…typically…just goes for the low-hanging fruit and shows no comprehension of the issuesssss.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/07/if-trump-really-wants-to-be-disruptive.php
It’s a LOT more involved than “Mexicans”…
Since I really don’t have a dog in this fight, I’ll boil this down to exceptionally simple elements.
Did Perry secure the border? No. Why is he parading around like he has? No idea.
Did Trump hire illegals to work on a building of his? He’s extensively responded to the allegation, and I see nothing of his response here, but the short story is, he hired a contractor, and so far as Trump knows, any employees who are, as cited in the article, former illegals but now currently considered legal and ready to work, well, if they’re considered legal, how would you turn them away, anyway? If any genuine illegals snuck past to work for the contractor, it’s not Trump’s intention, nor did anyone consult him about it.
At least that’s Trump’s story, which as I said, I find conspicuously missing here. But hey, not my fight. I’m just wondering why we’re supposed to defend Perry like some sort of hero here.
Oh, yes! Your neutrality stands out like an angry red, pustulent boil.
Perry didn’t reverse the unemployment numbers nation-wide, either, the dismal failure!
AND he hasn’t killed off ObamaDoggle, either. Whadda sorry excuse for a superman!
“Parading around” like he’s actually DONE something. Not like Da Donald at all, nosiree…
Maybe Perry was misquoted when I saw him quoted as saying “I secured the border.” The version I see now is “I took steps to secure the border.”
And I took steps to eliminate world hunger. There’s still world hunger, and I’m still not a saint.
“Hey Donald, I saw your tweet the other day but I think you might need to borrow my glasses to get a good look at the steps I took to secure the border while I was the Governor of Texas. I cant support what you said, but no one knows the concern Americans have about our porous border than I do.”
That was ALWAYS the quote.
Point to Perry’s claim of sainthood, please.
Has Perry taken steps to control the border? What, if anything, has Trump done in the last five years?
Has Perry taken steps to fight gang and cartel activity in Texas? Where, and what, can you point to that Trump has done along the same lines (given that he holds no office…and is responsible to no body of law as such).
“The border’s not secure — we don’t have secure borders anywhere — the borders are secure from Europe,” Trump said. “I mean, the fact is if you want to come in from Europe and if you want to become a citizen and you’re not here illegally and you go through the paperwork and the filing, you can’t get in.”
—Donald Trump circ. 2013
So, you see, the man is a buffoon. Illegal immigration is not a uniquely “Hispanic problem”. Indeed, illegals from the south are a big FRACTION…but a FRACTION…of the problem. And they MAY be the most tractable fraction of the problem, as they may well be the most likely to “self-deport” in the right circumstances.
I respectfully disagree with those who say there’s nothing wrong with our immigration system, requiring a fix. That’s simply not true. There are several things wrong with our system, and some are…well, systemic. It needs a top-to-bottom overhaul, like so many things in our Federal system, and that overhaul needs to have as a prime directive the protection of our national integrity.
We can use Australia as a model.
People can’t just walk across the border and end up in Australia. How should they be a model of what we should do?
The biggest priority should be securing our border. From there, we figure out how to handle the 12 million illegal aliens here in this country. I’m not saying I have all the answers, but the longer the border problems continue, the bigger problem we’ll have when that 12 million surges to 15 or 20.
You should read when you are too ignorant to understand a comment.
Australia has a very fine, aggressive immigration system that includes an insistence on assimilation.
You really should learn about it. Or learn about something.
Go Rags Go!
Yeah Team Rags!
We all love our rags but he sure as hell doesn’t need any cheerleaders. We don’t want his head to swell, ya know?
We can very easily point out hundreds of examples of violent crime done from illegal immigrants that came across the border in Texas. It is a major problem. Trump said what he did, and even though it wasn’t PC, it was right.
With regard to Rick Perry, we’ve gotten so used to politicians “playing politics” that we aren’t used to someone saying it like it is. Every politician is so scripted, so careful, so cautious, in everything they say or do because if they truly say what’s on their mind, their lives get turned upside down (see Trump).
I’m not saying that I’m this full supporter of Trump, since we’re still very early in the campaign process, but it is refreshing to have someone say what they feel so bluntly and clearly.
Workers are afraid for their jobs under Trump? No. ILLEGAL ALIENS are worried about their jobs under Trump. All that jobs nonsense Obama is always touting, and we have millions of illegal aliens working in jobs that Americans can, and should, be doing.
Am I the only one who vividly remembers why Gov Perry was rejected as a primary candidate by voters in 2012?
The man was fawning all over the illegals & justifying giving them state benefits and making snide remarks about those who want a border fence.
I like Perry the person & I don’t have reason to trust him on border issues. He has done some recent border grandstanding as 2016 draws nigh. I’ll give him that.
No, you’re not.
In fact I seem to remember Perry telling us that Americans who wanted a secure southern border were just bigots.
Was Perry smart to provide Trump any kind of legitimacy by responding?
What is this crap? Is it the official LI position that Perry is The Annointed, the Chosen Candidate who dispenses approval and legitimacy, and lets supplicants kiss his ring? Who do you think he is, Hillary!?
Any site using insurrection in its name should damn well realize that nobody is beyond criticism, and criticism from any quarter. Smug, flip snark may impress the John Stewrt crowd, but it’s not going to decide who the next Republican candidate for President is going to be.
Donald Trump will not be the Republican candidate. And unless he can come up with better responses to sound criticism, neither will Rick Perry.
This is exactly what we need: the Republicans fighting amongst themselves, doing the work of the Democrats for them.
Donald Trump has done us all a favor by stating the downside of the immigration issue, namely our utter failure to control our own borders and keep out known criminals. Now, if only someone will take up the upside of a well-designed immigration policy: the training and eventual export of people who come here just to work, and who learn to be impatient with systems that require bribes.
Trump is blunt enough to put it in these terms: Our immigration system has a hole in it the size of several large trucks. That hole is the failure to include a guest worker program. We have in the past and can in the future recognize that there are people who come here just to work, and we should recognize that as a reasonable purpose, and have a law to accommodate it.
People who come here just to work may have great pressures to do so, and if there is no law, they will come, anyway. Those people work here and send their money home, where it forms in Mexico, for instance, a major fraction of the country’s income.
Our current laws, however, do not accommodate these people, and act to criminalize their actions. Further, the laws tend to sequester them in our country instead of allowing them to return easily, breaking the family bonds. Meanwhile, the limping governments, particularly to our south, lose the advantage of having these vigorous people return.
American laws should not be formulated with the goal of maximizing convenience or profits to foreigners who flock here for the money.
American laws should be guided by a sensible and thoughtful policy which is intended to benefit America. That’s all.
No need to worry, “sensible and thoughtful policy” still leaves room for the usual sports—dirty politics, bribery, propaganda, scare tactics, and all the things which makes American daily news so entertaining. But somewhere deep down, the fundamental motivation should be American interests, and nobody else’s.
YES!
It’s a real shame that we need someone here to explicitly state that principle.
Hurray for Scott Walker.
Just thought I better lead with that.
Trump gets traction on immigration because our dear GOP plays footsies with amnesty and lies to conservatives about their chamber love affair. Perry scolded conservatives (that want border enforcement and no amnesty) as being heartless.
Giuliani has a plan for closing the border. We need some candidates to take that up on their campaign trail, and be bold enough to say what they will do. Illegals must be identified, maybe arrange with some industries for visas, but foreign nationals here illegally will not get citizenship. If they haven’t committed other crimes they will not be deported, but over time working here will require valid ID and payment of taxes like citizens.
Perry can pander to Hispanics on the issue if he wants e.g. “Mexican heritage is part of the fabric of our nation”. That is just a milder way of saying the illegal invasion is an act of love, so we must succumb to it.
Conservatives embrace legal immigrants just fine Rick, along with the part of their heritage that is not socialist and corrupt. But it is not compassionate to ignore wide swaths of our nation being overrun by lawless gangs of Mexicans, that run an underground economy while soaking up benefits.
Perry can pander to Hispanics on the issue if he wants e.g. “Mexican heritage is part of the fabric of our nation”. That is just a milder way of saying the illegal invasion is an act of love, so we must succumb to it.
————————————–
Bullshit!
It is NOT “pandering” to acknowledge history. And Texas history and U.S. history BOTH show very real contributions by people from Mexico. Go and read the base of the monument outside the Alamo.
I’m appalled at some of the stupid I’m reading here from people I expect better of.
Perry lost me last time around with telling us we aren’t compassionate enough.
But the issue is illegal immigration, not whether we as a nation (he’s running for POTUS, not TX gov) recognize “our Mexican fibers”. Sounds like political speech (pandering) to me.
America’s constitution is the fabric of our nation, and that is quite distinctive from our Mexican heritage. It is our constitution that is being torn apart, and should be the issue for a president. Any nod to “Mexican-Americans” should be followed with “BUT” America is exceptional and distinct, and different than the corruption and cartels that have overrun Mexico.
I lived in Texas for a few years in my Christian outreach days decades ago. The black and Hispanic fellowships were in “my branch” and I helped run Bible classes with illegals. I know them as humans, though maybe I’m a heartless bastard now, per Perry. We need to fundamentally transform legal immigrants into Americans, more than celebrate diversity of Mexican-Americans or African-Americans.
Also he wrongly claims the Donald insulted Mexicans, but Trump said they send their worst over. It’s not bull shit … Perry wants to play the compassionate conservative, he understands and the rest of us are racist till we denounce Trump for bringing it up. Sure I’m overstating it a little, but it is still pandering, just done in the slick political speech way.
Illinois doesn’t have a rich Mexican heritage, except for the million or so illegals in Chicago, who get their own representative in DC. I’d like Perry to tell us if/when he would grant amnesty, since he seems to dodge that specific.
In other words…
“Perry’s got major problems, and he’s not facing reality!”
“Mexican heritage is part of the fabric of our nation”. That is just a milder way of saying the illegal invasion is an act of love, so we must succumb to it.
——————-
THAT’s BULLSHIT.
Also he wrongly claims the Donald insulted Mexicans, but Trump said they send their worst over. It’s not bull shit … Perry wants to play the compassionate conservative, he understands and the rest of us are racist till we denounce Trump for bringing it up.
————————–
THAT is bullshit about your previous bullshit.
Perry knows more about illegal crime than Da Donald EVER will or can. And HE’s DONE something about it. And not a little.
You’re just lying about Perry injecting “racism” here. AND your BS about “diversity”. We ALLLLLLLLL know we have to better assimilate ALLLLLLLLLL immigrants. Again, ONE of the good things about the Australian model I cite above.
Have you ANY idea about RUSSIAN immigrant crime? Jamaican?
The real topic and concern is illegals and all the crime that has come over with it, as exemplified by the San Fran murder. So when Perry addresses it by retreating to “our rich Mexican heritage” he is dodging and equivocating, political pandering.
Maybe if you put BULLSHIT in bold as well as caps I’ll be more convinced Perry really wants to address the problem side of the equation, instead of opportunistically spewing how we must respect Mexicans. It’s the political way to say he is not racist, (but you anti-amnesty tea party nuts ARE).
Trump has nothing to do with it … it is the response to the real problem that is needed. Perry takes jabs at Trump to look bold. What will Perry do about amnesty? He WON’T SAY, meaning he will grant amnesty, but refuses to say so.
You are the one drinking the kool-aid if you can’t see Perry’s dance. He’s also called the border fence lunacy, even though it works near cities and in other countries. Sure we also need boots on the ground, but Perry is prone to grandstanding. “Lunacy”? Who does that pander to when he calls a fence lunacy? It panders to those that refuse to fund the fence.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/04/have-the-glasses-changed-rick-perrys-stance-on-amnesty/
So, why are you telling HALF-truths here?
You either DON’T know, or you are willing to lie about, Perry’s stance on a border fence.
He ADVOCATES building fences in places where they would (in his opinion) work. You may disagree (I do), but you can’t get away with misrepresenting what he’s said.
There are a LOT of places in Texas where a fence would (arguably) be easily defeated unless patrolled constantly. If you’re doing that kind of surveillance, you don’t really get much utility out of a fence.
a little more on the fence lunacy deal … Giuliani was on Hannity talking his border plan, 500 agents every 50 miles, or something. Hannity said like “so we need boots not a fence” and Giuliani quickly jumped in “oh no we need the fence, And the boots”.
Perry is grandstanding with “a fence is lunacy”, or “you are heartless”, and “Mexican American heritage” … such political evasiveness is not that hard to interpret … he is playing both sides, carefully.
well he said a fence is lunacy .. but I haven’t listened to him much, as I don’t consider him a real contender. In any case he is still playing games with the rhetoric. It strikes me that he wants the Hispanic vote and would grant amnesty. But he probably really would control the border, so I could still vote for him I just don’t like how he is “playing this” and don’t think he is the best candidate.
cheers
another point I just thought of, maybe for all candidates dealing with Trump. Instead of calling out Trump as a hater, as the PC crowd would demand, Trump versus the mild R’s cage match, maybe address the people that are being attracted to Trump, for their legit concerns that are being ignored by the RNC and by candidates trying to not sound too conservative.
I’d rather have Perry address me the jury, than the Trump clown on trial … if you know what I mean. Maybe start with “America, I hear your concern, that a lot of bad elements come into this country from Mexico. It is very valid and indeed we have failed there, and here is how I will fix that from the White House …” instead of sparring with Trump, calling him a hater?
So am I.
We’re not thinking of the same people though.
Let’s try this…
While I think pretty much all of us agree that “controlling the borders” is a top priority, I also think that CAN’T happen if we don’t “control the gradients”.
By which I mean that we have to kill the powerful draw that pulls people here, and keeps them here against the lawssssss.
Ergo, we have to make working here or living here on benefits as impossible as…erm…possible.
Until that happens, you STILL have too strong a draw for people to come here to be defeated by any barrier I know of from history. People will find a way.
Doing as I suggest would have…over time…the effect of reversing the gradient. Self-deportation would result, sure as there’s cause >>>> effect. It wouldn’t take all that long, nor would it be in the least “inhumane”. Would this cause ANY families to be ‘sundered? Yepo. But 1) that would be their choice, and 2) I don’t care.
Now, will criminal aliens STILL come here? Yep. They will. So, we’re left with developing a means to deal with them effectively. Catch and release is NOT going to work. There isn’t a more dead-bang prospect for recidivism that I can imagine. So we MAY have to deal forthrightly with catch and NEVER release as our only means to deal with this issue.
In all fairness, the only GOP candidate that has experience dealing with border security is Rick Perry!
Scott Walker, is on a border, but last time I checked the Canadians arn’t coming across in droves!
“These 17 districts, which run from the Western District of Washington to the District of Maine, filed a combined total of 5,257 criminal cases in US district courts in fiscal 2014.” Bottom line: One US attorney district in Texas filed more criminal cases than 17 districts on the Canadian border. “That means that all the federal criminal cases filed in the US district courts spanning the Canadian border from Washington to Maine (5,257) did not equal the criminal cases (5,832) filed by the one US attorney’s office in Western Texas.” Rush Limbaugh
Point is Perry, is best suited to deal with the illegal issue. “EXPERIENCE IS THE GREATEST TEACHER.”
Keith
A Trump Island w/casinos might work for illegals. Build it and they will come.
Trump could make Rep. Luis Gutierrez El Presidente and Alexis Tsipras the PM of ATM cash flow.
-“Trump’s “Jump the Shark” Island resort for illegals.
Oh, I need a popcorn refill… this political theater is finally starting to get to the good parts.
Trump is definitely edging the career politicians out of their usual comfort zone that consists of several hundred shades of gray on any given subject. Perry can grab any one of several shades of gray to rationalize not using the word “failure” to describe Texas border security, but any shade he choses falls far short of legitimate success. He definitely gets exemplary marks for effort at his state’s border security, but effort and results are not synonymous. It is not Perry’s fault that the feds have thwarted the border security efforts of all the border states, but this IS an opportunity for Perry to lay the blame where it belongs rather than spinning his wheels on petty bickering with a rival. Does he want to stand in the light or just slink around in the shadows?
Trump is taking an axe to the Obama Administration’s policies. Right to the damned forehead and it’s definitely making the more invertebrate Republicans with rather delicate sensibilities very uncomfortable. They’d rather attack Trump than recognize that Trump’s primary function for 2016 is as the man who breached the wall. Folks are getting hung up on form and not comprehending the function. Trump may not be there in the end, but he’s got real value to the rest as the guy willing to absorb the arrows. Pay attention to which of the other Republican candidates are willing to go through Trump’s breach and which ones are content to simply slither around outside the wall and count their campaign cash.
Maybe Trump can help with this too.
“Oligarch Al Gore: Spend $90 Trillion To Ban All Cars”
(Oh My, Al wants to steal another $90 Trillion! Snark!)
http://www.championshipsubdivision.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=42301
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2015/07/ubercab-vs-al-gore-90-trillion-plan-to.html
BRAVO! Re: “Trump is taking an axe to the Obama Administration’s policies. Right to the damned forehead and it’s definitely making the more invertebrate Republicans with rather delicate sensibilities very uncomfortable. They’d rather attack Trump than recognize that Trump’s primary function for 2016 is as the man who breached the wall. Folks are getting hung up on form and not comprehending the function. Trump may not be there in the end, but he’s got real value to the rest as the guy willing to absorb the arrows. Pay attention to which of the other Republican candidates are willing to go through Trump’s breach and which ones are content to simply slither around outside the wall and count their campaign cash.”
Trump is a con artist, and you readers of LI should not be naive enough to fall for his con.
That’s hardly the question at this point. The question is, where did his criticism miss the mark?
Consideration of these things is why pages like this have comment sections. Contrary to popular belief, they’re not here just so some tedious loudmouth posters can insist that they’re f’n brilliant and everybody who disagrees is a moron or the devil incarnate.
So, I tend to think that you’re right, Trump is a con artist; and although that is indeed an “art”, I don’t think it’s what we want in a Chief Executive. But that doesn’t make him wrong about the existential menace of the crime wave on our southern border.
No, I haven’t forgotten his old positions, his playing both sides of the political fence, donating to Democrats, to the Clinton Foundation, or any of it.
The thing about so-called useful idiots, in the communist sense, is that they’re useful. Anyone can be a mere idiot. It takes real guts to take this kind of heat and be useful in drawing attention to something that’s only going to get much, much worse under the future Hillary administration. Not that I expect anyone to do anything real about it, but my calendar says it’s June 2015. If people can’t indulge in a little futile fist waving at a cloud now, when can they?
Republicans are apparently no less delicate than their Democrat counterparts. So far there’s no shortage of selective, special interest useful idiots intent on sparking their particular “base” without offending everyone else under the tent. Is there such a thing as a broad spectrum useful idiot?
Immolate, that is exactly what I think about most politicians.
Rick Perry’s actions (unarmed national guard troops) were mostly for show in preparation for another failed Presidential run.
Texas economy has been strong for more than 50 years. Even Ann Richards couldn’t destroy it.
I am not forgetting Perry called me “heartless” in 2012 even though he couldn’t which three departments he wanted to end. And, no Rick the Marie Harf glasses don’t make you look smarter.
The problem is excessive immigration, or immigration that exceeds the rate of assimilation and integration. It is also for the issues that it compensates or obfuscates, both in America and abroad. Unmeasured or illegal immigration is worse for two reasons: covert dislocation and implicit corruption.
Our political class is against assimilation.
“Was Perry smart to provide Trump any kind of legitimacy by responding? Noah Rothman of Commentary weighs in:”
OMG, you’re quoting Noah Rothman who was literally run out of Hot Air? LOL!
What Trump is doing to the GOP is not Trump’s fault, it’s the GOP’s fault, having left themselves totally vulnerable by doing virtually nothing with a House and Senate majoriy; indeed, for having caved repeatedly and actually lost political ground despite their majorities.
Please note that the two Republicans talking the toughest are two businesspersons who do not now and never had held political office: Trump and Fiorina. They risk nothing with tough talk now. What happens when they do have something to lose?
Trump is a joke, a clown with a megaphone, and will never win the nomination, but Fiorina is a viable candidate, winning support almost entirely on talking tough. This is exactly how Chris Christie moved from NJ governor to conservative GOP presidential candidate darling – by talking tough. How does he look to conservatives now? This could happen with Fiorina. I hope not, but be careful.
Scott Walker best fulfills the saying, “talk softly and carry a big stick”, with Rick Perry a close second.
You should correct your headline … Perry started this fight … to get attention (just like Trump) … Perry started it with his comments about Trumps statement last week …
Kemberlee ? what a precious spelling …
Rick Perry is a very poor choice for a candidate running for any elected office, if for no other reason than he is heavily involved in all things muslim. He is continuously influenced by both Aga Khan who, with Perry’s help, has pushed through a pro-muslim curriculum for Texas schools, and by Grover Norquist who is married to Sama Alrayyes, a palestinian muslim who promotes palestinian causes for a living. On the issue of islamic influence in our government, Perry would be a worse choice for America than Barack Hussein Obama.
Did Rick Perry chase an illegal immigrant out of Texas and into San Francisco, California, where he killed someone while playing with a gun?