Because what these Republican debates need more of is people in American flag clothing complaining that Rick Perry—Rick Perry!—is too soft on immigrants:
The FOX News/Google GOP debate starts tonight at 6 pm—but in the meantime, how about trying your hand at an answer for the current most popular citizen question:
Well? Do you have what it takes to be the Republican frontrunner?
BOOBS! Wait, what was the question?
Quit luring them here with your breastses.
This is a good test, to see if we can answer a political question while being distracted by a fascinatingly rounded image of the nation’s flag.
So what was the question again?
Oh, yeah, I read it again. Answer: John, you’re an idiot.
As the husband of a legal foriegner, I think these are good questions.
It’s a bad question because it promotes a false premise. “Illegals” aren’t granted any benefits that are denied to the rest of us.
If the problem is that everyone else can’t get *better* health care, schooling, etc, whose fault is that? Not illegal immigrants. Who are the ones denying us those things? The same people who are asking questions like that are also trying to cut and eliminate those services for everybody.
Well, this isn’t all true guspasho, my nephew who was born in Oregon but raised in Mass., still having a parent living here – had to pay out of state tuition.
There has been recent efforts to get grant illegal aleins in-state tuition, right?
This doesn’t make sense to me one bit.
That’s because you don’t understand the rules for in-state tuition. It doesn’t matter where you were born to qualify for in-state tuition, or where one of your parents live, what matters is where you’ve been living in the last year or so. In the case of your nephew, he is a Massachusetts resident. If he was born in Mexico instead of Oregon he still wouldn’t qualify. If he moves here and lives with his in-state parent long enough he will qualify.
Yeah, I understand that all, but the rules also state you have to be a legal resident too – and there was an effort to change this rule.
In my opinion, the rules (or changing them) regarding my nephews plight easily take precidence over illegal aliens.
Different subject, monies sent to mother-in-law in Japan cannot qualify tax-wise as dependent care, whereas Mexicans or Canadians can deduct dependents living in those countries.
So what part of what I said in my first post isn’t true? Because neither of those things have anything to do with special rights for illegal immigrants. It looks like you’re just trying to invent shit to trash illegal immigrants like the people who came up with that damn question.