Posted on 11/22/2011 10:10:27 PM PST by Free ThinkerNY
The big theme out of Tuesday night's Republican presidential debate in Washington was Newt Gingrich's compassionate stance towards illegal immigrants who have put down deep roots in the U.S.
That position by Gingrich, who has recently surged to join Mitt Romney at the head of the Republican field according to recent polls, conflicted with the more hardline views of many conservative voters.
Many of those GOP voters who will decide their party's nominee oppose allowing illegal immigrants to remain in the U.S., period.
The immediate question for Gingrich was, after boldly defending his position that illegal aliens who've lived in the U.S. for many years, establishing families and belonging to churches, should be allowed to remain in the U.S., would Gingrich now suffer the same fate as Texas Gov. Rick Perry.
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
Ah, what about compassion for unemployed Americans and their kids—Newty? This pompous idiot has once again stepped in a big pile of elephant doodoo. Like the love seat photo op with Pelosi, the explanation will be “inexplicable”.
Way to go Newt!
You're mixing up Newt and Perry.
It was Perry who said you were heartless, Newt said you were not humane.
LOL not really
How does not allowing them to become citizens change anything?
Excellent post. States that enacted tough illegal alien laws did not spend any money deporting them. The illegals left the states on their own two feet. If our Federal laws mirrored the tough state laws the same thing would happen. Most illegals would depart on their own two feet. The nonsense about it taking a line of busses from the Texas/Mexico border clear back to Alaska to deport illegals was and is just that—nonsense.
The logic is political.
There's a reason Gingrich takes Spanish lessons from a private tutor every Sunday.
It’s not a question of how Reagan “turned out.” It’s about how amnesty turned out.
Why is it so insensitive to require people to return to their country of origin and citizenship? We don’t have the same concerns about “breaking up families” and “cruelty” when we give drug offenders long sentences in the Federal Bureau of Prisons. The fact that we are even having this debate is proof that we have completely lost control of out government.
Where have you been?
Newt gave an honest answer.
If you think any of the others are going to do anything else other than what Newt said you are dreaming.
I know you don’t like his answer, I don’t either,
I like the answer given in Post number 3 ,but that isn’t going to happen.
No way are we going to round up 20 to 40 million illegals and send them back to wherever the hell they came from. If you listen to any politician say they will do that you are listening to a lie.
Like Newt or not , he gave an honest answer.
Jeff, you nailed it. Why can’t Mr. Border state, have a heart Perry and Mr. family values, smartest man in the room Gingrich get this? The only conclusion is the lure of hispandering for votes is too strong a force to consider the obvious.
What a concept—either ENFORCE or CHANGE a law!
No amnesty scams of any kind—you want illegals legal CHANGE THE LAWS!!!
At least PRETEND we have a constitution,ok?
I wondered last night if he was fishing for her endorsement when he talked drill, baby, drill.
For all we know, they have talked!
Immigration has never been an issue with her.
Allowing low IQ nonwhiteThird Worlders a privileged status will be the death of a culturally western United States, no matter what Newt’s parish priest and Opus Dei propagandists tell him. Ditto those who support a Third World low-IQ cesspool like Puerto Rico becoming a state. These people are culturally incompatible with the values of the shrinking European-American majority, and pols like Newt who sell us out to Third World mouth breathers are guilty of cultural treason.
Think carefully about what Newt said. He said,
“Is it inhumane to deport an illegal immigrant who came to the United States 25 years ago,”
Why did he choose 25 years ago and not 20 or 30.
People assume that 25 years was just a number that Newt pulled out of his ass.
It is not.
Think back about about what happened 25 years ago.
That would be 1986.
That was the year Ronald Reagan’s bill gave amnesty to the then current residents in exchange for sealing the border.
The border wasn’t sealed and millions more Mexicans and other poured over the border.
The people who came after 1986 were illegal. But the people who came before 1986 were legalized if they bothered to come forward.
So Newt is talking about a law that is already on the books.
I agree with that whole-heartedly.
“Newt Gingrich’s compassionate stance towards illegal immigrants”
Typical viewpoint of National Proletariat Radio: always concerned about “them”, never concerned about “us”.
How NPR and Neut: how about a little compassion for the hardworking, law-abiding American citizen for a change? We’re sick of seeing our country invaded while the elites get their contributions from the Chamber of Commerce and look the other way.
“Right, Reagan did amnesty too, and look how bad he turned out... /s”
On that particular issue it didn’t turn out well at all, did it. He gave amnesty to 5 million, it is now over 15 million illegals that infest our country. So we surely don’t want to make the same mistake again, do we, with Newt giving amnesty to 15 million, so that next time it can be 25 million. Hang out the welcome sign, .... right.
We need new pols in Washington. Not all...but a lot. The 2010 indcutees as a result of the Tea Party activity are, for the most part pretty good.
We need another election this year doing the same, bringing down to earth, common-sense Americans into position who know how to and are willing to balance a check book, defend our borders and uphold the laws, drill for our own oil in a massive way, lighten the regulationa nd tax burden on companies so they will want to do business here again, and unleash the American people.
IMHO, Herman Cain is still the best candidate in the field that we have to preside over those things happening...to get behind them and with no-holds barred use a majority in the House and Senate to make sure it happens.
Herman Cain for America vs. Barack Obama, the man who despises America
http://www.jeffhead.com/cainvsobama.htm
“How does not allowing them to become citizens change anything?”
Uh...by denying them the right to vote.
Remember, he’s only talking about those who have shown them to be productive members of society, also, not welfare sinks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.