People call me Rebecca but all my friends call me Newt.
Why don't you put HER in charge?
GAME OVER MAN! GAME OVER!
Posted on 11/24/2011 5:37:51 AM PST by NaturalBornConservative
During the CNN GOP National Security Debate on 11/22/2011, Newt Gingrich recommended a comprehensive approach to address illegal immigration. Just for the record, what Mr. Gingrich really said about Amnesty may be viewed here.
Gingrich said that such a plan must (A) start with securing the border, then (B) establishing a guest worker program, and finally (C) setting up a board to review the status of each person here illegally. Such a board would distinguish between those who recently came here, and those who are more established. He said that those who recently came here, who don't have family ties, or are otherwise not established, should be sent home. While those who are established, who have been here for 25 years or more, who have children and grandchildren in America, who belong to churches, who have obeyed the laws, and who have paid their taxes, should be allowed to stay legally, but not automatically granted citizenship. For the latter, he recommended using something similar to the Red Card Solution, which would be used as a form of identification, to grant legality, and place them on a path towards citizenship.
The Krieble Foundation's Red Card Solution is a proposal which would allow companies to recruit workers from Mexico. The Red Card would permit workers to enter America, and would allow employers and immigration authorities to track them. It would aid in enforcement of immigration laws, with less intrusion by the government. According to the Krieble Foundation:
"It’s a simple solution. Private employment agencies would be allowed to open offices in foreign countries, and authorized to issue temporary non-citizen worker permits. The permits would be “smart cards” with a microchip that includes a photograph, fingerprint or other biometric identification data, and information needed so that border agents, police, and employers could swipe the card and know who the holder is, where he works, where he lives, who issued the permit, when it expires, and any other required information. Employment agencies would be licensed by the government and would be required to run criminal background checks before issuing non-citizen worker permits, much like gun shops do today. Employers would simply post jobs with employment agencies like they do today. Best of all, the program would be funded by user fees, not taxpayers."
Gingrich also recommended that H1 Visas be granted with every graduate degree in math, science and engineering, to encourage foreign students to stay in America.
For the most part, I concur.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. We hear that from all the amnesty shills. And they are as serious about that as Obama is about a balanced budget.
What about visa overstays and the phony Somali or Bosnian “refugees”?
I don’t mind the Mexican folks, perhaps some special arrangement could be made, but let’s send these other bums home.
Half the Bosnian are really Albanians or Gypsies anyway.
We have anywhere from nine to sixteen percent unemployment. Why on earth do we need companies importing workers from Mexico? The Alabama unemployment rate has dropped a half-point since implementation of their illegal immigration law.
I and many other IT workers were unemployed during the IT slump of 2002 - when a half-million H1-B workers were brought in under a program meant to fill jobs only when an American worker could not be found. This asinine Red Card proposal is little different in this economy.
I am sick of these Beltway think tanks carrying the water of those who want to bring in the cheapest possible third-world labor into this country at the expense of Americans who are out of work.
So in Newt's grand vision, the longer you have broken this country's immigration laws, the more law-abiding you are.
Only inside the Beltway can this possibly make sense.
Hey, maggot - try refuting what I have posted. You can't, jackass. You're just an apologist and a shill for the worst tendencies of the Beltway GOP.
Ah, the typical ploy of a troll who can't defend his candidate's stance on its merits.
But I'll play - I am trying to decide between Cain and Perry.
Both have executive experience, both are from outside the Beltway swamps, and although I have issues with some of Perry's illegal immigration stances, he's still better than Newt, and at least Perry understands the 10th Amendment. Newt has no clue about the concept of limited federal government. He gives it lip service, but his history over the last 10 years indicates otherwise.
Fortunately, I missed this latest installment of the the Left putting the Right in their MSM circus side show and calling it a "debate." Curious about where our candidates allowed the left to steer the focus of attention this time - looks like immigration issues - usually a subject as far away as possible from the failings of "The One We Have Been Waiting For."
Notice how if anyone starts to get close the real problem - Obama's economic, political, and anti-American train wreck, they're quickly cut off and the subject is changed?
Why are we letting the GOP and the Left hold us hostage like this?
Okay, we know what Perry’s plan is, pretty much the same thing as Newt, so now what is Cain’s solution? Bet it’s the same. When it comes down to brass tacks, some form of the Krieble plan is the only rational and achievable solution.
People call me Rebecca but all my friends call me Newt.
Why don't you put HER in charge?
GAME OVER MAN! GAME OVER!
Yeah, sure, jackass. You're just another Newt zombie - the only part of your brain still working is the bite reflex. I have posted my reasons on this thread why this proposal is so wrong in this economy, as well as the intellectual bankruptcy behind the concept that the longer you have broken immigration laws, the more law-abiding you are. To be a zombie Newt supporter, you apparently have to not care about either.
Thank-you for confirming my assumptions about your means of arriving at a response. You really are so emotional.
Yeah, I get emotional about logic being abused beyond recognition. About how someone can consider a law-breaker law-abiding. How a think tank can call for more third-world labor to be brought in when we have massive unemployment in this country.
Guilty as charged. At least I haven't sold my soul and my conservative values the way you have. Assuming, of course, that you ever had either.
First,secure the border.
Second, ENFORCE THE G*****N IMMIGRATION LAWS!!!
or change them...anything else is AMNESTY!!!
Oh, horsecrap. Alabama has seen a drop in unemployment of a half-point since they implemented their law against illegal immigrants.
If you make it untenable for illegals to stay here, they will go elsewhere. It's called self-deportation.
And Cain is still better than Newt. Newt basically is advocating complete surrender on this subject while pretending otherwise. So do you.
Cain has still run something other than his mouth. Or do you think some hack who has lived at the public teat his entire life as he moved up in office has a better sense of how the real world works than a guy who ran a private organization?
Wow how refreshing. Actuals facts vs. knee-jerk gotcha-ism.
This whole “qualified to be president” nonsense needs to stop. What makes a politician “qualified”? They need to spend a certain numbers of years in Washingston betraying their constituents, spending billions of taxpayer dollars on nonsense, pushing their porkbarrel programs on the nation? What makes them qualified? Does being qualified mean they’re experienced at tramping all over the constitution and bill of rights?
People want an experienced RINO politician when these so-called qualified people are the same clowns who got us all in the position we’re in in the first place!
And completely oblivious to the consequences it sets forth - namely that we pay billions in taxes to support illegals and that they take jobs from Americans.
Typical of just about everything that slithers out of the Beltway.
Following that logic, then anyone who proposes to secure the border first is just an "amnesty shill". I believe the question was - What will you do with those who are already here illegally, after securing the border?
We can't blame those who are already here for having simply walked across an unsecure border, or for the federal government's failure to identify, ID, and track them. Calling anyone with a reasonable plan an amnesty shill, doesn't solve the problem. Besides, what Gingrich proposed isn't really amnesty. It's a way to solve the problem, with broad based appeal.
Cain isn’t competent to occupy the White House. He is only marginally more qualified than the clown in office now. Herman Cain can hardly find Libya on the map. He is clueless on foreign policy and how to conduct it. He is so far out of his depths on national defense issues that he looked pathetic in the last two debates. His only recourse has been to fall back to meaningless bromides and vague generalities. The only person more clueless in the debate was Ron Paul.
As opposed to what? Newt and his complete immolation in the Beltway culture? DC is full of 'competent' people who have no clue how the real world functions, with budgets and hard decisions and sweat. Your definition of a competent person is that of the persons who have screwed up this country to the point it is.
And comparing Cain to Obama is absurd as well - Cain has run something other than his mouth.
Uh, no.
But it is what the likes of McCain and Lindsey Grahamn love to say. You have to look at the history of the person, and what they propose in tandem to declaring the border secure, to see their underlying agenda.
Because, after all, Janet Nappy has declared the border secure. Do you trust DC types to tell the truth about this? I don't. They believe you can spend money while still treating it as an asset. If you can believe that, you can convince yourself of just about anything.
Yep. This foundation, which is also against enforcement measures such as e-verify, has proposed a worse solution than probably anything else out there.
No employer would have incentive to provide the least bit of improvement in their workplace environments or their manual labor jobs as long as they can go to whatever god forsaken corner of the planet and sign up “workers” to come fill their openings in the US. And that is exactly what this red card program would permit them to do. If they can find anyone among 7 billion people willing to do a job for less and lesser conditions, they can bring them on over.
Of course, we’ve already got a majority of the illegals here receiving government benefits and there has never been a guest worker program that hasn’t simply led to the long-term immigration of those “guests”.
Read the thread...calling names is a big part of the dirtboy's repertoire.
We have seen this before.
Some grand bargain that has both enforcement and some amnesty.
It is always a lie.
The enforcement never comes and amnesty is expanded.
If Newt is honest, lets start with enforcement, and if it works, only then consider amnesty. You amnesty shills always try to lie
Okay, then Cain for Secretary of Commerce, or something. Gingrich for President. Bachmann for VP.
It is not surprising to watch a Beltway hack like Newt call for an amnesty program that screws American workers and taxpayers in the name of humanity for illegals. It is surprising to see so many FReepers waving the pom-poms for such.
And since the Simpson-Mazzoli amnesty of 1986 now happened 25 years ago, what Newt is doing is rewarding prizes to the very first group of lawbreakers to enter illegally and start waiting for the next amnesty for illegal aliens.
And here old Newt is ready to hand out the grand prize to the first group of lawbreakers, and providing irresistible encouragement for the next group of lawbreakers.
I call names where it is richly deserves, Mr. Troll who can't even ping a FReeper when they are talking about him.
Rolling in the same direction it has been going for years, with maybe the slightest veer to the right. No thanks.
Translation: more years of non-enforcement of immigration law under the pretense that nothing can be done until the border is secured.
And why is it that a president could not start stricter enforcement at the employer level today, if we had a president with any intention of enforcing the law?
Nothing but pandering, kick the can down the road garbage from Gingrich, and his grand plans would end in amnesty for all several years from now.
And here I thought conservatives were supposed to learn from mistakes.
You're first response to me on this thread:
There's ignorant and there's just plain downright dishonest, which are you?
Such a brazen display of rank hypocrisy, troll-boy.
“For the most part, I concur.”
Then you still need to learn something about politics. Consider what a politician has done, not what they say.
Amnesty activists make me angry. They are dishonest.
Enforcement never comes and amnesty always ends up bigger. Only honest policy is enforcenent first and only if it is done, then we can discuss next steps. Anybody insisting amnesty first approach is a liar or honest amnesty activist.
As another poster noted on this thread, Newt's approach would reward those who came in immediately after the last amnesty.
True to form, you have completely reversed the concepts of conservative reason and liberal emotionalism.
You are extolling Newt wanting to repeat the mistakes of Simpson-Mazzoli - in other words, taking the liberal path of not learning from mistakes.
While you rip into those who point out that we don't need more foreign labor for the foreseeable future, given our rampant unemployment.
So until you can figure out that you have the concept of liberal versus conservative exactly backwards, well, go pi** up a rope.
I don't know why you guys have to be so nasty in these discussions. What ever happened to the concept of conservative reason vs. liberal emotionalism? I mean, it doesn't bother me, you guys can call me anything you want, but it does sadden me to see people who call themselves "conservatives" react out of emotion rather than reason; lash out with personal invective rather than actual facts.
I totally concur! Happy T-Day!
And while I`m on the subject let me ask you this, what has that lesser of two evils dogma done to even slow down, let alone stop or, dare I say it, REVERSE the ever bigger and more abusive government trend by BOTH establishment parties?
“It is not surprising to watch a Beltway hack like Newt call for an amnesty program that screws American workers and taxpayers in the name of humanity for illegals. It is surprising to see so many FReepers waving the pom-poms for such.”
BUMP
“If Newt is honest,...”
BWAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAHAAAA!!
You are supposed to ignore the history of Beltway politicians saying one thing and meaning another.
You are supposed to ignore the history of DC think tanks rationally wanting to screw American workers and taxpayers with their proposals while putting forth the absurd notion that their proposals are good for this country.
You see, THIS TIME they really mean what they say. And you're just being emotional for looking at the past and questioning such.
On this I agree; not one candidate will be able to deport every illegal alien. I like the idea of fingerprinting and microchip. Fingerprinting identifies the “person” vs. using a phony Id that are a dime a dozen.
So we deport them, they just come back again, wash, rinse and repeat. We pay billions of dollars to deport these illegals. Secure the border first with droids, more agents, make agents immune from prosecution so they can do their jobs vs taking the word of an illegal. Then come up with a tracking program for those who work and pay taxes.
I wish one of the candidates would offer a discount on tuition for our American legal students who go into the fields of engineering, science, math vs. awarding a Visa to foreigners. Why not rewward our own people first to eliminate the shortage.
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.