Skip to comments.Why Newt's Immigration Plan is the Death of Conservatives
Posted on 12/17/2011 12:14:45 PM PST by ckilmer
My one problem with Newt is his idea of allowing people who have lived 25 years in the country to remain and to set that decision in the hands of local officials.
That stand almost immediately got praise from both clinton and schumer.
Soon after, the LA Times ran a story that said 60% of illegals have been in the USA for 10 years or more. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/12/60-percent-illegal-immigrants-report.html
Why would partisan democrats praise newts idea. Why would the LA Times run the story that 60% of illegals have been in the country have been in the country for 10 years or more.
Because they would see clearly how Newt's plan could be gamed--just like Ronald Reagan 1986 amnesty was gamed.
In a conservative county most of the illegals would be pushed out because the 25 year rule would be strictly adhered to -- but in a county where most people speak spanish and 40% of the population is illegal nobody will be deported. The LA Times suggests that they might draw the line at 10 years. But that's not the way it would work in practice. In high illegal counties soon enough people who have just stepped over the border would be allowed through. There wont be anything the feds or the state can do because they locals will be the ultimate arbiter. Whats more these counties will become gateway counties into the country from other countries and they will attract illegals forced out of other parts of the country. Once legalized they could move on.
The result will be that florida and texas especially will rapidly shift over to the democratic column. Thats the big prize the democrats are counting on that will shut the republicans out of presidential politics and the direction of the country.
Thats why the most partisan democrats Schumer and Clinton had high praise for Newts idea.
Newt nominated = Obama reelected
Send treats to the troops...
Great because you did it.
(An entirely free service)
Bachmann supported the same plan on Sept 7th yet people give her a free pass.
HARRIS: A quick 30-second rebuttal on the specific question. The fence is built, the border is under control. What do you do with 11.5 million people who are here without documents and with U.S.- born children?
BACHMANN: Well, that’s right. And again, it is sequential, and it depends upon where they live, how long they have been here, if they have a criminal record. All of those things have to be taken into place.
“”Newt nominated = Obama reelected”
I respectfully but strongly disagree with you.
Oh well - there goes 2012! We’re doomed, we don’t have chance and all we can expect is “4 more years!”
I think that Newt can win the nomination and win in the general. But his immigration plan is a long term poison pill for the pubbies.
By the time it all takes effect, Newt's presidency will be on the lecture circuit or honeymooning with wife #5.
Of all the candidates, I trust Newt LEAST.
Please. Newt Gingrich isn’t a Warmist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7VUg7nG3lw
Newt knew that before he said it..
He has been dealing with democrats for many years..
And knows how policies actually shake out..
BUT; then Newt didn’t invent “the System”.. he adjusted to it..
Newt is the best of the NON Constitutional candidates..
Ron Paul, is, of course, the ONLY Constitutional candidate..
I put it too YAH.. you want to follow the Constitution?.. OR NOT?..
Newt like the Democrats want the Constitution “ADJUSTED”.. just in different ways..
Because new immigrant citizens have voted 80% for the Democratic Party in the last five Congressional elections.
So far, Conservatives have been lucky.
New immigrant citizens have a very low voter participation rate.
When new citizens begin to vote at the same rate as Conservatives, the Democratic Party will take permanent control of both Houses of Congress.
The 25 year minimum will be cut to 10, mark my words. Those who were here illegally 25 years ago were already amnestied in 1986.
Also, in case anyone is under any illusion that Newt and Pelosi are “good friends,” you might want to listen to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACek8xwMpJs
Not necessarily. Newt is well aware of the mistakes of the past. There are ways to prevent that from taking place.
Those who can't can drive their pickup trucks!
There are sufficient buses to move the others over a couple of months without stressing the availability of buses.
I figured out that I could FLY all of them home to wherever they'd come with just the surplus passenger capacity ordinarily found in our commercial air fleet over a 6 month period of time.
NO ONE is talking about having them walk back to Mexico in the hot broiling Sun in June.
The use of the term "humane" is inappropriate.
It is impossible to reliably verify how long illegals have been here. Acorn guided document fraud would be massive. Courts and admin can define what docs are enough.
Citizen boards can grant amnesty to anyone, in liberal areas. Acorn intimidation for board members expected too.
Why should we kick out h1b visa holders after max 6 years since many have lived here over 10 years as student or worker.
Why illegals are preferred over legals?
Many things about what Newt will do as president will be the death of conservatives if they come out in droves to support him. Conservatives will receive the final judgment of not being a party that represents anything different than any other party.
I admit that the hour is late now for this country in that it cannot stand more of what is happening right now with the anti-American leftist’s in control. But lets face it. Newt is not much better. It is too bad that conservatives did not stick to their guns many years ago, and refuse to support anyone who was not a real conservative because at this point the American people might have been willing to try a real conservative for president. As it is they already think they tried one with GW bush. If they actually try Newt then it will be even worse.
Sadly, I doubt that when that times comes, that we will be able to gather here and talk about it.
I believe that the leftists are gleeful about this Gingrich surge. I believe they are laying low on purpose. I believe they are waiting for republicans to choose him. And as soon as you do then the media attacks are going to start running like water over Niagara Falls. I believe that is what Queen Nancy was referring to the other day.
As I understand, very few people would qualify for Newt’s plan.
Newt has a particular genius for zeroing in on the root causes of problems. He also has the ability to make opponent’s positions look un-reasonable in comparison.
He’s leader enough to understand you can’t totally have your way. We have had enough of that under our Dictator and Chief.
In the real world if anyone walks away from the negotiating table gleeful someone else will be screwed. Good leadership leaves everyone at least somewhat satisfied and that will just have to be enough.
I have my doubts about Newt and Romney, but I’m surely not going to be dogging either one and give the lefties a single piece of ammo to use on either one.
Anybody think 12 million people are going to be deported?
If not why do you go from there?
He is advocating building the fence to secure the border. That is what can be done at this point.
The same thing would happen in conservative counties as well because the Border Patrol and ICE would be prohibited from deporting or prosecuting any illegal alien falsely claiming residency just like in 1986.
Anybody who thinks about this plan for more than 5 seconds will realize how stupid and dishonest it is. Newt surely knows about the history and fraud and he still supports it. So he must be dishonest amnesty activist too.
Is handwritten lease or verbal testimony from neighbor enough evidence to prove illegal has been here 25 years? These issues will be defined by gov agencies and courts.
Every (non-white) person on this planet, with the help of La Raza/ACORN can provide necessary “proof”.
What about people who have been 20 years? Will they still be deported? Of course not. They are so close to 25 years (or whatever is the limit), that additional clarifications, at least by executive order, would be created.
So this would be absolute 100% blanket amnesty.
Occasional high profile murderer may be deported, that’s all.
Citizen boards are a joke. Everybody hate jury duty already, now another board? Why liberals in San Francisco should have the right to legalize 100M illegals? Of course, every illegal would go through San Francisco citizen board (remember, document fraud is so easy).
So this is absolute dishonesty.
If somebody does not understand the true nature of this (blanket amnesty), he/she is a total fool.
Newt’s “let’s secure border” is like “let’s reduce unemployment” Everybody is saying that, even Obama.
Newt has fought against employer verifications when he was in Congress.
The real solution is this:
- make sure no amnesty, ever, is forthcoming
- old-fashion fence in many areas (so future admin can not easily reduce security by executive order)
- e-verify (and jail executives who hire illegals)
- support strict state laws
- streamline deportation proceedings
Do you honestly believe the courts will let Newt’s “you can be permanent residents, but you can’t ever be citizens” stand?
I don’t care what Webster says. In this case PARDON = AMNESTY.
They may indeed cut it 10 years but they won’t have to because all the fraud perpetrated by the illegal aliens will simply be ignored. The residency requirements for the 86 amnesty were ingored.
Based on the postings today, I have started to wonder if Vanity means posted by a Paulbot.
Sometimes he is and sometimes he is not. It depends on the time and the audience. We really don't know what his real position is since he has been on all sides of the issue.
Newt described himself as a Green Conservative and a believer in manmade climate change that needed to be addressed by the USG immediately. Remember this interchange in had in his famous "debate" on climate change with Kerry that turned into a love-in?
Kerry-Gingrich debate on Global Warming
At one point, Gingrich said, "We're not arguing over whether it [a plan to fight global warming] should be urgent. We're arguing over whether bureaucracy and litigation is a better way to be urgent or whether science and technology translated by entrepreneurs into products is a better way to be urgent."
Finally, Kerry relented. "I'm excited to hear you talk about the urgency," he said. But "what would you say to Senator [Jim] Inhofe [R-Okla.] and to others in the Senate who are resisting even the science?"
Gingrich didn't hesitate. "My message," he said, "is that the evidence is sufficient that we should move towards the most effective possible steps to reduce carbon loading of the atmosphere." The pro-Kerry crowd applauded.
"And do it urgently?" the senator pressed.
"And do it urgently, yeah," the former speaker replied. "I think there has to be, if you will, a green conservatism," he added.
April 10, 2007
I said publicly sitting on the couch with Pelosi is the dumbest thing I have done. But I never favored cap and trade and actively testified against it. I was in the U.S. House and Energy Committee the same day Al Gore was there to testify for it and I testified against it. Through American Solutions we fought it in the Senate and we played a major role in defeating it.
1989: Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA) co-sponsors the ambitious Global Warming Prevention Act (H.R. 1078), which finds that the Earths atmosphere is being changed at an unprecedented rate by pollutants resulting from human activities, inefficient and wasteful fossil fuel use, and the effects of rapid population growth in many regions, that global warming imperils human health and well-being and calls for policies to reduce world emissions of carbon dioxide by at least 20 percent from 1988 levels by 2000. The legislation recognizes that global warming is a major threat to political stability, international security, and economic prosperity. [H.R. 1078, 2/22/1989]
1997: As Speaker of the House, Gingrich co-sponsors H. Con. Res. 151, which notes carbon dioxide is a major greenhouse gas that comes from products whose manufacture consumes fossil fuels and calls on the United States to manage its public domain national forests to maximize the reduction of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. [H. Con. Res. 151, 9/10/1997]
2007: Gingrich calls for a cap-and-trade system with tax incentives for clean energy. I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that theres a package there thats very, very good. And frankly, its something I would strongly support. [Frontline, 2/15/07]
NANCY PELOSI: Hi. Im Nancy Pelosi, lifelong Democrat and Speaker of the House.
NEWT GINGRICH: And Im Newt Gingrich, lifelong Republican, and I used to be Speaker.
PELOSI: We dont always see eye-to-eye, do we Newt?
GINGRICH: No. But we do agree our country must take action to address climate change.
PELOSI: We need cleaner forms of energy and we need them fast.
GINGRICH: If enough of us demand action from our leaders, we can spark the innovation we need.
April 18, 2008
It will be cut to nothing, because the plan is unrealistic and unenforceable, and the will is lacking. Newt needs to shelve this half-baked idea.
Newt could be forced to back down from his claim to grant "legality" to that group once the facts were thrown in Newt's face and tell him that those people are here because he and others in Congress since that time failed to keep their word or do their job!
Newt is first and foremost a political animal and want's the top job.
Just like some of the wishy/washy folk in DC, he can be made to stand and fight - if, and only if, he knows there are others behind him (with pitch forks) to stand against the pro-amnesty filth, including those in the Church as it's only being done for money. Follow the money and you'll expose those who insist on keeping illegals coming here. It's not merely about being "hospital to travelers amongst us" it's about continuing to keep them coming for slave labor and illegal voting plus getting your tax dollars for having "disadvantaged" folk in our midst.
We need a path to legality, but not citizenship, for some of these individuals who have deep ties to America, including family, church and community ties. We also need a path to swift but dignified repatriation for those who are transient and have no roots in America.
This pure sophistry. And exactly does he intend to have a "swift" repartriation of the estimated 2 million "criminal aliens" that are here? McCain said the same thing only he used the word "immediately."
The status quo is much preferable to Newt’s amnesty plan.
Newt is radioactive material. I agree with Ann Coulter.
Newt’s written plan does not include any mention of 25 years or any time limit at all.
He's been there through it all. I love these home made einsteins who sit around on a Saturday afternoon and think they can out think the guy who was there for so many years, and has been thinking about it longer than einstein maybe has been alive.
Priorities. I’m way more interested in getting rid of the people who came here recently—the women creating anchor babies, the young criminals, the real problems. I also think it’s easier on technical grounds to get rid of the newcomers than the ones who have been here a long time. If we can’t close and bolt the door, keep new illegals out, and chuck the recent arrivals out, we don’t have any chance of getting rid of the old-timers. We’re so far from doing any of this that the issue of longtime illegal residents is sort of a moot point.
“EXCUSE OR ABSOLVE FROM THE CONSEQUENCES OF A FAULT OR CRIME”
ASSESSING A $5000.00 TAX FOR A LIFETIME OF STEALING, LYING, NOT ASIMILATING AND REFUSING TO EMBRACE OUR AMERICAN CULTURE IS INSANE... AND IF IT IS A FINE... WHAT COURT WILL RENDER DUE PROCESS?
It is exactly as Mark Stein said. newt knows this plan is 100% unworkable... and it is amnesty no matter whether or not newt thinks that this insane 5 G's will make it something other than Amnesty... the result is the same end. Like with all things newt... when his ideas are seriously critiqued... most of them are unworkable at best. Look up gullible... you need to understand that word also.
No it doesn’t but he stated a criteria of 25year residence and that’s what I’m going on. Even 15-20 year should be enough to be a reasonable standard to shut up all but the most radical opponents. This is a problem that MUST be solved, and it’s going to hurt a little bit but right now it hurts a lot.
Look at their accomplishments. Newt allied himself with Ronald Reagan to build the Reagan Coalition, the Religious Right, and the Republican majority (together the Reagan Revolution) which directly led the downfall of the Soviet Union, the Contract with America, government reforms, less government, tax cuts, a balanced budget, and the great, long-standing Reagan economy.
Romney, on the other hand, vehemently denied Ronald Reagan and aligned himself with Ted Kennedy and the left. Romney accomplished installing liberal big government programs, defended and promoted Roe v Wade and legalized abortion as settled law, advocated and implemented RomneyCare with its liberty killing government mandates against formerly free citizens and its taxpayer funded or subsidized and mandated abortion procedures. He ran and governed to the left of Ted Kennedy on the gay agenda resulting in gay marriage in Massachusetts. He appointed liberal judges and liberal appointees throughout his government. Under his leadership conservatism and the Republican party was all but destroyed in Massachusetts.
Romney is one evil liberal progressive. No way in hell will MittBots be allowed to support this abortionist, big government, socialist scumbag on FR!
Guess my message isnt clear enough. I have to keep repeating it and zotting would be MittBots.
79 posted on Sat Dec 03 2011 19:59:37 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Jim Robinson
You are aware that in 1986 Ronald Reagan granted amnesty to illegals who were in the USA...Let’s do some simple math 1986 + 25= 2011. So anyone here 25 years already has been granted amnesty. Newt’s plan does nothing to change the status of anyone. And he shrewdly knows it.
The proponents of amnesty are wont to create the false choice between a blanket amnesty and mass deportation of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. In reality, we have other choices and alternatives that dont reward people who have broken our laws with the right to stay and work here and an eventual path to citizenship. The 12 to 20 million illegal aliens did not enter this country overnight and they will not leave overnight. Attrition through enforcement works. We have empirical data from Georgia, Oklahoma, and Arizona proving that it does.
Any legislation that legalizes the status of those who broke our laws by entering our country illegally and allows them to stay is amnesty. We must not only prevent the Democrats and some moderate Republicans from hijacking the meaning of the word amnesty, but the public must be made aware about the true impact of an amnesty. The Heritage Foundation concluded that the cost of amnesty alone would be $2.6 trillion. And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who would join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification, would approach 70 million over a 20-year period, assuming there are only 12 million illegal aliens. We cannot assimilate such numbers. An amnesty would destroy the United States of America with the stroke of a pen.
Who said we only have a choice between Gingrich and Romney?
The way you solve the problem is attrition thru enforcement.
O please...you are being overly dramatic. Obviously his plan will work as if companies are not allowed to hire them, they have to self deport! If they can prove they have been here for a quarter century...no big deal to allow them to stay, minus voting rights. Are you a Romney supporter?
I'll support the Republican regardless. (Gawd, that includes Ron Paul.)
Send treats to the troops...
Great because you did it.
(An entirely free service)
I agree to a point. The first step is to enforce and regulate the borders hard and fast.
Now we have all those people here what do we do? Find out who the hell they are. Give them 30 days to split.
If they stay, no welfare, must be employed and paying taxes for 10 years, all English speaking at a high level, then they can apply for citizenship.
They will be allowed to vote, but no ballots can contain Democratic Candidates, only candidates of my choice.
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.