...and by making them legal, I don’t mean amnesty and neither does Huckabee. He wants them to go back to the back of the line and then come in legally.
Nonsense. He wants them to pay a fine of 5 pesos and come right back in. Tyson Chicken needs em. But it’s not “amnesty”. 5 pesos and they will pay their “debt to society”.
Meanwhile, if an American citizen is found smoking a cigarette at a Bennigans in Little Rock, he/she is a criminal who faces a $250 fine.
He’s a liberal. Being a baptist minister is wonderful but it doesn’t make you a conservative. Hell, he’s not even a Republican or a RINO.
The only reason he won’t run as a Dem where he belongs is because they burn pro-lifers at the stake.
I’m beating a dead horse. Huck is finished. Nothing personal, he’s probably a nice guy. I wish him well hocking Home Gyms in infomercials with Chuck Norris at 2 am. Let him get a real job and keep him away from any levers of power.
“and by making them legal, I don’t mean amnesty and neither does Huckabee. He wants them to go back to the back of the line and then come in legally.”
Maybe you can explain what “going to the back of the line means.” The back of what line? If they go to the back of the legal immigration line, 90% or more of the illegals in the US would never be readmitted, well, unless you plan to increase legal immigration by four or five fold (which is what “comprehensive reform” did in so many words).
We presently let in 1 - 1.5 million legally each year, depending on the number of refugees and other special categories allowed. But, the allotment for Mexico is only a fraction of that annual total, probably one or two hundred thousand per year. If the millions of Mexican illegal aliens go to the back of the line, they’ll never get back in because each nation has a limited allotment each year, and plenty of citizens who’re try to do it legally already in “the line”. The same would go for many nations with illegals in the US.
So, what does “going to the back of the line” mean?