Posted on 11/24/2011 11:04:26 PM PST by AmericanInTokyo
"Presidenciales EUA, precandidato republicano Newt Gingrich a favor de regularización estatus migratorio de millones"
Translation: US Presidential Candidate Newt Gingrich, Republican, For The Regularization of Immigration Status for Millions"
We have seen this word "regularization" many times in the South of the Border press, used by both President Bush and President Fox, and a euphemism for "amnesty" for illegal aliens. To "regularize" them to stay in the United States.
NO AMNESTY.
NO COMPROMISE!
Bump in full agreement.
In door #36 “YES”! You my friend have been here long enough to win ‘AMNESTY’!!! Ding,Ding,Ding
There are many more legal Latino’s in this country than illegals. The legal immigrants went through a long but proper process, and others were born on US soil as citizens by birth. I am not convinced majority of legal residents and citizens are in favor of amnesty to illegals.
6. Create a path to earned legality for some of the millions of people who are here outside the law.
No thanks, Newt. That's amnesty.
“There are many more legal Latino’s in this country than illegals. The legal immigrants went through a long but proper process, and others were born on US soil as citizens by birth. I am not convinced majority of legal residents and citizens are in favor of amnesty to illegals.”
Well, I’m convinced you embrace conservativism!
Well, I have to ask...how would that logically happen?
I had to do a “think” before I even posted the question because I know what fire it will draw.
I appreciate the passion and agree.
But in the p.c. world in which we live...
How would it happen?
Maybe I’m confused.
I thought that Newt said that those who would be allowed to stay would be treated like migrant immigrants, who have been legal for years.
(In fact, the legal migrant workers have suffered because the illegals have been taking their jobs.)
I thought that he would not be in favor of citizenship for these folks, though.
Am I wrong about that?
Read Newt's 10 Steps to a Legal Nation paying attention to section 6.
“We need a system that enforces the rule of law, ensures that those who broke the law pay a stiff penalty, but also acknowledges that it is neither optimal nor feasible nor humane to deport every single illegal immigrant.
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.”
From your link...
“We need a path to legality, but not citizenship...”
“6. Create a path to earned legality for some of the millions of people who are here outside the law.
There are currently anywhere from 8 to 12 million people living in the United States who entered illegally.
These people range from day laborers who arrived recently, to grandparents who have been paying taxes, supporting their families and obeying the law for decades.
We need a system that enforces the rule of law, ensures that those who broke the law pay a stiff penalty, but also acknowledges that it is neither optimal nor feasible nor humane to deport every single illegal immigrant.
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.
We need a process that can distinguish at the human level.
Congress must charge the Department of Justice to establish a “citizens’ review” process for those here outside the law. It would establish committees to process these cases in individual communities and determine who will continue on this path to legality, and who will be sent home. Congress must define understandable, clear, objective legal standards that will be applied equally during this process. While this process is ongoing, those here outside the law will be granted Temporary Legal Status for a certain, limited period of time until all have had the opportunity to apply and appear in front of committees.
Applicants must first pass a criminal background check, and then the local committees will assess applications based on family and community ties, and ability to support oneself via employment without the assistance of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other entitlement programs.
The government will rigorously enforce a requirement that all individuals seeking this path to legality must be able to prove that they can independently pay for private health insurance. If an individual cannot prove this, they will lose the ability to stay in the United States.
Furthermore, proficiency in English within a certain number of years, similar to the requirement for naturalization, will be required for anyone who seeks continued legal status in the United States.
Once an applicant has been granted the right to obtain legal status, he or she will have to pay a penalty of at least $5,000.
Moving forward, those who receive this status will have to prove on a regular basis that they can support themselves without entitlement programs and pay for health insurance or else risk the ability to stay in the United States.
“6. Create a path to earned legality for some of the millions of people who are here outside the law.”
You didn’t read any further than that, did you? ;o)
“We need a system that enforces the rule of law”
Yep.
If Newt's plan allows ILLEGAL aliens to stay legally in this country that is amnesty. It does, and that's all I need to know.
You know that Newt said that, don’t you?
Yes, I did. And Newt's plan is amnesty.
No thanks.
Hey, backatchya!
From my reading of what Newt has said, it’s not amnesty.
None of them will be made citizens, as was the original Bush amnesty plan.
In the PNW, we have a lot of legal migrant workers. From what I’ve discerned, Newt wants to put these folks into that category.
It’s so good to see you!
Oh, well...I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
Just so you know, I am not a fan of Newt’s. I guess I have interpreted what he has said differently than most.
Citizenship is not required for it to qualify as amnesty. Some invaders probably don't even want citizenship. But if they are afforded legal status, as opposed to the illegal status they have now, that is amnesty.
Thank you South40 for that link.
But actually, my question is..how should this problem be dealt with in today’s p.c. world?
The Operation Wetback of the 1950’s will not fly today. (Heck you can’t even say w#tb*ck in polite society..nor would I want to).
Do you think that there might be an alternative? And if so what?
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.