Skip to comments.Rand Paul Defends Immigration Reform: 'I've Got A News Flash' For Coulter And Limbaugh
Posted on 04/17/2013 9:00:54 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
Confronted with critical quotes from Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh on Fox News Thursday morning, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) stood firm on his immigration reform stance and fired back at anyone who would try to question his resolve.
After Paul explained his stance on border security, the conversation shifted to undocumented immigrants who are already in the country. Fox host Bill Hemmer said, "you know you're a ripe target for the word amnesty," and then played clips of what media figures like Coulter and Limbaugh have been saying about the senator since he indicated his openness to a "pathway to citizenship."
"People like Coulter and Limbaugh say people like you are being suckered into an agreement here," Hemmer added. "What they argue is that conservative principles should not be sacrificed here, it's that the Republican message has been lost in the process. What would you say to that?"
Paul was eager to jump in and defend himself, saying "I've got a news flash for those who want to call people names on amnesty. What we have now is de facto amnesty." He explained, "We have 11 million people here that have been here, some of them for a decade or more. No one is telling them to go home. No one is sending them home."
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
Rand Paul Amnesty Pimp Ping!
I was hoping he’d be a contender. I guess I’m left with Cruz. He hasn’t done anything horrible yet...I think.
What an assclown.
I am so disgusted by what the GOP has become. My President, Ronald Reagan, must be rolling in his grave.
He's sellout but he's correct.
What we have, even in so-call red states...is a de facto sanctuary country..
There is a big difference between having rats in the cellar and putting out food for them. If this idiot thinks the vermin will vote for a strong America after he gives them voting rights, then he is stupider than he looks now.
He is right about one thing we do have de-facto amnesty. No one is sending them home.
That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be sent home though.
We have had 2 amnesties in my memory both were supposed to close the borders and stop the need for another amnesty.
This amnesty will be no different. Except we will have to have another in ten years.By that time we may have a Mexican President.
CLOSE THE DAMNED BORDERS before granting any amnesty.
So far Cruz seems to be the real deal; but we now know better than to put to much faith in any Republicrat. Maybe the Cruz has been designated as the last man whose job it is to turn out the lights when he leaves.
Meanwhile the Saudi students have landed safely at home.
Isn’t Ted Cruz ineligible to be President, at least according to some birther purists?
I’m afraid the list of “pure” conservatives (at least those that couldn’t inspire another round of circular firing squads here on FR and elsewhere among conservatives) is short to none already. And we haven’t even reached the midterm elections.
Which is pretty darn pathetic.
No doubt to a hero's welcome.
Enforce the immigration laws we already have, and they'll leave by themselves. No welfare, no employment, no sanctuary cities.
Stop rewarding them for breaking our laws, and the problem will be solved!
The politicians are doing this for votes and nothing but votes to increase their own power and privilege. "Screw the American tax payers. Let them eat weeds."
“What we have now is de facto amnesty”
......”So let’s double-down on it! Woohoo!” Rand Paul
Rand Paul, the open borders libertarian from Kentucky. More wackiness and nuttiness to be revealed as other key issues come before the Senate.
“What an assclown.”
What part of his statement you don’t agree with?
You don’t think there’s a defacto amnesty? You think Obama is doing a good job?
AND the new immigrants will get free tax payer paid cell phones. Isn't that great? Gosh, those Republicans sure are good to other people. Too bad they weren't on our side.
The right answer to the wrong question is still a wrong answer. Conservatives are answering the wrong question when they should be changing the conversation to asking the right questions.
What are the right questions? I don’t know, but I would start with:
Why do we have immigration laws at all? Hmm? What are the specific things a person needs to have done before they can immigrate? Are they not important things protecting the US population from...well what are the purposes of the requirements?
Why don’t we simply grant citizenship to anyone who can sneak into the country, or stays longer than their Visa allows? Isn’t that what you are proposing we do?
Why don’t we get rid of ICE altogther, unless there is a reason for them? Is there a reason to keep ICE?