Skip to comments.Rep. [Steve] King: ‘Gang of 8’ Immigration Plan is Not Conservative
Posted on 04/29/2013 9:02:57 PM PDT by Olog-hai
Representative Steve King (R-Iowa), a member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration & Border Security, said the immigration reform plan crafted by the Gang of Eight in the Senate and promoted strongly by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is nothing more than a bold amnesty plan that is not very conservative despite advertisements claiming otherwise.
King, a conservative, was interviewed on CSPANs Washington Journal on Apr. 25 about immigration reform. During the interview, host Greta Wodele Brawner showed one of the television ads in support of the Gang of Eight plan that is being promoted by the Mark Zuckerberg-backed group Americans for a Conservative Direction. Zuckerberg is the founder of Facebook.
When asked about the ad and how it might affect House Republican reaction to the Senate immigration proposal, Rep. King said, You cant call that plan very conservative. I can call it bold. Its a bold amnesty plan.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
Thank God there is one left.
I wish Steve King had run for president in 2012, and I hope he enters the race in 2016.
Only one that I've given money to in 40 years of being a political junkie and that should tell a lot about how I feel about him!
STEVE KING FOR PRESIDENT!
Gee, what a (non)surprise.
This is impossible, Rush Limbaugh says Rubio is a real conservative, and he’s right 96.7% of the time.
“Triggers In Gang Of Eight Bill Arent Triggers At All:
Proposal Would Actually Weaken Security Requirements Previously Enacted”
Rubio is getting hammered on his Facebook page. It’s a shame, I really had high hopes when he came on the scene, but people simply will not trust him now.
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 12:52 PM
Subject: Rebuttal mexico
AMNESTY TWO ISSUES NEVER TOUCHED
ACTIVE FR’S IF YOU SEE ANY CREDITABLE REPORTS OF PROBLEMS AMERICAN CITIZENS ARE HAVING WHILE LIVING IN MEXICO PLEASE POST THEM.....
(1) When is the treatment of American citizens in Mexico and their rights vs US treatment of Mexicans going to be an issue when we discuss amnesty ? And two other questions US legislators should ask
Here are three questions:that has yet to appear on any US legislator’s questionaire from either chamber
ASK YOUR FEDERAL LEGISLATORS WHY THEY HAVEN’T
!...Should Mexican citizens when in the US be given the same rights American citizens are given while in Mexico? .......To begin with American citizens illegally entering Mexico are promptly booted out and heavily fined.
2.. The Mexican government through public statements and educational system lays claims to major portions or all to some of our southwestern states as part of the Mexican nation . Are we asking for trouble by granting their illegals an expressed path to our citizenship laying the groundwork for “squatters rights” at some future date ?
3... If it is deemed necessary to supplement the US labor force by allowing itinerant labor should the individual states make the determiniation as to the number should the offer being needed ? And should that offer not be restricted simply to Mexican nationals which absorb their quotas but to other central and south American countries as well ?
What makes it necessary for US to subjugate our sovereignty because of available cheap labor ? While the Godless Demo-Coms socialists endorse and encourage population control and abortion . Then complain the US is not reproducing enough citizens to replace its aging retiring workforce. Then rely on (as the Romans did) on foreigners (barbarians) to keep their welfare ponzie schemes supplied with tax money and keep the system working.....
On the Mexican problem
Ever hear of reciprocal aggrements ? These are arranged to protect the rights of American citizens working or living in other countries.
Why is it when it comes to citizens of other countries we are required to offer them the same privledges as we do to US citizens? But when it comes to US citizens who get in trouble or attempt to do business in other countries they do not get the same treatment their citizens get.
Americans cant own coast land in Mexico. And get no title to it elsewhere. If they run out of cash theyll get unceremoniously sent back or put in jail untill some relative comes up with the fresh. Thats just for starters as for granting them voting privledges yea lets give Mexican citizens that right when American citizens vote in their elections .
Steve King is a conservative; Rubio presents as a passionate advocate--for amnesty.
This comprehensive immigration business cost the Republican Party the House and Senate in 2006, and the White House in 2008.
Just as the base was sitting out 2012 (having rallied in 2010), so, too, will it walk away from an amnesty-embracing party next year.
Grassley was a vocal and thoughtful opponent of amnesty in 2006 and should continue in that regard this year.
Rush, who was kind to Rubio, though how much more is open to question, stipulates Obama doesn't want a solution now--wants an issue next year.
The myth of the "conservative" hispanic family with its Catholic aversion to abortion has been exploded.
The truth is the USG pitches bennies and the Mexicans come in droves.
The mistake of 1986 ought not be repeated. Steve King knows that.
The fight is for the conservative principles--and Rubio is on the wrong side.
Yup. Steve King is one of the good guys, Rubio is destroying any chances he may have had of ever being a good guy. Never, ever cross the aisle or Join McCain in pushing treasonous legislation!
“Well Mr. Franklin, what have you given us”?
“A gang of fifty six, if you can keep it”
Now we know why it isn’t 100%.
Heh, no doubt.
This one counts for a lot though.
Should knock him down to 50.01%. Being generous there.
Advice to Rush...talk about something that actually matters and quit trying to push this RINO down my throat. He’s done, Rush, and he did it to himself.
Rush should disavow his statement and modify it to fit reality... my bet is that he will not. I have written him an email requesting the above. It will be ignored with almost certainty.