Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rand Paul to Vote Against Gang of Eight's Immigration Bill
National Review ^ | June 23, 2013 | Eliana Johnson

Posted on 06/23/2013 9:36:26 AM PDT by VitacoreVision

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-69 last
To: Hostage

Totally agree with the rest of your post.


51 posted on 06/24/2013 9:08:10 AM PDT by jpsb (Believe nothing until it has been offically denied)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: VitacoreVision
I'm officially a "no legal drugs", "defend your country" libertarian now or maybe a Liberpub for short.

There is not now nor was there ever a need to erase national borders except to make it easier for global commerce.

I like business as much as the next person and Mexicans (Latinos) do not bother me in the least...but everyone needs a backyard they can call their own.

The GOPe can go fly a kite when it comes to finishing off our national sovereignty. I told everyone that if the GOP did not build the fence, I was jumping ship.

Where's the Fence? Go Rand!

52 posted on 06/24/2013 9:32:20 AM PDT by Earthdweller (Harvard won the election again...so what's the problem.......? Embrace a ruler today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dowcaet

This bill was obviously a monstrosity from the beginning. The fact that Paul didn’t get it ‘til now is very disturbing, and frankly, disqualifying in my mind. Bob


53 posted on 06/24/2013 10:26:21 AM PDT by alstewartfan ("You have the most appealing surface I have seen. Bring it over here. Lay it down by me." Al Stewart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

“So Rand’s excuse is the border wouldn’t be secure enough under this plan. And if the border were secure enough? Then what Rand? You would then agree to flooding this nation with 100 million plus new citizens in under 20 years?

Someone set this guy on auto-destruct! Sadly, it was him.

NO SALE!”

BINGO


54 posted on 06/24/2013 11:57:25 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

Well that’s good to know. So are you saying Rand’s only participation in this immigration bill is his amendment aimed at making the border more secure?


55 posted on 06/24/2013 12:38:26 PM PDT by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

He’s still for legalization—just wants a more secure border first.


56 posted on 06/24/2013 12:44:12 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker; jpsb

Two conflicting views on Rand. Which is accurate?


57 posted on 06/24/2013 12:47:31 PM PDT by Hostage (Be Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

No “new path to citizenship” doesn’t really have any significant meaning. As Paul explains in this clip, starting at 3:15: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june13/immigration_06-18.html , he would first of all, with a secure border, legalize the illegals here now. Then he would allow them to apply for citizenship just as they would have been able to do had they remained home. So they wouldn’t be put to the front of a line for citizenship, but they would be able to live here legally until their citizenship came through.

That is amnesty through and through.


58 posted on 06/24/2013 12:55:18 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

Again, Paul’s “no new pathway” claim is meaningless. He would allow the illegals already here to live here legally while putting them in the regular line for citizenship with those who stayed home. This is a “new-for-the-presently-illegal path to citizenship” and it is abject amnesty.


59 posted on 06/24/2013 12:57:54 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: unixfox

You’ve also got them bringing their kin in via chain migration, which would multiply that 30 million by a factor of three.


60 posted on 06/24/2013 12:59:09 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: jpsb
"Paul has always been border security first and no new path to citizenship. Liars have misstated his position on illegal immigration. Go to his web site and read his position for your self, it has not changed since first put up there months and months ago."

I've argued on many threads with Freepers on this topic and other Rand Paul "Libertarian" perspectives. It's frustrating to no end on the blindness of nearly every so-called "constitutional conservative".

Rand is consistent and correctly principled on all core "conservative" beliefs, and he backs it up with action that riles both the left and right establishment.

There are a handful of good congress critters. Rand is #2 in my book amongst all. Cruz is #1. But, Cruz isn't eligible for POTUS from what I understand of the law (bummer of bummers). So, Rand is the #1 candidate for 2016 from my perspective.

Keep up the good work!

61 posted on 06/24/2013 3:46:43 PM PDT by uncommonsense (Liberals see what they believe; Conservatives believe what they see.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: VitacoreVision

““I’m like most conservatives in the country in that I think reform should be dependent on border security first,””

Close, and Thanks for SAYING, you’ll vote no.

However, You are still not like most conservatives in this country who think that some Precursor to Immigration Reform ameliorates the Evil Itself.

Most Conservatives in this Country have had a belly full of Immigration Reform period. Making the next round of being sold out conditional on some empty promise to “Do Something” first doesn’t cut it.

We want it stopped. No more damned Reforms.


62 posted on 06/24/2013 3:48:36 PM PDT by To-Whose-Benefit? (It is Error alone which needs the support of Government. The Truth can stand by itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

Thanks. These guys... grrrr.


63 posted on 06/24/2013 4:51:18 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Kennedy: Today I am a Berliner / Reagan: Gorbachev tear down this wall / Obama: I can't read this...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

No new pathway to citizenship, means that one must return to their country of origin and then wait in line. Paul have been very consistent on this topic. All Paul would do is give qualified illegals in the USA a work visa.


64 posted on 06/24/2013 11:05:24 PM PDT by jpsb (Believe nothing until it has been offically denied)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

Paul has been against the gang of 8 bill from day one. There was never any doubt which way he was going to vote. FR just has a bunch of Paul haters that constantly misrepresent him.


65 posted on 06/24/2013 11:18:06 PM PDT by jpsb (Believe nothing until it has been offically denied)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: jpsb

That’s absolutely not what Paul says in the interview.

He would have illegals who have been ‘legalized’ here be able to go in line as if they were still home and hadn’t committing felonies being here.


66 posted on 06/25/2013 1:48:35 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: kenmcg

None of them have my trust. Way too many times we’ve seen erstwhile “conservatives” cave in favor of amnesty. It proves they all can be bought for the “right” price... and that includes Cruz. He just hasn’t been given the the offer he wants.. yet. A little pork here, a tacit threat there, and you’ve a made guy.


67 posted on 06/25/2013 4:54:55 AM PDT by ScottinVA ( Liberal is to patriotism as Kermit Gosnell is to neonatal care.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: VitacoreVision

Rand right again.


68 posted on 06/25/2013 5:08:38 AM PDT by swampthang77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: American Quilter
I guess I need a civics lesson.

After it has been changed by the Senate, won't the house need to vote on it again in it's final form?

69 posted on 06/25/2013 12:22:19 PM PDT by nitzy (You can avoid reality but you can't avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-69 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson