Skip to comments.Live Thread: Republican Presidential Debate on National Security 8 P.M. EST 11/22/11 on CNN
Posted on 11/22/2011 3:37:12 PM PST by kristinn
Hosted by the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute, the theme of tonight's Republican presidential debate is foreign policy and national security.
The debate is being held at Constitution Hall in Washington, D.C.
CNN is carrying the debate live at 8 p.m. EST.
Participating candidates are: businessman Herman Cain, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, former Speaker Newt Gingrich, Reps. Ron Paul (TX) and Michele Bachmann (MN), former Gov. Jon Huntsman, and former Sen. Rick Santorum.
Cain/Santorum 2012 .. because ? we want to cut out all the unnecessary talk and get things actually done.
its not Perrys,nor the state of Texas fault theres illegals everywhere.Thats the Federal Government’s responsibility.
And by the way,Perry has never once said,in all my years living in Texas,that he was for amnesty,nor has he ever been for the Federal DREAM Act.The Governor cannot deport illegals,only ICE can.We have passed legislation here in Texas denying drivers licenses to illegals,requiring voter i.d. to vote.Perry did call on an emergency special session of the Texas State Legislature to ban sanctuary cities,but the bill was stalled.
Please,come off the lie that Perry and Texas is soft on illegals because thats complete B.S.
You aren’t listening to me. I want to provide cover for an operation against the Iranian nuke capability.
If they get those nukes, then we’ll wish we’d worked hard at getting access.
I do believe Ahmadinejad is mad, and that he will use them. I also believe he will use a clandestine delivery system and not a conventional one.
Your ideas do not take into account those who’ve been here and have children who have been born here and/or grandchildren born here.
There is no removing these folks. US citizens are permitted to have their parents and grandparents visiting with them. That throws EVERYTHING out of kilter.
We need to change the anchor baby law, but that will not be retroactive to those already made US citizens.
Everybody seems to forget the anchor baby law and visitation by relatives being fine and dandy with immigration. But the US Constitution forbids any ex post facto law.
And a visa is “legal”.
Besides, we always forget about anchor babies...children and grandchildren who are by law US citizens.
Their parents and grandparents can get visas to visit all they want. It’s just the nature of how the system works.
LOL. You’re OKRita
Most illegals don’t work like that. It’s under the table. There is no paper trail.
I just hired out putting down a wood floor, molding, some work on our doors. I know the guys who are doing it, but there is no paper transaction between us. I pay them, and their reporting to the government is strictly on their terms with however they do taxes at the end of the year. I don’t have a clue.
Nonetheless a work visa is a legal document. Therefore, the presence is not illegal.
I have no problem with not giving benefits to guest workers. That’s as it should be.
However, all of this is moot until the anchor baby law is changed. Once a child is born in the US and is a US citizen, then the entire picture for the parents and even grandparents changes. If nothing else, they could be on visitor visas for the rest of their days, but there is NO WAY that the US is deporting one of its own citizens, i.e., that anchor baby. It’s just a fact.
Newt is going to take the Perry plunge down in the polls.
The immigrant job issue to me is a non-issue.
Tell that to the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs, due to this economy.
they see Illegals doing jobs, they would do to save their house, their car, their way of life.
Perry took the plunge because people saw him in a couple of debates and realized he’s a goofball. Newt will be the nominee.
The jobs I see Illegals doing are mowing and concrete work. I’m not sure how many women who were laid off are gong to jump in there and do those jobs. And, I’m not sure how many of their husbands really want to do that either. Certainly the wall street wackos don’t want to do real work.
Finally, a well written description of the type of work these ‘savages’ perform. We see them on the highways, on construction sites slaving away - while we drive to our airconditioned cubes and tap out computerized data.
We overlook that their ‘illegal’ journey into this country is reminiscent of earlier ‘slave traders’. This nation was built on the shoulders of subservient millions - willing to sacrifice all to survive.
The Government allowed an invasion of 30 million foreign nationals across our borders and is responsible to offer a correction. Practical men and women realize that deporting each and every non-documented resident is not physically possible or even desirable.
We accept undocumented refugees from war-torn areas. What is the difference? Workers want to work. Refugees will not fight for their homeland - will they fight for ours?
I agree with the posters who make the point: Once an illegal immigrant applies for free benefits - they go home. This is true for legal immigrants - they have to be sponsored or self-sustaining....no freebies.
Very well put summary of Cain’s management style.
Yikes, they got the Vicks Vapo-rubout treatment.
I know...I'd light em up. Freakin' Pakirs.
I am neither for nor against Cain and Gingrich. My point was just an extension of Michelle Bachman's position.
If we "legalized" the illegals suddenly, then we might as well hoist up a white flag instead of the stars and stripes. We should then advirtise in all countries below the border, in Spanish, that all you have to do is come to America, pay taxes and behave yourself and voila, you will be legal.
And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who would join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification
The problem with your post is that you equate Newt's plan to amnesty, even though he specifically states they would NOT get citizenship. Then you cite the Heritage Foundation on the consequences of amnesty being chain migration. Yet you are missing that the Heritage Foundation is specifically defining amnesty as granting citizenship. Only the families of CITIZENS are entitled to family reunification.
Notice how if anyone starts to get close the real problem - Obama's economic, political, and anti-American train wreck, they're quickly cut off and the subject is changed?
Why are we letting the Left hold us hostage like this?