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

Skip to comments.

"Newt Gingrich Facing GOP backlash Over 'Humane' Immigration Policy" (U.K. Guardian)
The Guardian (United Kingdom) ^ | 24 November 2011 | Ewen MacAskell (in USA)

Posted on 11/23/2011 9:05:05 PM PST by AmericanInTokyo

Conservative activists believe Gingrich's views on illegal immigrants has opened up the field for another GOP candidate...

(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; borders; campaign; gingrich; illegalaliens; illegals; immigration; legalization; newtgingrich; openborders; primaries; regularization
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-104 next last
To: Mari2525
Since Newt believes in securing the border, he doesn’t fit the definition of an open border Republican.

Newt also is opposed to a border fence. Which means his talk of securing the borders is just lip service.

61 posted on 11/24/2011 3:04:07 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo
Click to my homepage for full transcription, but here's the highlights of his remarks in the debate:

"...deal with this as a comprehensive approach that starts with controlling the border"

"...ultimately you have to find some system – once you’ve put every piece in place, which includes the guest worker program, you need something like a World War II Selective Service Board that, frankly, reviews the people who are here."

“...if you’ve come here recently, you have no ties to this country, you ought to go home, period. If you’ve been here 25 years and you got three kids and two grandkids, you’ve been paying taxes and obeying the law, you belong to a local church, I don’t think we’re going to separate you from your family, uproot you forcefully and kick you out.”

“The Krieble Foundation is a very good red card program that says you get to be legal, but you don’t get a pass to citizenship."

“I do believe if you’ve been here recently and have no ties to the US, we should deport you. I do believe we should control the border. I do believe we should have very severe penalties for employers, but I would urge all of you to look at the Krieble Foundation plan.”

62 posted on 11/24/2011 4:07:02 AM PST by Lady Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dagnabitt

American citizen children can not be deported against their will.


63 posted on 11/24/2011 4:18:39 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True Supporters of our Troops PRAY for their VICTORY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: newheart

I’m with you - I used to be more of hardliner until after I came to Christ, then started really pondering on what He would do. Closing the borders for control, and deporting the more recent lawbreakers is fine by me, but mass deportation of folks with roots seems a bit overboard. That’s why Perry’s “gaffe” seemed to make sense to me too.


64 posted on 11/24/2011 4:31:07 AM PST by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rmlew

Despite what you say, Anwar al Awlaki was a US citizen, an anchor baby. So was the recently born child of a Mexican drug lord whose young wife crossed the border just for that purpose.

The law currently makes anchor babies inevitable; they are US Citizens.

And for anyone to say, “conress can strip” that away is acknowledgement that NOW things are as I say they are.

And congress cannot punish people by using a law passed after the fact: ex post facto laws are prohibited by the Constitution. That means that all anchor babies now citizens will be citizens their entire lives. It cannot be taken from them.


65 posted on 11/24/2011 4:49:46 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True Supporters of our Troops PRAY for their VICTORY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo
"His proposal to allow most of the country's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants to remain in the US"

Most? That is a gross distortion of what Newt actually said.

66 posted on 11/24/2011 5:16:24 AM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lady Lucky

Don’t bother posting what Newt actually said, there are too many here who are perfectly willing to tell what he actually means, as far as they are concerned. If Newt says he is for amnesy they will slam him, if he says he is for controlling the borders, they will say he is a lying beltway pol. It really is pointless to argue with those who do not want to hear facts, but prefer to deal in supposition.


67 posted on 11/24/2011 6:36:05 AM PST by ez ("Abashed the Devil stood and felt how awful goodness is." - Milton, "Paradise Lost")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: newheart
Most are not advocating “cattle cars”,and BTW,thats a disingenuous ploy meant to demonize your opponent before the argument even commences, I`ve heard many lefties use it,not a good sign, but here goes anyway.

I say we simply make it a federal offense to hire an illegal, punishable by one year in jail and massive fines. If they can`t get work, they`ll self deport in droves. What employer wants to save a few bucks at the risk of a federal penitentiary and loss of their business? If the illegal uses illegal ID they do hard time in a hell hole of a jail with "Bubba the butt hole buster" as a cell mate. We also make it illegal to give any assistance to illegals, no food stamps, housing, welfare, tuition, NOTHING at all. Make it impossible for them to survive here so they`ll have no choice but to go back on their own.

68 posted on 11/24/2011 7:28:29 AM PST by nomad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ez

If you’ve been here 25 years and you got three kids and two grandkids, you’ve been paying taxes and obeying the law, you belong to a local church, I don’t think we’re going to separate you from your family, uproot you forcefully and kick you out.”

///////////////

How could they have been “paying taxes” and “obeying the law” if they are illegal?


69 posted on 11/24/2011 7:58:39 AM PST by luckybogey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Mari2525
Meh...I don't consider the liberal Wikipedia a valid source.

Check out sites like numbersusa.com and fairus.org for border security info (factual info with plenty of supporting data).

70 posted on 11/24/2011 8:36:28 AM PST by Jane Long (Soli Deo Gloria!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: xzins
US citizens cannot be deported. True.

Their alien parents can be, however. And kids generally live where their parents want them to live.

If a 30 year old Jamaican woman (without US citizenship) is deported for being a drug dealer, the fact that she has a 4 year old kid born in the USA is not going to stop the deportation. Where the kid lives will be up to mom. She'll likely take the kid to Jamaica...or she could get a US friend or relative to take the kid in. If the kid goes to Jamaica, he/she would be in good company. There are thousands and thousands of born-in-the-USA US citizen children living abroad.

The “anchor baby” element really doesn't kick in until the child moves back to the USA, usually around high school age, and then later as a young adult, files a petition (IR-5) to bring the alien parents over, legally, as lawful permanent residents (green card holder). Of course there are visa ineligibilities for criminals, deportees etc. In fact in Jamaica Mom's case, she's out of luck since narcotics dealing is a permanent immigration bar.

71 posted on 11/24/2011 9:22:32 AM PST by Dagnabitt (Amnesty is Treason. So is immigration, legal or illegal, of Islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: newheart

My plan always involved buses not cattle cars.


72 posted on 11/24/2011 9:50:41 AM PST by Red_Devil 232 (VietVet - USMC All Ready On The Right? All Ready On The Left? All Ready On The Firing Line!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Newt does believe in a border fence, he just recognizes that putting a fence along the entire length of the southern border is not feasible, so his plan includes other ways to secure the border where there would not be a fence.


73 posted on 11/24/2011 10:21:47 AM PST by Mari2525
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Mari2525
Newt does believe in a border fence, he just recognizes that putting a fence along the entire length of the southern border is not feasible,

Hardly. India fenced off their entire border with Bangladesh. If it matters, it gets done.

Newt wants the typical half-measures to deal with illegal immigration, so we can pass amnesty again and reset the same clock we got after Simpson-Mazzoli - amnesty for those here and an incentive for more to come here and wait for the next amnesty.

74 posted on 11/24/2011 10:24:48 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: rmlew

I know that during that 20 years, Newt voted in favor of Reagan’s amnesty bill.

I don’t know why Newt would have to introduce or co-sponsor any bill that says enforce the laws we’ve already passed. Seems rather silly.

I know in 1994-1996 Newt was pushing through the conservative agenda, i.e. the Contract with America. How and why did he sabotage efforts to enforce the immigration laws during just those 2 years in office? I take it he didn’t sabotage efforts to enforce immigration from 1980-1995, or in his last years in office, 1997-1999?

Maybe the Democrats were only saying they were open to the immigration issue to derail the passage of the conservative agenda? Sorry, I don’t believe Democrats nor do I trust them and I didn’t in the 1990’s either.


75 posted on 11/24/2011 10:52:05 AM PST by Mari2525
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: newheart
Somehow the concept of “Do justice. Love mercy. And walk humbly with your God” (Micah 6:8) does not line up especially well with the idea of putting 11 million Hispanics into cattle cars (Yes, plenty of Freepers advocate this) and shipping them back to Mexico.

Newt is right on this one.

Sometimes a picture can express sentiments better than words can.


76 posted on 11/24/2011 11:45:38 AM PST by Ron H. (No to Romney, Perry, Gingrich and Huntsmen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Red_Devil 232

My plan always involved container cargo ships. Very efficient.


77 posted on 11/24/2011 11:49:12 AM PST by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Jane Long
.... Stop with the sensationalism.

That's the best open borders boosters and advocates of law breaker sympathizers can come up with.

78 posted on 11/24/2011 11:50:59 AM PST by Ron H. (No to Romney, Perry, Gingrich and Huntsmen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo; newheart
I am truly embarrassed for you.

Truly self-embarrassing. If this person had any shame about them self they would be downright shameful as well.

79 posted on 11/24/2011 11:55:41 AM PST by Ron H. (No to Romney, Perry, Gingrich and Huntsmen!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: newheart

I’ve read it. Point 6 is sure to fail. And point 10 though admirable would not last long.


80 posted on 11/24/2011 12:00:16 PM PST by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-104 next 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