Posted on 11/25/2011 10:42:04 AM PST by presidio9
I’m still waiting for you to tell us what Herman Cain will say when asked what he thinks about the Gingrich solution, i.e.,
control the border
guest worker program
review board
deportation in specific cases
very severe penalties for employers
Do you think Mr. Cain will say that wholesale mass deportation is practical and fair, and that individual review is not? Do you think he’s against very severe penalties for employers of illegals? Do you think he will denounce the guest worker program and vow there would be none in a Cain administration? There are guest workers in the US now, and have been for decades — including during the Eisenhower years. Somehow I don’t envision Mr. Cain taking on that fight, but perhaps you do?
Does that mean they already know who is illegal, or do you cut off everyone?
:-)
Me too, thanks. ;-)
I wrote him off in 1996. He wrote himself off in 2011 with his idiot compassionate conservatism amnesty crap.
We have enough legal immigrants now to do those jobs. It wouldn’t work, because employers and illegals who have been here for years won’t get the card. In Operation Wetback, most of them returned on their own.
I don’t know what Herman Cain will say, but what he’s said about illegal immigration so far is much tougher than what Gingrich said, and he hasn’t insulted Conservatives in the way he explained his soft illegal immigration stance. I also like Cain on the other issues, and especially the fact he’s a complete Conservative outsider with no establishment ties. I like Herman Cain on more than Gingrich on several issues.
We can see what Cain says when he’s ask about Gingrich’s horrible plan. I hope he doesn’t defend his friends plan, and lets us know where he’s stronger on the issue. Why ask me, and not wait until they ask Herman Cain? I support Herman Cain for several reasons including past tough stances on illegal immigration. I like him better than Gingrich, and will support him over the career politician establishment guy who endorsed the extreme liberal Republican in the 2009 New York Congressional special election, along with groups like the log cabin Republicans, when almost all Conservatives were supporting the Conservative party candidate such as Sarah Palin, and Fred Thompson.
https://supporthermancain.com/
keep repeating that.
Thank you for the thoughtful and sane reply! Why can’t everyone be so reasonable?
Now about draining the treasury. On the website, re “Immigration,” Newt’s position includes this:
“Applicants must first pass a criminal background check, and then the local committees will assess applications based on family and community ties, and ability to support oneself via employment without the assistance of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other entitlement programs...
“Moving forward, those who receive this status will have to prove on a regular basis that they can support themselves without entitlement programs...”
As for voter fraud, it certainly is a serious problem and should be exponentially worse in November 2012, given the Obama/Holder influence.
But it’s a separate issue from immigration, since voter fraud is committed by others besides illegals. That said, I’ve reason to believe a Republican president, particularly one cleaning up after Obama, would devote considerable attention to the problem.
No solutions will make the nation perfectly invader-free, but by and large, I don’t think too many of the people who’d be permitted to stay, would endanger their status by committing voter fraud.
Democrat politicians are another matter! They’d have to go back to using cemetery records :)
Are you really going to argue that Newt Gingrich wasn't carrying on an affair with Callista while married to his second wife Marianne during the late 90's?
Because I've got a freezer full of heat'n'serve crows here, of course! :)
I fully expect Cain to agree with Gingrich at some point, and then I shall be serving you a nice hot dish!
That is not what you said. You said he was doing the same thing Clinton was doing. In case you aren’t aware, Clinton committed perjury by lying to the grand jury about his exploitation of a young intern who worked for him; not to mention enlisting his subordinates in the campaign to smear and discredit her; not to mention various other incidents of sexual harassment and assault.
That is what you were falsely equating with the sins of Newt Gingrich.
Herman Cain has already talked tough on illegal immigration, and he isn’t stupid enough to agree with a candidate on an issue that hurt their candidacy, and may very well cause their collapse overnight the same way it did with Perry. Cain has already let his immigration stance be known.
http://www.hermancain.com/home
Here is his plan from his webpage:
We must secure our borders, enforce our laws and promote the existing path to citizenship.
That’s nice for a bumper sticker or a talking point, but it, like Cain, has no depth or detail.
Secure how? Electric fences? Shoot on sight? Which laws? How much money? How many more agents? Round them up? Promote? You mean advertise? 999?
It won't get me into Heaven, though...
unless of course I die on a blackjack table. ;)
Now I understand, He loved Marianne, He was just Fnnn Callista.
Some women fall in love with and marry prisoners
I like this more conservative definition I saw Kellis91789 post instead.
"Just because they don’t get citizenship doesn’t mean it isn’t amnesty. If they are not held accountable to the law as it existed at the time they violated it, they are getting amnesty. The law they violated REQUIRES deportation and anything else IS AMNESTY.
I support any real conservative.
1. Cain
2. Bachmann
3. Santorum
Cain is the one who has said enforce the law already on the books. Too many Newters have told me no one will do that. I say lets get a real conservative in there and let him try. No lib loving compassionate conservatives or RINOs but someone who will enforce the laws on the book and not ignore them.
Don't Newter our sovereignty. Nominate a real conservative, Cain.
Actually, there are few processes easier than sending out a government notice saying there's a new rule.
The new rule would be along these lines: "Periodic review commences 02/22/12, kindly submit the following documents by 02/12/12." (Just using two notable birthdays for the examples.)
Cutoffs start soon after. Even if we had no illegal residents in America, this would be a good idea, since the entitlement programs are afflicted with fraud on a vast scale.
I just looked around. In 2011, it appears Herman Cain has not yet been asked to tell us what he’d do about the 12 million illegals already here. And not having been asked, he’s not saying; indeed he seems to be most carefully avoiding it.
However, there is a site, http://www.economicfreedomcoalition.com/news/press-opinion-061107.asp
where he made this comment in 2007:
“The Immigration Bill could have succeeded if the political class in Congress and the president had listened to the public and addressed the four distinct problems. Namely, secure the borders convincingly, expand the temporary worker program for skilled legal immigrants, establish a reliable legal immigrant identification program and then propose a reasonable program for the 12 million (and counting) illegal persons who broke our laws to get here, but not amnesty.”
Taking point 4 first, well, they ALL say that whatever they propose, it isn’t amnesty. Cain’s notamnesty is “a reasonable program for the 12 million” already here.
What would this reasonable program be? Deport all 12m? I doubt it!
As for “expand the temporary worker program for skilled legal immigrants,” well, with what people do you expand it? There’s no point in putting legal immigrants in it; if they’re legal, why do they need to take refuge in the temporary worker program? One expands it to enroll more non-legal immigrants, unless you think he’s suggesting recruiting some other category of Mexicans...? Those currently in Mexico perhaps? No, we can rule that out. Expanding a temporary worker program means adding some of those 12m illegals to the rolls.
Would you not agree?
Or is what he thought in 2007 not what he thinks today?
Is he now a one-size-deportation-fits-all guy?
He’s not saying. Why not?
I am not for amnesty, but seriously... Which candidate will unilaterally kick out ALL people who are here illegally? Heck, we can’t enforce the immigration laws we have. Yes. Newt’s plan is amnesty for some and that does not sit 100% well with me, but there has to be a way to slam the door that is our porous border and start deporting at least those foreigners who are breaking laws (I know... just them being here is illegal). You know, there are two easy stances to take on illegal immigration. One is to keep everything the way it is and do nothing, which will continue to bleed our resources, dilute what is left of our culture and leave a continued gaping hole in our security. The other simple stance is to say, kick them all out now. As good as that sounds, I don’t see it ever happening. The status quo is not acceptable. Maybe Newt’s plan is the kind of thought out plan that could actually work.
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.