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

Skip to comments.

Newt's Citizenship Problem (What does he mean by long established illegals who are "law abiding"?)
American Thinker ^ | 12/12/2011 | Daren Jonescu

Posted on 12/12/2011 4:48:54 AM PST by SeekAndFind

After the November 22 Republican debate in Washington, D.C., many conservatives took issue with Newt Gingrich's proposal to establish a system of local boards of review to assess the cases of illegal immigrants who have lived in the United States for twenty-five years. While his opponents on stage chose to focus on concerns that the plan would entrench a powerful new "magnet" for illegal aliens, others isolated the strangest aspect of Gingrich's proposal, which was his explicit description of such long-established illegal immigrants as "law-abiding citizens." How, people reasonably asked, can an illegal alien who has never been granted U.S. citizenship be called a "citizen" at all, let alone a "law-abiding" one?

Some of us shied away from putting too much emphasis on this odd phraseology. In my own case, I considered that "law-abiding citizen" is a hackneyed expression, and hence the kind of term that a candidate might carelessly toss off in the heat of a debate, particularly when he is coming under fire for his position, and is attempting to defend himself on the spur of the moment. In the context of a debate about illegal immigration, paths to citizenship, and the like, it was a poorly chosen phrase, indeed. Nevertheless, as I have devoted some energy to debunking the myth of Gingrich as a great debater who would mop the floor with Obama in a one-on-one confrontation, it was not at all surprising to me that the candidate most inclined to present himself (and, presumably, to see himself) as a great rhetorician would be the one most likely to produce the most absurd logical gaffes.

Suddenly, however, in the wake of the December 10 debate in Iowa, it is no longer feasible or reasonable to hold our fire on Gingrich's peculiar use of the notion of citizenship.

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aliens; amnesty; gingrich; illegal; immigration; newt; pandering
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-58 next last

1 posted on 12/12/2011 4:48:57 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
We will have a Tea Party congress no matter WHO the president is.

Amnesty for illegals ain't going anywhere so this hit on Newt is moot.

2 posted on 12/12/2011 4:54:18 AM PST by Happy Rain ("The Founders obviously anticipated Obama when they crafted the 2nd Amendment.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If you support amnesty, Newt is your man. The final bill, the grand bargain negotiated between Senate’s Acorn caucus and Newt will be great.

Once we have changed the electrorate, we can ignore those radical rightwingers and social engineers.


3 posted on 12/12/2011 4:54:31 AM PST by heiss (heartless and inhumane (radical rightwinger))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He means that the clowns insisting on rounding up and deporting 15 million illegals are unserious about finding a workable solution.

NO!

I will not engage in a circular debate that brings us back to this same point.


4 posted on 12/12/2011 4:56:01 AM PST by G Larry ("I dream of a day when a man is judged by the content of his Character.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

To call the author an American thinker is to redefine the word “thinker”.

This piece pedantic. The author does not agree with Newt. But this piece pretends its more than that.


5 posted on 12/12/2011 4:56:16 AM PST by Notwithstanding (1998 ACU ratings: Newt=100%, Paul=88%, Santorum=84% [the last year all were in Congress])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

To call the author an American thinker is to redefine the word “thinker”.

This piece pedantic. The author does not agree with Newt. But this piece pretends its more than that.


6 posted on 12/12/2011 4:57:09 AM PST by Notwithstanding (1998 ACU ratings: Newt=100%, Paul=88%, Santorum=84% [the last year all were in Congress])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain
We will have a Tea Party congress no matter WHO the president is.

We'd better, if Noot is elected.

7 posted on 12/12/2011 5:02:47 AM PST by Colonel_Flagg (Why, yes. I AM in a bad mood.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

A law abiding illegal alien is an oxymoron.


8 posted on 12/12/2011 5:09:09 AM PST by magslinger (Who cares if they are"electable" if they are going to govern like Democrats? -noprogs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I think we need to examine this whole “law abiding” issu also. Is it possible for an illegal for an illegal to live here and be law abiding?

Their 1st illegal entry carries little weight or consequence. Their 2nd is damned serious in the eyes of the law. Can they have lived here 25 years and not have perpetrated identity fraud or theft?


9 posted on 12/12/2011 5:11:11 AM PST by umgud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Imagine a race of people who do not speak English, have no skills but physical labor and are encouraged by their own countrymen (for a small fee) to ‘follow me’ and I will show you a land of opportunity.

You must travel a long distance in sub-human conditions - will face starvation, dehydration, armed patrols and razor sharp barriers. If you survive - your housing, clothing and wages will be subsistence and you may be arrested as an invader.

By living quiety in the shadows and working hard for your new owner, this will become a paradise. The laws of this new land are supple and it will even be possible to acquire help from the government in the form of medical care, food and education for any children you have.

Imagine that.


10 posted on 12/12/2011 5:21:19 AM PST by sodpoodle ( Gingrich - flying solo - without congressional baggage!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I guess hacks think illegal is the norm because so many invest in it.
A vote is a vote no matter if it’s above the law.


11 posted on 12/12/2011 5:21:21 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain

“We will have a Tea Party congress no matter WHO the president is.”

I’m not so optimistic.

McCain’s failed campaign resulted in republican losses in the house and senate.

I just don’t see Newt doing much better than McCain.


12 posted on 12/12/2011 5:33:39 AM PST by BarnacleCenturion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

And do Daren Jonescu and SeekAndFind have a candidate that they are supporting?


13 posted on 12/12/2011 5:51:17 AM PST by campaignPete R-CT (I will go back to New Hampshire to campaign.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: heiss

Deja vu all over again. Bush compassionate conservatism. Romney, Perry not any better. Yuck! Screwed again!!


14 posted on 12/12/2011 5:54:56 AM PST by AmericanInTokyo (Bye bye Hugo (Chavez)...I smell sulphur approaching.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: spectre; truthkeeper; processing please hold; antceecee; navymom1; jaredt112; Edgerunner; ...

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
This is a ping list promoting Immigration Enforcement and Congressional Reform.
If you wish to be added or removed from this ping list, please contact me.

Behavior by Department of Justice Officials May Lead to Impeachment

Obama’s foolish war on marijuana (Obama Regime Doing Bidding of Mexican Drug Cartels?)

Was Fast and Furious All About Gun Control?

Probe Widening on Obama’ s Fast and Furious(gunwalker)

BREAKING: Grassley calls for Lanny Breuer’s resignation from DoJ(gunwalker)

Children Of Immigrants Ask For Halt To Deportation That Splits Families

DMV Clerk Pleads Guilty To Bribes For Licenses

HOLDER ON THE ROPES

Congressman attempts to transfer Fast and Furious blame onto NRA ‘radicals,’ the Senate — Holder...

Holder, Grilled on Gun Inquiry, Says He Won’t Resign

Congressman claims Tea Party, NRA “manufactured” Fast and Furious

Fast and Furious Stonewallings Call For Eric Holder's Impeachment

Class to dispel myths about immigrants

Spirit of ousted Fast and Furious minion Dennis Burke; raised from the political afterlife

Issa threatens Holder with contempt of Congress charge(Gunwalker)

Dem Rep Says She’s Never Heard of ‘Fast and Furious’

Federal judge decides who is an ‘authorized journalist’—and who is not(gunwalker)

Eric Holder: Largest Money-Launderer in the Drug Business

Holder Testimony: Issa Attacks, Dems Push Gun-Control

Fast and Furious Victims' Voices Live On Through Their Families

Are Zetas operating as police impersonators in the United States?

Attorney General Defends Misleading Congress

Islamic terrorists plot to attack U.S. from Mexico

Is Eric Holder the new Mike Nifong?

Attorney General Milo Minderbinder (Holder)

Mexico Busts Drug Cartels' Private Phone Networks

Fugitive illegal immigrant wanted in felony hit-and-run

Holder Puts Obama in a Double Bind

Are there SECRET Fast & Furious emails from Eric Holder? (Holder Can't Give Straight Answer)

US to leave Mexican border crossing to rangers (proposal to open an unmanned port of entry)

Holder: Lying is a State of Mind- So is Impeachment

Sipsey Street Exclusive: "The greater fear within the beast." The FBI looks "invincible, but

VIDEO: Adams Grills Holder Over Fast and Furious Operation (Watch Nervous DOJer Behind Holder)

Sheriff Joe Captures Two Illegal Smugglers Who Had Been Deported 27 Times!

Latinos plan ‘Occupy Aztlán’ movement (Will Target Rich, White Areas Door-to-Door-AZ)

Anchor Baby: A Term Redefined as a Slur

GOP record on illegals: 25 years of broken promises

State, local policies emerge on illegal immigrants

Arpaio Deputies Arrest Illegals in Raid – Including One Who Stole DEAD Teen’s ID

US proposes unmanned border crossing with Mexico

Class to dispel myths about immigrants

Report: "Fast & Furious" Designed to Justify Gun Control (NRA)

Ala. GOP leaders have 2nd thoughts on immigration

Islamic terrorists plot to attack U.S. from Mexico

Fast and Furious Scandal Cries Out for Answers

Breaking: Islamic Terrorist Groups Plot Attacks on US From Mexico & Latin America (Video)

15 posted on 12/12/2011 6:00:19 AM PST by bcsco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain

Wrong, the first argument, look they voted for newt they must support amnesty. If amnesty is not the third rail, congress will pass it.


16 posted on 12/12/2011 6:00:41 AM PST by org.whodat (Just another heartless American, hated by "AMNESTY" Newt, Willard, Perry and his fellow supporters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Gingrich is not trustworthy on immigration issues. Period.

And immigration is killing us.


17 posted on 12/12/2011 6:00:51 AM PST by SharpRightTurn ( White, black, and red all over--America's affirmative action, metrosexual president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
illegal immigrants who have lived in the United States for twenty-five years

Gingrich 'mesh-muddles' all around that number.

When one news person asks him about the '25 years', Gingrich says 'he didn't say that'. In another question, a newsie asks him, then, if 15 years is okay/too long/not long enough, and he responds that it should be more like 25 years.

Gingrich slithers through his responses on the issue, as the newsies try to pin him down on specifics.

==

Other concerns:


18 posted on 12/12/2011 6:03:15 AM PST by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Good....anybody around here truly believe that any one of us We the People CITIZENS who say, just happened to have forgotten to file our tax returns, for a few years, but otherwise are “completely law-abiding” ...would be treated equally as these NON-CITIZENS here illegally?


19 posted on 12/12/2011 6:03:21 AM PST by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It’s really quite simple. All you do is ask the illegal how long they have been here and I’m sure they will tell you the truth. (sarc) This statement by Newt shows just how full of nothing he is. The Republican Party is done if they nominate him.


20 posted on 12/12/2011 6:04:57 AM PST by Hattie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Do I want every illegal deported?

Heck, yes!

But I want the border closed first. This will never happen under Obama. I believe it will happen under Newt.

He and the other candidates are correct. Until the border isn't seeping through thousands of additional illegals a month, this continues to be nothing more than a verbal exercise.

I'm personally excited about his revoking hundreds of executive orders. He is one of the few folks to talk about it and the elimination of all the bogus, extra-constitutional Czars.

21 posted on 12/12/2011 6:05:13 AM PST by TheWriterTX (Hunkering down...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
No, you have that backwards.

Diane Sawyer tried to change the time spent in the US, and Newt said, "I didn't say that."

22 posted on 12/12/2011 6:06:52 AM PST by TheWriterTX (Hunkering down...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
No, you have that backwards.

Diane Sawyer tried to change the time spent in the US, and Newt said, "I didn't say that."

23 posted on 12/12/2011 6:07:00 AM PST by TheWriterTX (Hunkering down...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I can’t see the need to have this in Breaking News unless you want a hit piece on Newt that won’t get buried.


24 posted on 12/12/2011 6:11:41 AM PST by mmanager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain
Hmmmm "long standing" ??

Well, in the 9th Circuit, that could mean you did NOT get arrested last week.

25 posted on 12/12/2011 6:12:02 AM PST by ptsal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I can’t see the need to have this in Breaking News unless you want a hit piece on Newt that won’t get buried.


26 posted on 12/12/2011 6:13:49 AM PST by mmanager
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hattie
"All you do is ask the illegal how long they have been here and I’m sure they will tell you the truth."

Give them a few days and I'm sure they'll even have documents to back that up!

27 posted on 12/12/2011 6:14:49 AM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Why do people keep saying he said they’d be US Citizens? Clearly he hasn’t said they’d be citizens. Just that they’d become legal residents.

I’m not defending his position, but at least call it what it is and describe the problem accurately.


28 posted on 12/12/2011 6:15:54 AM PST by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If the choice is between Newt and Obama, I will leave that option blank and focus on state and local races.

After Newt sinks the Republican ticket (like John McCain) or destroys the Republican Party (like George W. Bush), I will be back to tell you I told you so.


29 posted on 12/12/2011 6:29:36 AM PST by WilliamHouston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheWriterTX; TomGuy
If you look at Newt's written plan on immigration, there is no mention of any time limit. Newt is lying about the 25 years, which he uses to make the extreme case that is more favorable to this position. Sawyer was trying to nail him down on the time limit and Newt lied and said it was 25 years.

Politicians who respond that we should deport “criminal” illegal aliens and that “undocumented workers who play by the rules” should have their status regularized in some way by the federal government, i.e., pay a fine, learn English, and get to the back of the line on a earned path to citizenship are supporters of amnesty. Trying to create two classes of illegal aliens is a distinction without a difference, except if you are intent on treating them differently, i.e., providing one group with an amnesty.

30 posted on 12/12/2011 6:31:58 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: BarnacleCenturion

“I just don’t see Newt doing much better than McCain.”

That is absurd...Conservatives and Tea Partiers are flocking to Gingrich. He is the last conservative standing.

Disagree? Who is more conservative?

Romney or Obama...everybody else is dead in the water.


31 posted on 12/12/2011 6:37:50 AM PST by rbmillerjr (Conservative Economic and National Security Commentary: econus.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
Actually, what he said was a panel would judge what to do. The problem with laws is they are made in Washington, by bureaucrats. A panel could see the difference between someone that is MS13 and someone that has worked, paid taxes, and contributed to the US. If you want the guy out, send him home. If he's a fruit picker that has 3 DWI's and 2 wives, why would we keep him? Newt is just saying we can't spend the money throwing out people who are probably more patriotic than many here are. The ones with ties to La Raza or drug cartels, can go. We spend alot of money chasing mom's with 3 kids born here, just to send them home for no reason. The DWI's that have 3 alias's get treated the same as the guy working at the chicken plant for 15 years.

Newt would have to get elected and get such a program financed and passed, a big challenge for today. I think we worry too much about one issue and throw out the baby with the bathwater. I can almost guarantee none of the others will do anything like no one else has in 30 years. Bush didn't, and he knew the problems it caused in Texas. Newt can and will fix the budget and that is what we need more than tweaking Immigration. If I'm on a panel to decide, the bloodsucker on food stamps with multiple ID's, and a few run in's with the law will go home anyway.

If you want a hard and fast law that everybody without papers goes home, then we will spend billions clogging the courts to get rid of people more law abiding than some in my family. My daughter works for a local Sheriff and sees this everyday. Many "citizens" should be beaten and shot, while some guy working at the mill lives next door and hides in the shadows and volunteers at the local church. I know about the murderers and rapists, but we don't do anything to them already. At least a panel would have some sort of filter to keep some judgement in the process.

32 posted on 12/12/2011 6:38:04 AM PST by chuckles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: for-q-clinton
McCain, Kennedy, and Obama support the position of pay a fine, learn English, and get to the back of the line on an earned path to citizenship.

Newt supports the position of pay a fine, learn English, and get your status legalized. The main difference between the two is citizenship. Newt does this to sell amnesty. He creates a second class of LPR status that will never be upheld by the courts. LPRs have all the duties and privileges of citizenship except the right to vote. They can work, receive entitlement and welfare benefits, have a driver's license, be drafted, sponsor their relatives to come here legally, etc.

Any legislation that allows illegal alliens to stay and work here is amnesty. Citizenship is not the issue. Newt uses it to fool and deceive. Newt supports amnesty.

33 posted on 12/12/2011 6:40:26 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mmanager

RE: I can’t see the need to have this in Breaking News unless you want a hit piece on Newt that won’t get buried

_________________________

I was not the one who put it in the FR Front Page news. I just posted under the section of NEWS and POLITICS.

Ask the moderator why he/she deemed it worthy to be placed there.


34 posted on 12/12/2011 6:43:53 AM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
(my personal opinion of the situation) What has long been troubling is the National Security implications of those who support illegal immigration have ignored. Would NOT like to see a repeat of what someone or a group of someones are capable of from having entered this nation illegally with harm intended toward Americans on their minds. Then, the political argument turns toward security or freedom. Will attain agreement on security, and will be told freedom will suffer. Security is (imho) a byproduct which moves hand in hand with freedom. The argument, of such, is normally never made by those who argue freedom over security. This causes (me) to then question the motives of those arguing security is sacrificed to ensure freedom. Perhaps I do too much questioning?

It is true the dynamics of language, in our nation, is changing in unthinkable ways. Language sometimes gives an impression of one and then the question does arise, what is the intent of speaking other than English? Is it too make the English speaking nation uncomfortable, or is it more sinister? Since language is one of the keystones of a society, and all here know the story of Babylon, another question arises, regarding National Security, and why would our politicians not make it clear, English is spoken here?

Who is the enemy? With the current state of affairs, guess who is not. Much more difficultly based in language, and the enemy knows this. Otherwise language would be of no consequence (imho). Should one expect our politicians to rush forward to assure the public, English is our official language, and inform those illegally here English shall be officially the language spoken during the conduction of all business within the bounds of America? Regrettably no, though (imho) it would send a signal to the enemy. Our politicians had best know what they are doing, for the barriers to understanding and comfort are growing. Though when one looks at the flip side, a trap could be being set? Wonder if the trap works more ways than one? No doubt.

35 posted on 12/12/2011 6:45:08 AM PST by no-to-illegals (Please God, Protect and Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform with Victory. Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chuckles
We have something called the Rule of Law. If you are here illegally, you should be deported regardless of how "law-abiding" you might be.

The proponents of amnesty are wont to create the false choice between a blanket amnesty and mass deportation of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. In reality, we have other choices and alternatives that don’t reward people who have broken our laws with the right to stay and work here and an eventual path to citizenship. The 12 to 20 million illegal aliens did not enter this country overnight and they will not leave overnight. Attrition through enforcement works. We have empirical data from Georgia, Oklahoma, and Arizona proving that it does.

At least a panel would have some sort of filter to keep some judgement in the process.

First, Newt assumes the illegals will come forward and subject themselves to such a judgment. I doubt that the estimated 2 million "criminal aliens" will appear before these local community panels. And what do you think the panels in sanctuary cities like LA, SF, Chicago, Washington DC, etc will decide on who can stay and who must go? Newt's ideas are fantasy. They are uneforceable and unworkable. It is a fairy tale for those gullible to believe in such solutions.

36 posted on 12/12/2011 6:50:03 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: chuckles
We have something called the Rule of Law. If you are here illegally, you should be deported regardless of how "law-abiding" you might be.

The proponents of amnesty are wont to create the false choice between a blanket amnesty and mass deportation of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. In reality, we have other choices and alternatives that don’t reward people who have broken our laws with the right to stay and work here and an eventual path to citizenship. The 12 to 20 million illegal aliens did not enter this country overnight and they will not leave overnight. Attrition through enforcement works. We have empirical data from Georgia, Oklahoma, and Arizona proving that it does.

At least a panel would have some sort of filter to keep some judgement in the process.

First, Newt assumes the illegals will come forward and subject themselves to such a judgment. I doubt that the estimated 2 million "criminal aliens" will appear before these local community panels. And what do you think the panels in sanctuary cities like LA, SF, Chicago, Washington DC, etc will decide on who can stay and who must go? Newt's ideas are fantasy. They are uneforceable and unworkable. It is a fairy tale for those gullible to believe in such solutions.

37 posted on 12/12/2011 6:50:03 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: chuckles
We have something called the Rule of Law. If you are here illegally, you should be deported regardless of how "law-abiding" you might be.

The proponents of amnesty are wont to create the false choice between a blanket amnesty and mass deportation of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. In reality, we have other choices and alternatives that don’t reward people who have broken our laws with the right to stay and work here and an eventual path to citizenship. The 12 to 20 million illegal aliens did not enter this country overnight and they will not leave overnight. Attrition through enforcement works. We have empirical data from Georgia, Oklahoma, and Arizona proving that it does.

At least a panel would have some sort of filter to keep some judgement in the process.

First, Newt assumes the illegals will come forward and subject themselves to such a judgment. I doubt that the estimated 2 million "criminal aliens" will appear before these local community panels. And what do you think the panels in sanctuary cities like LA, SF, Chicago, Washington DC, etc will decide on who can stay and who must go? Newt's ideas are fantasy. They are uneforceable and unworkable. It is a fairy tale for those gullible to believe in such solutions.

38 posted on 12/12/2011 6:50:22 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: kabar
Sawyer was trying to nail him down on the time limit and Newt lied and said it was 25 years.

I caught an after-debate interview with Gingrich after one of the other debates. He was questioned about the '25 year' requirement. At that time, he said it wasn't '25 years'.

That is what I mean by my previous post: he mesh-muddles all around the issue without giving any specifics that he can be pinned down on. I think I used the word 'slithering' to describe his movements on the issue. :)


39 posted on 12/12/2011 6:54:35 AM PST by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: chuckles

If they were law-abiding they wouldn’t be there...

Do you also think that law-abiding tax-evaders should get off scot free for avoiding taxes for a couple of decades if only they pay taxes from now on?


40 posted on 12/12/2011 7:01:32 AM PST by LastNorwegian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
This is Newt's own written plan on who can stay and who must go:

We need a path to legality, but not citizenship, for some of these individuals who have deep ties to America, including family, church and community ties. We also need a path to swift but dignified repatriation for those who are transient and have no roots in America.

This is just amorphous pap that provides no real details on exactly how such a proposal would be administered. How does he define "deep roots" versus "no roots" in America? Family, church, and communtiy ties? This is just a smokescreen for amnesty that is no different than McCain and Obama who want to deport the 2 million "criminal aliens immediately and allow the rest to stay. With 8 million illegal aliens holding jobs in this country, why would you want to legalize their status when 25 million American citizens and LPRs are looking for fulltime employment?

41 posted on 12/12/2011 7:09:52 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain

Absolutely right! and btw..Newt NEVER said any illegals would be granted citizenship or amnesty.


42 posted on 12/12/2011 7:23:09 AM PST by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: heiss

Please send me the link in which Newt promised amnesty to illegals. Would prefer it be explicit.


43 posted on 12/12/2011 7:25:02 AM PST by katiedidit1 ("This is one race of people for whom psychoanalysis is of no use whatsoever." the Irish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kabar

I always equated amnesty to getting citizenship and the right to vote. That’s the biggest fear I think most conservatives have...is turning lose a bunch of line jumpers on the polls to vote their more freebies for their relatives to come and get some.

What do we do today with someone that has been here 30 years illegally? Do we deport them? If not, are we better off just letting them stay here illegaly, give them a path to residency, or do we round them up and send them back home (where ever that is)?


44 posted on 12/12/2011 7:27:45 AM PST by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

It means AMNESTY... and I will no longer accept spin and lies. Webster’s dictionary defines AMNESTY and PARDON... look them up.

LLS


45 posted on 12/12/2011 7:29:25 AM PST by LibLieSlayer ("Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness." Ronaldo Magnus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain

You might be surprised at the number of people on this forum who think anyone who says anything kind or reasonable about illegals is dead meat.

I don’t think this will hurt Newt either, but it should at least shut people up who’ve been criticizing Rick Perry for far less radical statements and actions.


46 posted on 12/12/2011 7:31:48 AM PST by altura (Perry 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: for-q-clinton
I will tell you what it is... it is progressive INCREMENTALISM PERIOD. Once they are legal residents... they will file suit against the government for discrimination and the march to citizenship is assured. These people cannot speak English... the majority cannot... they will not assimilate because they have not to date... many support reconquesta and la raza... they are enemy invaders.

LLS

47 posted on 12/12/2011 7:36:20 AM PST by LibLieSlayer ("Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness." Ronaldo Magnus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: for-q-clinton
Definition: Amnesty, from the same Greek root as "amnesia," forgives past crimes and removes them from the record for future purposes. In the context of immigration, amnesty is commonly defined as granting legal status to a group of individuals unlawfully present in a country. It overlooks the alien's illegal entry and ongoing illegal presence and creates a new legal status that allows the recipient to live and work in the country.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986: The textbook example of an amnesty. The 1986 law's path to citizenship was not automatic. The legislation stipulated several requirements to receive amnesty, including payment of application fees, acquisition of English-language skills, understanding of American civics, a medical exam, and registration for military service. Individuals convicted of a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible. No one disputes that this act provided amnesty. Supporters said it would be a “one-time” amnesty. It was estimated that one million would apply, but the true number turned out to be 2.7 million.

Any legislation that legalizes the status of those who broke our laws by entering our country illegally and allows them to stay is amnesty. We must not only prevent the Democrats and some moderate Republicans from hijacking the meaning of the word amnesty, but the public must be made aware about the true impact of an amnesty. The Heritage Foundation concluded that the cost of amnesty alone would be $2.6 trillion. And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who would join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification, would approach 70 million over a 20-year period, assuming there are only 12 million illegal aliens. We cannot assimilate such numbers. An amnesty would destroy the United States of America with the stroke of a pen.

What do we do today with someone that has been here 30 years illegally? Do we deport them? If not, are we better off just letting them stay here illegaly, give them a path to residency, or do we round them up and send them back home (where ever that is)?

No one is proposing that we "round them up." The proponents of amnesty are wont to create the false choice between a blanket amnesty and mass deportation of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. In reality, we have other choices and alternatives that don’t reward people who have broken our laws with the right to stay and work here and an eventual path to citizenship. The 12 to 20 million illegal aliens did not enter this country overnight and they will not leave overnight. Attrition through enforcement works. We have empirical data from Georgia, Oklahoma, and Arizona proving that it does.

If you allow those lawbreakers to stay and work here, the object of their crime, then you send the message that all you have to do is just get to the US and eventually have your status legalized. Conferring rights and privileges upon illegal aliens has a corrosive effect on the Rule of Law, the very foundation of our Republic. It is also a slap in the face to legal immigrants who have followed the rules and obeyed the laws. There are millions of immigrants waiting their turn overseas to enter the U.S. legally and approximately 40 million immigrants living in the U.S., most of whom followed the law.

What do we do today with someone that has been here 30 years illegally?

FYI: We had a one time amnesty 25 years ago in 1986. The proponents like Ted Kennedy said it be the first and only amnesty and that it would solve our illegal immigration problem. The government estimated 1 million would apply, but the true number turned out to be 2.7 million. We now have 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. When you reward something, you get more of it. I see no real urgency to addressing the legal status of the current crop of lawbreakers. Let's try enforcing our laws and securing our borders, including implementing fully the US-VISIT program to track and deport visa overstays. 40% of the illegal aliens in this country came here legally and overstayed their visas.

48 posted on 12/12/2011 7:57:10 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: katiedidit1
Absolutely right! and btw..Newt NEVER said any illegals would be granted citizenship or amnesty.

Definition: Amnesty, from the same Greek root as "amnesia," forgives past crimes and removes them from the record for future purposes. In the context of immigration, amnesty is commonly defined as granting legal status to a group of individuals unlawfully present in a country. It overlooks the alien's illegal entry and ongoing illegal presence and creates a new legal status that allows the recipient to live and work in the country.

You are confusing amnesty with the right to citizenship. You don't need a path to citizenship to have an amnesty. In fact, many recipents of the 1986 amnesty chose not to be citizens but just green card holders, Legal Permanent Residents who enjoy almost all the rights and benefits of being a citizen except voting.

Do you support Obama's current "backdoor amnesty" of over 300,000 deportation cases that are being reviewed to allow their deportation rulings to be overturned and closed allowing them to stay and receive work permits?

49 posted on 12/12/2011 8:08:23 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Happy Rain
Amnesty for illegals ain't going anywhere so this hit on Newt is moot.

You're "whistling past the graveyard" if you believe that bit of nonsense.

The GOP will jump at the chance with a GOP controlled house and senate to use the President as cover to get this past.

Newt will refine Bush's attempt at this boondoggle just enough to get it to past Home Plate.

Watch and Learn.
50 posted on 12/12/2011 8:42:22 AM PST by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-58 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