Posted on 01/26/2012 1:29:37 AM PST by AmericanInTokyo
MIAMI — Fighting to curry favor with Florida’s large pool of Hispanic voters, Newt Gingrich on Wednesday called for a guest-worker program for most illegal immigrants, but his campaign could not say whether those people would be on a path to citizenship - the key question in the immigration debate.
Under close questioning by Univision’s political host, Jorge Ramos, Mr. Gingrich said he would grant quick citizenship rights to illegal immigrants...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
No Newt? Not ‘conservative enough for you? Fine, then Vote for Mitt, Obama, or neither which results in one of the two anyway while sleeping secure in your purity.
Your choice.
If Newt wins, we will have to get ready to put a full court press on Congress to block any amnesty proposal, just like we did with Jorge Bush. I wish Newt were as good on immigration as Bachmann; unfortunately, he’s not.
Immigration (yes, including legal immigration) is killing us.
Saying “vote for Romney or Obama” doesn’t make Newt’s problems go away.
I have every intention of voting for Newt if he gets the nomination, and working very hard to get him elected.
That doesn’t mean I’m going to gloss over his glaring failures of conservative instinct. Nor is anyone else, believe me. So best get used to it and figure out how to combat it.
Here’s a thought, It’s easier to ‘combat it’ when it’s just the dems raising the issue every 5 min. You are doing their job for them.
Step 1, elect Newt
Step 2, keep him on the reservation.
No one thinks he’s perfect.
The difference is that nobody wants to immigrate to Mexico (or not nearly on the scale of people who want to immigrate to the US!). We actually have all of those requirements in our own law, but because we have a complicated structure of quotas (for refugee or other special status, countries, regions, job categories, etc.) it’s not particularly relevant.
We need to redo the entire system.
It’d take a few years, but this is Newt essentially turning out the conservative and GOP lights in this country behind him.
If it’s not sufficiently ‘humanitarian’ to make illegals who “go to church and are in our communities” go home, there’s no way it’d be considered humanitarian to make these millions of now legal, permanent residents voting US citizens (their offspring of course already would be).
We are in a terrible fix re: this election and the future of our country.
The whole lot of them are part and parcel of the immigration problem which is destroying America.
They have allowed it, they have encouraged it, and they lack the COURAGE to do anything of substance to fix it (as it would mess up the little nests they have feathered for themselves).
Anyone who believes otherwise is an idiot. I truly detest these people, but we’re stuck with them as our nominees.
Dare I agree with you?
I hope you manage to stick around until the primaries are over and a candidate has been chosen.
I liked Rick Perry, but now we have to go with what’s left.
But after blowback from FLA GOP Hispanics (Rubio, et al), he immediately pulls the ads and is now all gung-ho for "Pathways To Citizenship" for illegals, and mocking Romney's plans to increase the self-deportation flow via actually enforcing existing laws.
What's the proper term for simultaneous FlipFlopping + Pandering?
A Flippander?
Panderflop?
Flipanderflop?
Or was Newt’s pulled ad one that claimed that Romney was *anti-* immigrant? If so, then maybe it’s just a simple flipless pander.
Congress must charge the Department of Justice to establish a “citizens’ review” process for those here outside the law. It would establish committees to process these cases in individual communities and determine who will continue on this path to legality, and who will be sent home. Congress must define understandable, clear, objective legal standards that will be applied equally during this process.
.............
This is the key language where the USA would get screwed. The problem here is not that Congress would set out clear guidelines—rather the problem is that local would have the ultimate AUTHORITY to determine “who will continue on this path to legality”.
It absolutely does NOT matter what guideline the Congress lays down. It will be obeyed to the letter in American counties. But in counties that have heavy illegal populations —distant congressional directives will be totally IGNORED.
If you don’t get this then study what happened to the Reagan law that was passed in 1986. The border enforcement part of the law was totally ignored and the Mexicans saw the law as a surrender and began to pour over the border.
Congress must charge the Department of Justice to establish a “citizens’ review” process for those here outside the law. It would establish committees to process these cases in individual communities and determine who will continue on this path to legality, and who will be sent home. Congress must define understandable, clear, objective legal standards that will be applied equally during this process.
.............
This is the key language where the USA would get screwed. The problem here is not that Congress would set out clear guidelines—rather the problem is that local would have the ultimate AUTHORITY to determine “who will continue on this path to legality”.
It absolutely does NOT matter what guideline the Congress lays down. It will be obeyed to the letter in American counties. But in counties that have heavy illegal populations —distant congressional directives will be totally IGNORED.
If you don’t get this then study what happened to the Reagan law that was passed in 1986. The border enforcement part of the law was totally ignored and the Mexicans saw the law as a surrender and began to pour over the border.
yeah this is right.
Courage, my man!
Thanks for the kind words.
Chain Migration - which is the official term for extended family immigration - is central to our current predicament.
In 2010, 75% of new Green Cards were issued to family members of recent immigrants.
I support a money based immigration policy.
Applicants should be ranked by salary, with a strictly enforced minimum pay level.
If some American company is willing to pay you $150,000 a year, that’s good enough for me.
If this guy loses his job next year, tough, go home.
Foreign business owners and foreign entrepreneurs would be a more complex issue, but something like a guaranteed, bonded minimum tax contribution each year would be sensible starting point.
If these guys or women can stay above the minimum financial requirements for three years - BINGO - welcome to the USA fellow citizen.
Below is the key provision in Newt’s proposal to let in illegals.
............
“
Congress must charge the Department of Justice to establish a “citizens’ review” process for those here outside the law. It would establish committees to process these cases in individual communities and determine who will continue on this path to legality, and who will be sent home. Congress must define understandable, clear, objective legal standards that will be applied equally during this process.
“
.............
This is the key language where the USA would get screwed. The problem here is not that Congress would set out clear guidelines—rather the problem is that local would have the ultimate AUTHORITY to determine “who will continue on this path to legality”.
It absolutely does NOT matter what guideline the Congress lays down. It will be obeyed to the letter in American counties. But in counties that have heavy illegal populations —distant congressional directives will be totally IGNORED. These counties will let in EVERYONE—especially from countries of the county’s dominant ethnic group. These counties will become counties that attract illegals from all over the USA. Further these counties will attract and give entry to illegals from all over the world.
If you don’t get this then study what happened to the Reagan law that was passed in 1986. The border enforcement part of the law was totally ignored and the Mexicans saw the law as a surrender and began to pour over the border.
Excellent points.
If a written law is not enforced, then what’s the point of the law?
If the Constitution can be whimsically interpreted by any federal judge, then what’s the point of a Constitution?
And voila, lots of Nuevo Mexico Cities and the like.
It would be ugly. Ghettos.
If there is a bright side of it, the ghettos concentrating the “ex illegales” in a few small spots will reduce their electoral impact versus spreading out.
But I think Congress is going to barf at the idea of these ghettos. And as now, nothing will be done.
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.