Immigration Debate Unifies California GOP (Party Is Secure Borders Anti-Amnesty Alert)

Los Angeles Times ^ | 12/05/2007 | Phil Watson

[pissant]

I’ve discovered that most republicans have as little knowledge about politics and conservatism as most democrats.

[calcowgirl]

...the California GOP leadership would take a twelve month vacation leading up to election day.

Either that or sharpen their knives and thrust them in the back of any conservative candidate.

[DoughtyOne]

Yes, they seem capable of just about anything ‘to help’. ;-)

[Norseman]

The CAGOP is against amnesty and for secure borders. It has unified rather than split the state party.

Sure, the party appears more unified, but:

1) It sure seems smaller as a result and,

2) The only leadership that can get elected statewide has figured out that they can't adopt the same position as the base.

Please don't misunderstand me. I'm against illegal immigration. However, I'm also pro-immigration generally. The way Republicans talk lately (especially Hannity and O'Reilly) the "pro-immigration" part gets totally obscured.

I'll say it again. Huckabee has this figured out. And yes, maybe he'll come down in favor of some sort of "amnesty" but anything short of "send everyone home no matter what if they or their parents or their grandparents got here illegally" is amnesty to a lot of you. Problem is, you can't win an election on that platform, though I guess it feels real good to keep shouting it.

As I see it, it's a two-part problem. One, what do we do about porous borders? Answer: Close 'em. Two: what do we do about the 20-25 million illegals who walked across when we had open borders (effectively)? My answer: Use some common sense and realize that most are hard-working people trying to help their families, then find a legal way for them to eventually continue doing that. There are plenty of options, but anything short of "send the ALL home" brings shouts of "Amnesty, Amnesty!" from too many people, especially in here.

I'm pretty sure Huckabee's answer is pretty close to mine, so let's see how the general electorate responds to his message. My bet? He continues to make significant gains the more people hear. But we'll see.

[CottonBall]

My answer: Use some common sense and realize that most are hard-working people trying to help their families, then find a legal way for them to eventually continue doing that. There are plenty of options, but anything short of "send the ALL home" brings shouts of "Amnesty, Amnesty!" from too many people, especially in here.

That's because allowing people who broke our laws to get here to stay IS amnesty. The 1986 Amnesty Bill was called just that because it gave the criminals amnesty. The term was used honestly back then - and today you guys try to cover up what you are really for by using PC terms. But - it doesn't work. Every single amnesty bill has failed in the Senate in the last few years because the people know exactly what you are trying to do. People were irate and let their representatives know it.

I'm pretty sure Huckabee's answer is pretty close to mine, so let's see how the general electorate responds to his message. My bet? He continues to make significant gains the more people hear. But we'll see.

If that happens, then conservatism is dead. And 2008 will be a repeat of 2006. The Republican base will stay home or vote 3rd party.

[Kevmo]

Good enough place to bump this thread for later.

bmflr

.

.

Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts