Posted on 08/10/2015 9:30:44 PM PDT by Steelfish
When Eisenhower made it clear that he intended to enforce the law and deport illegals many began removing themselves. Some will choose to do that on their own terms once they see a President who isn’t going to put their interests first.
I still think that asset forfeiture is the way to go about this. Given the choice between leaving with their stuff or having it confiscated as they get booted will focus some minds.
The wall that will keep illegal immigrants out is not physical...it is a combination of things.
-No welfare for immigrants, legal or illegal.
-Strict enforcement of laws prohibiting the employment of illegals.
-Ending the citizenship birthright..no more anchor babies.
-No home sales and no renting unless verified to be a legal US resident.
-No driving privilege for illegals, a year at hard labor for any caught driving under the influence... building a wall perhaps.
Trump is giving lip-service to the idea of letting some illegals back in if they are proved to have been worthy residents in the US. But he won’t let 99.99% of them back in once they are gone. It’s just a ploy so amnesty lovers heads won’t explode. Trump is a clever businessman, he knows how to play the game. He knows the GOPee wants cheap labor and the Dems want cheap votes and a permanent welfare-addicted latino subclass to ensure permanent Demo rule. If he convinces both groups that the illegals will be able to come back at some point they won’t go batshit crazy on him.
>How awful that NR has gone GOPe.
>>How awful some have gone pro amnesty.
How clever. But how do you know that Trump has not had a genuine change of opinion on the subject?
Another relic of Conservative opinion flailing for a remnant of relevance.
Worry about what the terrible things Trump will do on immigration if he wins the primary and/or wins the general.
The last person the open borders lobby want in the medium term as GOP nominee is Trump because of the anger Trump is whipping up and fear of the incumbent RINOs in congress.
What is this the seoncd... the second editorial from these people against Trump?
They did the exact same thing to REagan....the exact same thing.
Why should a candidate get specifit this early on? There are so many low info voters out there, that it’s best you make it simple for them.
Instead of a long dissertation about getting rid of the EPA, why not just say, Colorado shows we should get rid of the EPA.
Idiots...
Talk about incoherent - the only thing obvious is that the author wants to protect the GOPe/RINOs and other commies - just not good at saying it.
bkmk
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.