Posted on 12/02/2011 12:33:07 PM PST by presidio9
Immigration has always been a hot-button issue for both sides of the aisle, and in the 2012 presidential election, things are not going to be different. That's why former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich is making headlines for advocating for a more "humane" approach for dealing with the roughly 11 million illegal aliens in this country.
Gingrich, who is rising in most polls, endorsed a version of amnesty that would grant long-term undocumented aliens a "red card" visa, allowing them to gain legal status without earning U.S. citizenship.
"If you've been here 25 years and you got three kids and two grandkids, you've been paying taxes and obeying the law, you belong to a local church, I don't think we're going to separate you from your family, uproot you forcefully and kick you out," he argued.
"I don't see how the party that says it's the party of the family is going to adopt an immigration policy which destroys families that have been here a quarter century."
He also backed certain provisions of the DREAM Act, which would award a path to citizenship for young illegal immigrants who serve our country in the armed forces or attend college and have a spotless background.
Because of this position, Gingrich is feeling major heat. Some have editorialized his position as damaging. Others are calling it a "stumble." One conservative columnist, Thomas Sowell, wrote on National Review Online that Gingrich's position is "more baggage that he needs to overcome."
But the former speaker is right. This country has become the greatest in the world thanks to immigrants who left their nations in search of America's promise. If you want to come here and work hard, there should be a process in place for you to do that. And if you've been here for, say, 25 years and pose no threat, you should be allowed to stay, not forcibly be sent back.
It takes courage to say what Gingrich said. In the GOP primary races, candidates tend to err on the side of unrealistic but popular proposals. They say what they think the right wing wants to hear, not what is workable.
The reality is that if you're a Republican who lives in a state that is flush with immigrants, including illegals, you need to make tough decisions that while on a chalkboard might seem questionable, in practice are necessary. Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani is a perfect example of a conservative who can look at the issue without ideological blinders, defending an executive order that protected illegals who report crime from getting deported.
Despite the firestorm Gingrich is feeling from his opponents, most of the candidates criticizing Gingrich for his position have staked out similar ground in the past.
After Gingrich made his comments at a Republican debate, GOP front-runner and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney pounced. But he has taken positions in the past that mirror Gingrich's, and has yet to provide a clear answer on what he would do about immigration.
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) blasted Gingrich as having the most liberal position out of the entire field, but in a September debate, Bachmann expressed the same core conviction: You can't deport 11 million illegals, many of whom have been living here for decades. She, like Romney, has not given specifics about how illegals would be treated under her presidency.
But Gingrich's position could help his candidacy — and his party. It's much like that of President Ronald Reagan: "If you have come here recently, you have no ties to this country, you ought to go home, period," Gingrich has said.
Not only will Gingrich's stance do well in the general election, where getting at least 25% of the Hispanic vote is critical, it will help him in key primary states — even Iowa, where immigration has become a front-burner issue.
Immigration is a great thing. We want the Chinese scientists, the patent creators, the Andrew Carnegies and the Greek diner owners like my father who were elated when they found out that they could work seven days a week in the U.S.
But most importantly, we want a President who has the smarts to find solutions and the guts to say them out loud. Gingrich is a guy who often says what is impolitic because he thinks it's right. It's refreshing, especially when most politicians are afraid to buck the status quo. His stance on immigration is looking like a breakthrough moment for an old face now quickly becoming the comeback candidate.
Here are a few mistakes, and things she left out:
Thomas Sowell agreed with much of Gingrich's plan, but thought it was too much of a political risk at this time.
Gingrich was a leading opponent of the DREAM Act. His plan would allow only minors who were brought to this country by their parents to gain citizenship through military service. It is not DREAM Act II.
Tantaros neglects to mention that none of the other candidates actually HAS a comprehensive immigration plan. They are content to demonize and take pot shots from the peanut gallery. This type of political gamesmanship from Democrats is the primary reason that we have not been able to fix Social Security or balance the budget.
We have immigration laws that must be enforced.
Claiming we must revise laws is just another way to avoid doing what must be done: enforcing the existent laws.
Once we have 11 million permanent legal residents who cannot vote, how long does anyone think it will take before granting them full citizenship (with the ability to vote for Democrats) becomes the next big civil rights issue?
Cain does. He want's to electicute them and feed them to the gators.
And his view on climate change (along with Nancy Pelosi) proves he has a better grasp on that particular issue than does GOP rivals…puke.
Pie in the sky nonsense.
“smarts ... guts to say them out loud. Gingrich is a guy who often says what is impolitic ... refreshing, especially when most politicians are afraid to buck the status quo”
“If you have come here recently, you have no ties to this country, you ought to go home, period,” Gingrich has said.
You ought to go home. Now there’s a profile in courage.
(But you won’t? Aw, c’mon! No? Por favor! Pretty please?)
“Immigration is a great thing. We want the Chinese scientists, the patent creators, the Andrew Carnegies and the Greek diner owners ...”
This article reeks.
This country was founded by rebellious Anglo-Americans who fought to the death against big government, fool. No Hispanic nation has ever stood for our values. They had their chance. They had their own countries. We don't want them ruining ours.
Once they have legal status, e.g. red card, then courts or executive order can give them citizens more easily. In anycase, this would further increase illegal immigration.
Fence and e-verify would largely solve issue. We don’t need amnesty plan.
Lucky for all, this is Gingrich's second priority after sealing the border. Unfortunately, simply enforcing the existing laws will not solve the problem by itself.
RINO Newt is all over the map on immigration. His pro-amnesty supporters are giddy that his latest position is pro-amnesty even though he has said in the past that he is NOT for amnesty.
I am not for amnesty for anyone. I am for a path to legality for those people whose ties are so deeply into America that it would truly be tragic to try and rip their family apart."
~Newt Gingrich 2011
Anything less than requiring people who are working here illegally to return home to apply for a worker visa is amnesty.
~Newt Gingrich 2006
They’re gonna sell the beltway turd if it’s the last thing they do.
Like a lot of very smart people, prior to 2009 Gingrich based his opinions on research that have since been determined to have been falsified by East Anglia University. He has since reevaluated his position on climate change. It may not be very popular on this website, but it is the correct one: "We do not know if the planet is getting warming, or his we are causing it."
Everyone agrees that sealing the border is the top priority. EVerify will have no effect on the millions of illegals who are not employees but independant contractors, working for individuals as baby sitters, gardeners, delivery boys, livery cab drivers, nannies, prostitutes, maids, caddies, handy men, the list is endless.
Furthermore, the only individuals that Gingrich is offering legal status to are people who have been here for years, are supporting themselves, have health insurance, pay taxes, have relatives who are themselves citizens, and have no criminal record. Suppose we actually WERE able to take away any possiblilty for these people to work. Do you really think that their large Catholic families won't just take them in and provide from them anyway? Short of hunting them down and deporting them, they are not leaving.
I for one am sick and tired of this paradigm that it is “inhumane” to insist that illegal immigrants go home.
We don’t want to torture them. We don’t want to abuse them. We don’t want to turn them into slave labor or chain them to posts in the desert to die of thirst. We really don’t want anything bad to happen to them at all.
We simply want them to go home.
I have a feeling we're not really talking about people who have been here for at least 25 years. Most of those were probably amnestied already under the 1986 law signed by RWR.
The 25 year requirement is going to be reduced after the election. The question is to what? Five, ten??
The "worker visa" visa that Gingrich is referring to there is a non-existant proposal as part of a 25 page document he published in 2006 in opposition to the DREAM Act.
The is the sort of thing James Axelrod likes to do, like when he ignored the truth and played McCain's "The fundamentals of the economy" quote endlessly.
Actually, none of this is really up to any president, Republican or Democrat.
Agreed. But what if they don't?
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.