Posted on 01/29/2013 11:11:39 AM PST by posterchild
A conservative pro-immigration reform group has issued talking points to Republican lawmakers, telling them to avoid referring to the children of illegal immigrants as "anchor babies" or calling for the construction of an "electric fence" on the border, among other things.
The talking points, published by BuzzFeed, went out to Republican lawmakers on the Hill as momentum builds for an immigration bill that would legalize most of the country's 11 million illegal immigrants. The memo urges lawmakers to call illegal immigrants "undocumented immigrants" and to avoid terms such as "aliens" or "illegals." Another phrase to avoid? "Send them all back."
"Conservatives get a bad rap when it comes to immigration reform because of a few people who say things that can be taken to be offensive," said Jennifer Korn, executive director of the Hispanic Leadership Network, the center-right group that sent the talking points on Monday. "It all means the same thing, but the way you say it matters."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
If the Hispanics who live here had wanted to live in a Hispanic country they would have stayed where they were. They also know that ANY ethnic group that ‘takes over’ will ruin the balance that makes the country work...
‘earned legal status’ ???
earned ?
“Conservative Hispanic group tells GOP to avoid ‘amnesty’ label”
NO true conservative actually believes in amnesty. I’ll stop using the terms anchor babies’ or electric fence’ the day I stop pressing 1 for English.
The comments ( yes i did) are overwhelmingly anti amnesty.
An ex girlfriend from Mexico (violating the terms of her tourist visa by working in the US) would talk with her friends back in 2000 about the coming amnistia. Did 13 years change the language that much or is it only a forbidden word in English?
You give citizenship to people that crossed into the U.S. without legal permission! What the f*ck else is it called?
“Conservative Hispanic group” and not one American in the bunch.
“conservative pro-immigration”
I stopped right there. It’s not credible.
Amnesty... no amnesty... “path the citizenship”... “earned legal status... temporary guest worker program... yada, yada, yada.
None of it matters, one way or the other, unless and until the border is secured. There are two completely separate issues at play:
1) Stopping the influx of illegal immigrants
2) Dealing with illegal immigrants already here
You can’t effectively resolve #2 until you resolve #1. If we found some magic formulation as to what to do with illegal immigrants already in the US that would make EVERYBODY happy, it would still be pointless without a secured border — because the second you’ve dealt with the millions already here, you have new case #1 crossing the border, and you’re back to square 1.
Close the border. Then, and only then, can we talk reasonably about our options.
Do a search for Jeb Bush and Hispanic Leadership Network.
All of these ammnesty lovers are in for a big shock when the announcement is made that all the 11 million illegals are now elibible for a path to citizeship and only 10 come out of the shadows. Most of them have no desire whatsoever to become US citizens.
That’s part of the problem. The illegal’s don’t want to be identified as breaking the law. But they are. Undocumented doesn’t relate necessarily with breaking the law. They are also alien to this land. Ergo, illegal alien. Anchor baby. Easier to say than a child of an illegal alien who was born in this country. Talking points = Politically correct. I’m not.
Link
Illegal aliens are government growth hormone.
30 million illegals is enough to create some 50 new primarily democrat congressional districts with all the costs, pork, earmarks, entitlements, and liberal votes associated with them.
Anyone who supports amnesty and calls themselves a conservative is a liar.
they’re using the leftist tactic of normalization here folks. Ask them one thing-If we don’t stop the flow of illegals from countries unwilling to do the things necessary to make things good enough that their citizens want to stay just how long before we’re granting a third amnesty because our politicians aren’t willing to put the interests of the country before their own political power?
Even if they were all 100% millionaire conservative capitalists I would still be against 1) giving an advantage to those who broke the law over those who followed it, and 2) trusting the federal government to engage in any enforcement when they’ve failed so miserably in the past decades.
Being conservative & pro-immigration is perfectly credible. It’s being conservative and pro-illegal-immigration that’s an impossibility.
Just a REMINDER for those who see RUBIO in 2016....
Doing exactly as he’s been told....
“Sen. Marco Rubio, a Republican from Florida who’s part of a bipartisan group of senators pushing for immigration reform, has used “earned residency” at times....”
Also, Jan Brewer favors amnesty as well.
Au contraire, my friend. The legal immigrants coming in are overwhelmingly candidates for welfare from the time they plant their first toe on our soil. If your image of the average immigrant is some scientist or inventor, you need to do some more research. And the legal immigrants are not voting conservative and are not apt to given the pool from which they come. We have two huge problems: (i) illegal immigration, and (ii) legal immigration. To think otherwise is to bury your head in the sand. Do some research at https://www.numbersusa.com/content/issues.html to find out what our disastrous current legal immigration policy is doing to us.
Perhaps I should elaborate. Being conservative and pro-welfare-state is an impossibility.
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.