Skip to comments.Gingrich, Vitter, National Review, Malkin, Coulter, Erickson oppose Rubio’s immigration plan
Posted on 01/30/2013 2:10:36 PM PST by SeekAndFind
The key subplot to Rubio's immigration push, of course, is how much of a headache it'll be for him with conservatives in the 2016 primaries. The talk-radio charm offensive is mainly designed to get grassroots opinion-shapers like Rush to at least wait and see what the bill looks like before lobbying against it, but more broadly it's designed to move the Overton window on what positions are acceptable for a good conservative to hold. Rubio can afford to have immigration reform fail; he can't afford to be RINO-ized over it. Like I said yesterday, whether or not a bill ends up passing, he’s already achieved something significant by getting Rush et al. to acknowledge that “recognizing reality” in terms of a grand bargain on immigration is something “admirable and noteworthy.” No matter what happens now, unless he ends up voting for a watered-down Democratic bill with token enforcement (which he won’t), he’s got that as a soundbite for his primary ads in 2016. James Antle makes a good point too in noting that none of Rubio’s would-be rivals for the nomination have attacked him on this yet. Jindal, Paul, and Christie have all kept quiet and Ryan has actually endorsed Rubio’s plan. The likely candidates don’t want to alienate Latino voters and the pundits with big audiences don’t want to kneecap a guy who might end up being the party’s best chance to regain the presidency.
So how’s all of this playing with conservatives in the Senate and online? Is Rubiomania enough in itself to convince people to reserve judgment until the first draft bill hits the floor in March? Not yet:
I love and respect Marco. I think hes just amazingly naïve on this issue, Vitter said. This is the same old formula that weve dealt with before, including when it passed in 1986, and that is promises of enforcement and immediate amnesty. And of course, the promises of enforcement never materialize. The amnesty happens immediately the millisecond the bill is signed into law, and the same is true here. No, they wont be citizens immediately. They will be legal.
Citizenship is guaranteed at that point as a practical matter, he added…
Look, as soon as you give these people a legal status, to say that youre going to reverse that is ridiculous, Vitter said. Itll never happen. As soon as you give them a legal status, they are here legally forever and probably theyre citizens pretty darn soon after. And if Marco thinks no matter what happens or doesnt happen on the enforcement side thats not going to happen, I just think hes nuts.
Yeah, Rubio’s wisely focused on the enforcement provisions in his chats with conservative media but even if he gets Schumer et al. to bend a little on those — which I think they will, if only because enforcement can be eroded over time — he’s got the problem Vitter mentions of immediate probationary legal status for illegals who are already here. I don’t think Schumer will be as yielding about that. Neither does National Review, which opposes the bill in part on grounds that, let’s face it, there’s no way Democrats can be trusted on this issue:
[B]roader reform measures must wait until credible enforcement mechanisms are in place. Those mechanisms include, at a minimum, a physically secured border and mandatory universal use of the E-Verify system, which confirms the legal status of new hires. We agree with Senator Rubios view that we cant be the only nation in the world that does not enforce its immigration laws. . . . Modernization of the legal immigration system is impossible unless we first secure the border and implement an E-Verify system. We very much doubt that Senator Rubio will achieve meaningful border security in cooperation with Senators Schumer, Durbin, Menendez, and Bennet. The less-of-the-same version being developed in the House with the support of John Boehner and Paul Ryan almost certainly will suffer from similar defects, since it appears to be based on the same premises…
Senator Rubio, an exemplary conservative leader, is correct that our immigration system is broken. And he is correct that, at some point, we are going to have to do something about the millions of illegals already here. But he is wrong about how to go about repairing our immigration system, and wrong to think that an amnesty-and-enforcement bill at this time will end up being anything other than the unbuttered side of a half-a-loaf deal. And there is no reason to make a bad deal for fear of losing a Latino vote Republicans never had.
If you believe, as NR does and as even some liberals acknowledge, that Latinos are likely to go on voting Democratic in the medium-term at least, then it’s perfectly rational for Democrats to go on trying to weaken border security measures in the drafting process and later, after something’s passed. (Passionate supporters of organized labor may disagree, natch.) Meanwhile, Newt Gingrich objects to the bill partly because he objects to the process:
Gingrich, who won applause for his piecemeal immigration reform package during the 2012 GOP presidential primaries, said he would not endorse the bipartisan immigration reform pushed by McCain and Rubio–and that is extremely similar to President Obama’s offering…
“Frankly, I’m pretty tired of a handful of people in Washington, starting with the president, meeting in secret meetings in closed rooms to cut giant deals to come out with a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ vote to then tell the rest of us that it will be a catastrophe if we vote ‘no.’ I think that’s really bad government and I don’t think it produces good ideas,” said Gingrich.
Read Erick Erickson and the boss emeritus for further objections. Conservatives on the Hill are evidently already worried about Rubio getting rolled by Schumer and hurting himself for 2016, but like I said, I think that’s overblown. If worse comes to worst and grassroots opinion turns decisively against the bill, Rubio will turn on it too. He’s already done most of the heavy lifting he needs to do on this issue by making himself a face of immigration reform, no matter what the eventual outcome. And no matter what you think of the bill, his media outreach effort is impressive. It’s not just Rush and Hannity he’s talking to; he came on Ed’s radio show the other day to speak directly to blog readers and he’s got an op-ed today at Red State responding to Erickson’s piece. If you think the GOP suffers from chronically poor messaging, as basically every conservative does, then take some comfort in the fact that this guy knows what he’s doing on that front even if you oppose his goal.
Here’s Coulter with Howie Carr, also in need of a lottttt of persuasion.
Watch this at WRKO
Rubio is hopelessly naive about any possible improvement in border control as long as the ‘Rats and GOPe are involved.
Before ANY movement is made on NEW immigration policy I want ALL of the 1986 to be fulfilled such as the promised “border control” that was promptly ignore and want that to be paid back at a pro-rated rate.
Naive is not the word.
Disingenuous, maybe. Dishonest. Dishonorable.
But not naive. He knows exactly what he is supporting.
I agree. All this rubio for prez crap is just that...crap. He is not who conservatives wish him to be. The rubio plan makes illegals legal first, then down the road comes border enforement. bs
As well as most Freepers.
When is the treatment of American citizens in Mexico and their rights vs US treatment of Mexicans going to be an issue when we discuss amnesty ? What makes it necessary for US to subjugate our sovereignty because of available cheap labor ?
Ever hear of reciprocal aggrements ? These are arranged to protect the rights of American citizens working or living in other countries.
Why is it when it comes to citizens of other countries we are required to offer them the same privledges as we do to US citizens? But when it comes to US citizens who get in trouble or attempt to do business in other countries they do not get the same treatment their citizens get.
Americans cant own coast land in Mexico. And get no title to it elsewhere. If they run out of cash theyll get unceremoniously sent back or put in jail untill some relative comes up with the fresh. Thats just for starters as for granting them voting privledges yea lets give Mexican citizens that right when American citizens vote in their elections
Seems like Rubio has some sort of bromance with Linda.
One more time. Is Rubio even eligible to be President? His parents were not U.S. citizens at the time of his birth.
Rubio-Obama Amnesty is a travesty.....anything that does not deport Illegal Aliens is amnesty....plain and simple. Rubio-Obama is amnesty
Seems the more Phony Con Anti-Birthers claim Rubio is eligible...but anyone who has researched the eligibility issue in length proved that Rubio is not eligible...as his parents were not US citizens when he was born
...as well as all Patriots!
That has become moot due to the current occupant of the WH.
Dems won’t push it — they may have some other manufactured candidate of questionable birth in the future.
Pubbies won’t push it, either.
Heck, many politicians have been advocating allowing foreigners to vote and foreigners to be eligible to run in the primaries.
This is just another way of diluting the principles on which this nation was founded.
Rubio is a degenerate little twerp busy body lawyer and con man who never held a real job in his life.
Actually heard him utter the phrase “undocumented worker” on the 10 minutes of the 3 hour Limbaugh show that isn’t a collection of continuous commercials for ridiculous products and services that nobody with half a brain would purchase.
So now the Washingtonians from both parties for their own selfish and nefarious reasons want to enfranchise illegal alien criminals at the expense of real Americans who work for a living and actually pay taxes.
The degenerate political class keeps pushing the productive class against the wall, mugging them via the IRS under threat of imprisonment in broad daylight.
Soon will come a breaking point.
The tyranny of the Washingtonians and their apparatchiks in the bureaucracy and their demented evil propagandists in the press must inevitably result in the collapse of the first American Republic and the rise of a second Republic.
A Republic where the Franchise is limited to responsible citizens, and the Capital in not located in DC but is rotated amongst the States that are invited to join (NY, CA, the entire Northeast and IL need not bother to apply).
The sooner the collapse happens, the better.
The Washingtonians extort 3 trillion dollars from the working stiffs paycheck every year, and will stop at nothing to continue their thievery.
The Washingtonian problem will not be solved via the electoral process.
No solutions to any of our problems will come from DC, for the political class in DC is the biggest threat to the security and wallet of the American productive class, not the barbarians in the Middle East.
Heck, if they took out DC, they would be doing us all a favor.
Marco Rubio and his “immigration reform” initiative can go straight to Hell.
Maybe he team up with that fake suntanned orange faggot Charlie Crist and pass a national primary seat belt enforcement law like he did in Florida.
Marco is busy, busy , busy.
So true, I say we let all the illegals stay at Rubio and Juan McLame’s houses!
So what this comment means is even though we all know the GOP sucks at messaging, we should applaud a MESSAGE that sucks.
As Mr. Spock said, "A difference that makes no difference is no difference."
Rubio = Dem mole or GOPe patsy. Either way, he’s toast if he tries to make a run for POTUS.
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.