We're all pro-amnesty now

Washington Examiner ^ | November 13, 2015 | staff

[Cincinatus' Wife]

On Thursday, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio traded barbs over immigration policy. But it wasn't the usual sort of immigration debate for a Republican primary.

Cruz attacked Rubio's position, based on his Senate voting record. He argued that Rubio had not only proposed the so-called "gang of eight" immigration bill, but he had also voted against amendments that would have strengthened border security and limited immigration.

Rubio, instead of disingenuously trying to change his position to please anyone, instead argued Cruz's position is closer to his own than he lets on.

"Ted is a supporter of legalizing people that are in this country illegally," Rubio said on the campaign trail. "In fact, when the Senate bill was proposed, he proposed giving them work permits. He's also supported a massive expansion of the green cards. He's supported a massive expansion of the [H-1B visa] program, a 500 percent increase ... If you look at it, I don't believe our positions are dramatically different."

Whichever candidate's argument you want to buy, there was some truth to both. And it was constructive to see two candidates debate based on their voting records instead of chasing as hard to the Right as possible. Assuming that Rubio and Cruz rise to the top of the GOP field in the next three months, which at the moment seems likely, this discussion might finally force a lot of voters and pundits on the Right to start putting some flesh and bone on the lazy term "amnesty" which has so long been a conversation-stopper on any change to the untenable immigration status quo.

The fact is, whichever candidate conservatives end up choosing, his policy will be well short of the wholesale crackdown that a small minority continues to demand. Based on their own records, neither Cruz nor Rubio supports the logistically impossible and cost-prohibitive policy of deporting more than 10 million people. So what positions exactly will be "in bounds" as Republicans go forward?

To advocate for the dreaded "A-word" - amnesty - is to microaggress a certain kind of conservative. The word has been deployed successfully and repeatedly to create fear and crush any hope of changing the current status quo. And as others have argued previously (including Rubio), the current situation amounts to a de facto amnesty, because very few are punished under the current laws, and each time reform is blocked stronger enforcement of immigration laws is sacrificed for the sake of keeping the unenforceable laws exactly as they are now.

What qualifies as "amnesty?" A grant of citizenship? Permanent permission to work in the U.S.? Temporary permission? A special procedure for dealing with illegal immigrants currently in the U.S. that does anything besides deport them? A continued chance for permanent residency through existing processes, which amounts to forgiveness of the earlier illegal act of entering the U.S.? An expansion of legal immigration so as to obviate the enormous demand for illegal immigration? A policy of prioritizing certain deportations (of felons, for example) over others?

Literally every Republican candidate, including Donald Trump, supports at least one of the above. (And just three years ago, Trump suggested Mitt Romney lost the 2012 election because he was too hardline on immigration.)

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Nov 25, 2012: Donald Trump: Mean-Spirited GOP Won't Win Elections

- The Republican Party will continue to lose presidential elections if it comes across as mean-spirited and unwelcoming toward people of color, Donald Trump tells Newsmax.

Whether intended or not, comments and policies of Mitt Romney and other Republican candidates during this election were seen by Hispanics and Asians as hostile to them, Trump says.

"Republicans didn't have anything going for them with respect to Latinos and with respect to Asians," the billionaire developer says.

"The Democrats didn't have a policy for dealing with illegal immigrants, but what they did have going for them is they weren't mean-spirited about it," Trump says. "They didn't know what the policy was, but what they were is they were kind."

Romney's solution of "self deportation" for illegal aliens made no sense and suggested that Republicans do not care about Hispanics in general, Trump says.

"He had a crazy policy of self deportation which was maniacal," Trump says. "It sounded as bad as it was, and he lost all of the Latino vote," Trump notes. "He lost the Asian vote. He lost everybody who is inspired to come into this country.".........

[TigersEye]

He's also supported a massive expansion of the green cards. He's supported a massive expansion of the [H-1B visa] program, a 500 percent increase ...

That has zero to do with illegal aliens and therefore zero to do with amnesty.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

You left off:

“[Cruz] proposed giving them work permits.”......

[BobL]

THANKFULLY Trump is running so there won’t have to be any voting “the lesser of the two evils” when it comes to immigration.

[Pollster1]

What qualifies as "amnesty?" A grant of citizenship . . . A policy of prioritizing certain deportations (of felons, for example) over others? Literally every Republican candidate, including Donald Trump, supports at least one of the above. (And just three years ago . . .

Stupid argument. I want every illegal deported, with no exceptions, but setting priorities is not Amnesty. I want illegals who have committed additional crimes (especially violent crimes) deported ahead of illegals who have not committed additional crimes, and I want illegals who returned after deportation held as a higher priority than others (but locked up for long enough before being sent home that they will not want to return).

I also do not hold long past "compromise" positions attempting to take a step in the right direction against those who were trying to incrementally restore the rule of law. It takes time for a decent person to understand just how deceptive, insincere, and evil the Left is in any negotiation.

The positions that are unacceptable are the ones that give any legal status as a reward to criminals who entered our country illegally. Getting around to nonviolent illegals eventually, but locking up and deporting others first is not Amnesty. Getting around to deportation eventually but improving border security first is not Amnesty.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Donald Trump has illustrated, yet again, that he will morph positions, support any party - say and do anything to promote himself for power and profit. His style and his history are firmly on the Left.

Trump causes turmoil and uncertainty with his waffling positions and his traveling side-show of insults - sucking the air out of meaningful debate, upstaging Hillary and giving her cover.

Now it boils down to this, is there a dime's worth of difference between Rubio and Cruz? Let's honestly discuss that - start realizing that it is time to stop killing them off, as they're the only credible, viable candidates left in the race - and they have the credibility to go the distance and block Jeb - and Hillary.

Take a minute to read article below; then start closing ranks around these two, the ones who should be battling it out for the nomination; start cutting through all the meaningless noise so we can highlight the issues - get them to present their policy positions clearly and give their solutions.

Imagine Cruz and Rubio debating one on one - now that would be something to watch.

War: Cruz, Rubio Clash On Immigration

[NTHockey]

I am still not committed to ANY candidate. But, I will not vote for ANY candidate who favors anything short of deportation. Period. End of discussion. The single most important question is are we to survive as a nation? Nothing else matters, yet all other issues fall into place once deportation is complete.

If we don’t elect a President who will stop and reverse illegal immigration, does it really matter who gets elected? We won’t be a nation, just a bunch of people living in an geographic area.

BTW, lest anyone think I am a racist, I am 2nd generation American (Hispanic) and the wife is 1st generation (Italian). We are both children of LEGAL immigration.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

This is our objective: Deny this lying, corrupt, vengeful woman (and her husband and fellow travelers) the White House.

"..... Yet through all the sordidness and lying, the personal ruthlessness and disorder, the idealistic missionaries faithfully follow and serve the leader.

They do it not because they are themselves corrupted through material rewards. The prospect of fame is not even what drives them. Think only of Harold Ickes, personally betrayed and brutally cast aside by Clinton, who nonetheless refused to turn on him, even after the betrayal. Instead, Ickes kept his own counsel and protected Clinton, biding his time and waiting for Hillary. Then joined her staff to manage her Senate campaign.

The idealistic missionaries in this true tale bite their tongues and betray their principles, rather than betray him. They do so because in Bill Clinton they see a necessary vehicle of their noble ambition and uplifting dreams. He, too, cares about social justice, about poor people and blacks (or so he makes them believe). They will serve him and lie for him and destroy for him, because he is the vessel of their hope.

Because Bill Clinton "cares," he is the vital connection to the power they need to accomplish the redemption. Because the keys to the state are within Clinton's grasp, he becomes in their eyes the only prospect for advancing the progressive cause. Therefore, they will sacrifice anything and everything-principle, friends, country-to make him succeed.

But Bill Clinton is not like those who worship him, corrupting himself and others for a higher cause. Unlike them, he betrays principles because he has none. He will even betray his country, but without the slightest need to betray it for something else-for an idea, a party, or a cause.

He is a narcissist who sacrifices principle for power because his vision is so filled with himself that he cannot tell the difference............

[USS Alaska]

Now it boils down to this, is there a dime's worth of difference between Rubio and Cruz? Let's honestly discuss that

You don't want honest debate, you just smear Trump.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, Don't support my guy Ted Cruz.

With your method of constant url inundation and your HATRED OF TRUMP, you will do more harm than good for Cruz' chances.

Back rubyred, leave Cruz alone, he doesn't need your insane, constant calls for 'honest discussion' when every FReeper on the planet KNOWS THAT YOU DON'T WANT HONEST DISCUSSION, YOU JUST WANT TO KILL OFF TRUMP'S CHANCES.

[mkjessup]

You once again, hit the nail on the head.

There could be some random article about a growing trend to forego sugar in coffee in favor of Splenda or Sugar Twin, however Donald Trump admits to preferring sugar in his coffee, CW would twist that around to suggest that "Trump knows that he's a sourpuss and needs all the sugar he can get"

Her hatred for Trump borders on irrational. And I suspect it is all because her boy Walker was the first to drop out of the race, and she blames Trump for it.

'Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned', that sums it all up.

[trebb]

Funny how you used to support a fairly conservative wimp and now attack the most conservative person that is/was ever in the race. I find that eating sweets takes the bitter taste out of one's mouth.

Now for a short public service announcement to all on FR:
I prefer Cruz and my money goes to his campaign, hence the Cruz link. If you like someone else, donate to him/her (find your own link to do it) and if you use FR and don't donate, then please don't complain about the welfare leeches or those who have Obama Phones because, functionally, you are no different than any other FReeloader

PS - If you are one of those who cannot afford even a small donation to FR or a candidate, God Bless and happy FReeping!.....

GO CRUZ!! Keep it up Trump!!

Donate to Cruz

Donate to FR

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Defend Trump’s 2012 statement on illegal immigration.

I’m not getting on the S.S. Trump.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

I suggest you 3 submit your prose to this contest.

http://www.bulwer-lytton.com/2015win.html

[odawg]

This part of the quote does:

“Ted is a supporter of legalizing people that are in this country illegally,” Rubio said on the campaign trail. “In fact, when the Senate bill was proposed, he proposed giving them work permits. He’s also supported a massive expansion of the green cards.”

[Lurkinanloomin]

Perry and Walker dropped out because Americans don’t want amnesty candidates.

Trump is winning because he says he will enforce the laws.

[Lurkinanloomin]

She’s just mad thsat Perry and Walker were rejected for their amnesty stances.

[BobL]

“I am still not committed to ANY candidate. But, I will not vote for ANY candidate who favors anything short of deportation. Period.”

I’m with you, which is why I support Trump. The others range from flat-out Amnesty (JEB/Rubio) to looking the other way while they stay and have babies (Cruz). Trump is now using the term “deportation” when it comes to all of them (i.e., not just the criminals). No one will. Perhaps the others may also start talking deportation, now that they see just how well Trump is doing...but will anyone believe them?

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Perry and Walker would have secured the border. Walker was the first in the field to address curtailing legal immigration.

Scott Walker is the only one who has actually removed immigrant magnets, including instate tuition for illegals 3 months into his first term in 2011 (the Dems had just spent 10 years getting it enacted) - to date Walker is the only governor to revoke instate tuition for illegals.

Walker also fought and beat the unions (the money and muscle for the Left) and has continued to cut programs that advance liberal clout (like tenure).

So you go on blowing smoke because Trump’s words then and his boasts now don’t match up.

[mkjessup]

I suggest you 3 submit your prose to this contest.

I suggest you stop wasting everyone's time with your pathological hatred of Trump and your constant 'WAH-WAH-WAH'. You're not winning any converts to your cause.

Trump is a locomotive running full throttle down the mainline, and Perry and Walker were smart enough to get off the tracks.

And that galls you no end.

[DoughtyOne]

You are a shill for the GOPe.

After watching you try to foist Perry and Walker off on us here, and now watching you try to take Trump down all day every day, there’s no other conclusion to be had.

You don’t want Trump to do what he plans to do.

You are a fellow traveler of the Left.

This isn’t Democrat Underground. It’s Free Republic.

It’s pathetic that need to remind you of that.