GOP Establishment Trains More Fire on Trump

Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | November 20, 2015 | Rush Limbaugh

[itsahoot]

There is no consistency in your position:

Yes there is, you just don't like it.

If you think anyone can undo 1/100th of what Obama has done by going through congress you are deluded. I don't like it, but it is true.

The Constitution has about as much effect, on limiting the current political class, as a restraining order against a crazy husband bent on murdering his wife. By the time you can go though the courts to remedy your grievances the demographic of the country will be irrovicably changed to socialist/marxist. Good luck with that.

[Carry_Okie]

If you think anyone can undo 1/100th of what Obama has done by going through congress you are deluded. I don't like it, but it is true.

You WANT a king. You have helped Obama succeed: you have let him transform you from a conservative into a subject. You gave him that power, nobody else did, because you understand Constitutional institutions so poorly that you cannot envision redress.

Get a brain or own the consequences.

[itsahoot]

You WANT a king.

I do not want a king, but a king got us in this mess and a king will be required to undo it. That is all I am saying, I don't like it but reality is a bitch.

Communism has taken two steps forward and one back all of my life.

[Carry_Okie]

I do not want a king, but a king got us in this mess and a king will be required to undo it.

Like I said, you want a king.

I don't like it but reality is a bitch.

In a nation of self-government, "reality" is what we make it. I'm still in the business of making, thank you.

Communism has taken two steps forward and one back all of my life.

What we have is fascism now, not communism, and you have become a fascist. You surrendered, and gave them victory.

[itsahoot]

I'm still in the business of making, thank you.

You are doing a bang up job. What you are advocating is revolution because what you want to happen will not come about any other way. Maybe we should save that option until we see if the President and the people can undo the corruption that pervades the current government.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

CO, you put a LOT of work in that post and got very little back so far.

kabar might be the perfect counter-point. If I recall correctly, kabar supports the Sessions Plan, and that means ‘Trump’ last I heard. I’ve never heard anyone criticize Senator Sessions here. So, I’m intrigued.

Glad you found that address to show me.

I don’t have the time just yet to read it but promise to do so later today when I’m off-line. Be back later. FRegards ....

[Carry_Okie]

Thanks for the compliment. Most of what I got for it is crap when I linked it from elsewhere.

kabar supports the Sessions Plan, and that means 'Trump' last I heard.

Cruz worked out his plan directly with Senator Sessions, about whose preferences I haven't heard. Cruz' plan starts with enforcing existing law, something that can be done immediately. Trump's involves actions that I believe can be halted by the courts. NEITHER candidate has mentioned getting a statute out of Congress to remove jurisdiction over cases involving aliens from the Federal courts, which would be a big help.

[wintertime]

Ping for later

[GOPJ]

They're out of donors, they just can't find anybody to fund their anti-Trump activity, the establishment. The Republican establishment is just at their wits' end. They thought Trump would be gone by now and they can't find anybody willing to help them because nobody thinks it can be done now.

ANYONE who gives to the GOPe in order to undermine Trump will be remembered... and NOT in a nice way. That could be the problem the GOPe is having shaking the money tree...

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

“Cruz’ plan starts with enforcing existing law, something that can be done immediately. Trump’s involves actions that I believe can be halted by the courts.”

Thank you for the quick summary. But I’ll read the full post later.

BTW ... states have the tech to rapidly and cheaply nail every undocumented driver on the road ...

The automatic plate reader [or APR]

APR Tech Could Cheaply Wipe Out Most Illegal Immigration

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3374794/posts

It would need a recall of all license plates and other minor adjustments. Well worth it though.

ALL crime fighting could become more cost-effective if a given state desires it. But due to flawed constititutional interpretation we need the Federal government to permit this use of APR tech [regarding illegal immigrants].

- - -

As for the border wall, we need to cut through regulations to get it up quickly and affordably. Has anyone gotten into the specifics of that? EPA stumbling blocks, etc.?

[A CA Guy]

They ran Romney wo reneged 25% of the time and had no problem because he is GOPe.
Politicians reneged on us all the time giving us Obamacare, new taxes, a shrinking military and a mess around the globe.
Out of hundreds of deals a very few went south making Trump among the most successful businessmen in history.
Regarding the east coast casino, ALL went broke there, no one was spared.

[editor-surveyor]

.
Anyone that gives to the GOPe is probably called GOPJ

[GOPJ]

LOL - no, I don’t give to the GOPe... Come on, you’ve always been one of the nice people here... don’t make this personal.

[kabar]

Let's take a look at your comments re Trump versus Cruz on immigration. I will note that Cruz has had an epiphany on immigration in the last few months. Is it due to a real change of heart or political expediency as he sees the success that Trump is having with the issue and how it resonates with the American people?

Anybody familiar with the history of wild swings in immigration law understands that the big problems in the last century began with Ted Kennedy's Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. The Slave Party goal has obviously been demographic:

Yes, the 1965 Immigration Act changed the demographics of this country forever. Other landmark events included Reagan's 1986 "one-time" amnesty, Bush 41 doubling the legal immigration caps approximating now over one million legal permanent immigrants annually, and the two Obama executive amnesties beginning with the 2012 Dreamer amnesty that has legalized 580,000 Dreamers (up to the age of 30) giving them work permits and SSNs.

87% of legal permanent immigrants are minorities as defined by the USG. Since 1990 we have admitted over 35 million legal permanent immigrants, almost equal to the population of Canada. In 1970 one in 21 was foreign born; today it is less than one in 8, the highest in 105 years; and within a decade it will be one in 7 the highest in our history.

Immigration drives 80% of our population growth. Non-hispanic whites will be a minority by 2043, compared to 63% today; and 89% in 1970. There are electoral consequences. Minorities and immigrants vote more than two to one Dem. By 2019 half of the children 18 and under will be minorities. Unless we significantly reduce legal immigration, the Dems will soon be the permanent majority party.

So nobody needs to tell me the problems the demography of illegals have posed; they are legion. They have destroyed my once beloved, admired, and idyllic California and turned it into a degenerating cesspool of crime and corruption. It is a continuing and unfolding tragedy.

LEGAL immigration is far more destructive than illegal aliens. In the case of CA, both have combined to destroy the state, which has the same demographics as the US will have in 2050, if we don't decrease drastically legal immigration.

Trump's proposal is to deport them all and allow only "the good ones" back in on an expedited basis. The more one reads what Trump has to say the more one realizes this will be a VERY expedited step over the border and back for the majority of current illegals, wall or no wall. Current illegal aliens will become LEGAL immigrants or "guest workers," which is not at all clear in his plan.

Trump has never indicated how many would be allowed back in except that it will be done legally. If that is the case, the numbers could be very small given the fact that most of the lawbreakers have violated many laws including those that are felonies. Nor has Trump provided a detailed plan on how the lawbreakers will be deported. He does however support such things as mandatory e-verify, the elimination of catch and release, and a host of other measures meant to enforce our laws. Deportation is required by law for those here illegally. It goes on every day now. Under Trump and now Cruz, attrition thru enforcement will winnow down the illegal alien population. We will always have to deport people. And Trump says unequivocally that if you are here illegally, you must go. Cruz has equivocated.

There seems to be this quaint notion that we have a static population of 11 million illegal aliens. The reality is that it is constantly changing. 60% of all green cards are due to a change in status, in many cases from illegal to legal.

One legitimately has to ask why Cruz never talks about mass deportations and avoids the question when asked in debates. Many here presume he therefore doesn't mean for illegals to leave. I think there is another explanation beyond that unsupported assertion: To state such flatly without ambiguity would be to give his RINO/crat enemies a weapon against him.

Cruz is trying to have it both ways. In the past, he has supported legalization of the lawbreakers and criticized Romney's self-deportation (as has Trump in the past.) Cruz Tries to Claim the Middle Ground on Immigration Cruz parsing of words is Clintonian, hence his avoidance of defining what is amnesty.

Reporter asks Ted Cruz four times: “How do you define amnesty?”

So no, his plan is amnesty in all but name, and worse if the courts shut him down. Everything I've heard on this forum to the contrary is nothing more than wishful thinking unsupported by reality.

The courts will have a hard time stopping the President from enforcing the law. How can they stop deportation of the 40% of the illegal population who are visa overstays? Unlike Obama who has used his power to thwart the enforcement of existing laws, Trump will be enforcing existing law that was passed by Congress. He will not be using executive orders to legalize the lawbreakers. He will enforce the laws against sanctuary cities.

Unlike Trump, Cruz has promised to curtail legal immigration until employment conditions have improved. Trump has made vague promises to favor Americans in his policies but has not explained what he means.

Cruz is not proposing to curtail legal immigration. He is proposing not to increase it. Here is what he says:

Halt any increases in legal immigration so long as American unemployment remains unacceptably high. The purpose of legal immigration should be to grow the economy, not to displace American workers. Under no circumstances should legal immigration levels be adjusted upwards so long as work-force participation rates remain below historical averages.

Compare that to what Trump is proposing. Trump wants legal immigration to return to historical levels, which means 195,000 a year (1925-65) compared to 1.1 million today. From Trump's plan:

Immigration moderation. Before any new green cards are issued to foreign workers abroad, there will be a pause where employers will have to hire from the domestic pool of unemployed immigrant and native workers. This will help reverse women's plummeting workplace participation rate, grow wages, and allow record immigration levels to subside to more moderate historical averages.

One feature I applaud in Cruz' plan is that he does not propose to make e-Verify mandatory nationally as Trump does. Mandatory e-Verify is clearly an unconstitutional search and a usurpation of the power to control EVERY employment agreement. It is ripe for the kind of abuses that make the current IRS scandals look like a tea party. Cruz DOES propose to make e-Verify mandatory for federal employment and or contracting, which is within his Constitutional authority as an employer. He gets the Constitutional distinction.

BS. The Supreme Court ruled in AZ's favor on making e-verify mandatory. We need to shut off the job magnet now. E-verify is a tool that makes it easier and quicker for the employer to ensure that he does not hire illegal aliens, which is against the law. Are you against the I-9 process which currently requires. All U.S. employers must ensure proper completion of Form I-9 for each individual they hire for employment in the United States. Is it unconstitutional? Does Cruz support the elimination of the I-9 process? Cruz says in his plan that he wants to "strengthen e-verify," What does that mean?

FYI: People like Jeff Sessions and Steve King want mandatory e-verify as do NumbersUSA, FAIR, etc.

I'm with Cruz' plan as opposed to Trump's because the former shows a far better understanding of both existing law and how the government is structured.

The Trump plan was written for the most part by a staffer in Jeff Sessions' office. I know that for a fact. As someone who has been working on the immigration issue for nine years as a member (read President) of a grassroots immigration group that lobbies on the Hill, Trump has presented the best position paper of any presidential candidate in recent memory. Cruz has made a belated attempt at a knock-off of the Trump plan and it is not as good. I don't trust Cruz to deliver on immigration.

Trump was the first high profile political figure to highlight the American victims of criminal alien crime. Cruz has never done that. Cruz wanted a 500% increase in H-1B visas, one of the Cruz amendments to the Gang of 8 bill that Sessions did not support.

Phyllis Schafly, who gets it on immigration, has called Trump the "last hope" for America." She said Cruz would make a good VP or member of the Supreme Court.

[Carry_Okie]

I will note that Cruz has had an epiphany on immigration in the last few months. Is it due to a real change of heart or political expediency as he sees the success that Trump is having with the issue and how it resonates with the American people?

I agree with this question. It is one of the reasons I have not chosen specifically to back Ted Cruz. He has a problem with repentance and contrition, which in a capable person with powerful persuasive skills is a potentially disastrous character flaw.

I'll get to the rest of your post later. I've got work to do.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

This election is about OUR mandate regardless of which anti-establishment name wins. And we can use that mandate to amend the Constitution. THAT is the end game.

To put it plainly, your [CO’s] research leads you to conclude that Cruz is tougher than Trump on illegal immigration, but he’s scared to say so:

“So I see it as tactical. Let’s face it, Cruz knows he will face the same media character assassination that Reagan did and worse: “warmonger, racist, elitist, uncaring, enemy of the poor...” it will go on, and on, and on...”

This policy of caution might have helped him when the Establishment RINOs fell like flies. By keeping his head down, he might well have out-foxed them. They all dropped off the poling radar.

... Phase One Complete ...

Time for Phase Two:

NOW or never, FRiend. Cruz darn well better start making waves by explaining how he’s tougher on illegal immigrants than Trump, particularly unskilled ‘unregistered border crossers’. If he fails to do so, he loses his chance. [Assuming your research is accurate.]

It’s up to Cruz. If he gets into the specifics, I can support him over Trump. Otherwise, I’ll remain ‘all-in’ for Trump due to his willingness to fight.

Cruz is now in the Top Two. You and others at the grassroots helped him get there. [Even here online.] Now it’s his job to confront the RINOs and define himself. So I’m off the hook — monkey’s on his back. And unless you are part of his strategy team, you’re off the hook too.

There is only one serious mistake we must avoid — if this primary is not brokered, we need to rally behind either Trump or Cruz — whichever wins.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

The unknown Trump [Remember Herman Cain?]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3379464/posts

‘The guy I know, vs. the spoon-fed perception the media tries to sell you I know that listeners do not have the opportunity to listen to my radio show every day, every hour, and every minute. That’s why we make Cain 24/7 available 24 hours a day at HermanCain.com. But when it comes to Donald Trump, I constantly get asked by a lot of people when I’m traveling, dining out, or even at church, questions that I answer frequently on the radio show. First, can Trump win? Yes, and here’s why: Trump can win the Republican nomination and the presidency...’

— Herman Cain

[Carry_Okie]

NOW or never, FRiend. Cruz darn well better start making waves by explaining how he's tougher on illegal immigrants than Trump, particularly unskilled 'unregistered border crossers'. If he fails to do so, he loses his chance. [Assuming your research is accurate.]

NOW is here.

I'll take my award for prescience at the door. ;-)

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

“Ted Cruz: Trump Will Let Deported Immigrants Back In, I Won’t”

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3379878/posts

Outstanding!

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

“Ted Cruz: Trump Will Let Deported Immigrants Back In, I Won’t”

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3379878/posts

I hope Trump addresses this.