|
 |
Posted on 01/19/2015 8:03:28 PM PST by SoConPubbie
Ted Cruz is the only possible Republican candidate who understands the problem with amnesty.
“It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.” – Voltaire
Even though we just came off an election that seemed to last an eternity, we are approaching 2016 more quickly than we realize. Unlike the last two presidential election cycles, the Republican field is stacked in 2016. There are several solid contenders for the nomination, as well as a parade of horribles who would lose to presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.
Unfortunately, despite a deep bench of qualified conservatives who appear to have their heads on straight, there seems to be a pervasive misunderstanding among them regarding one key issue: amnesty, and a pathway to citizenship. Ben Shapiro recently wrote up a handy little guide which shows us just where each of the Republican front-runners stand on the issue of amnesty—specifically a “pathway to citizenship.” Here are some quotes from the men themselves:
“I do believe that those who come here illegally ought to have an opportunity to get in line with everybody else. I don’t think those who come here illegally should jump to the front of the line or be given a special deal, be rewarded for coming here illegally, but I think they should have a chance, just like anybody else, to get in line and to become a citizen if they would like to do so.” – Mitt Romney
“…there already is a process for how people become citizens. The main difference is I wouldn’t have people be forced to go home. You’d just get in line. But you get in the same line everyone is in.” – Rand Paul
“I tend to think that the rational approach is to find a way to give people a pathway to citizenship. You shouldn’t ignore the law or ignore those who break it. But by the same token, I think it’s a little disingenuous when I hear people say they should experience the full weight of the law in every respect with no pathway…” – Mike Huckabee
“For people waiting to come in our country legally, we’ve got to make sure that they get in first, that they get their status first, because they’ve been following the rules and playing by the rules. After that, if there is a way to set up a process so that you enable people to come in and have a legal pathway to do that, that’s something we’ve got to embrace.” – Scott Walker
“…of course allow [illegal immigrants] to have a pathway to citizenship. That’s the only humane and reasonable thing to do.” – Ben Carson
Now, there are certainly other presidential contenders, but my point is clear. There is a pervasive sentiment that, regardless of the method, and the time frame, we should eventually allow those who came here illegally to become citizens.
The left contends that even if we grant citizenship, amnestied illegals would not be allowed to vote. They tell us that it’s crazy to worry about something like that. However, as the DNC’s Donna Brazile said early last year: “I don’t think you can create two classes of citizens in this society, one with legal status and the right to vote, and one without.”
The wheels are always in motion, and to believe otherwise is foolish. The left wants illegals to be granted the right to vote because they will–in large part–vote Democrat. The Democrats want 11 million new voters who are dependent on government handouts, and grateful to those who give them those handouts. That way, a conservative candidate will never again win a national election. Because of the makeup of illegal immigrants, they tend to be low-skill, low-wage workers, who would be much more likely to rely on the federal government for subsistence. Why would they ever vote for a Party that wants to reform social safety nets?
Republicans are either foolish enough to think that if they support amnesty, they will get a chunk of those future votes, or they are too stupid to see what’s really going on. Either way, their idiocy is causing them to side with the left on a “pathway to citizenship.”
There is one candidate, however, that understands what’s happening, and that candidate is Ted Cruz. As Shapiro points out in his article:
“The Texas senator has been outspoken in his belief that the border must be enforced and that illegal immigrants should not be given a pathway to citizenship. Last year, he was instrumental in killing a Republican bill pushing comprehensive immigration reform.”
In 2013, Senator Cruz himself said as much:
“In my opinion, if we allow those who are here illegally to be put on a path to citizenship, that is incredibly unfair to those who follow the rules…”
Not only is it unfair to those who have come here legally to grant illegal immigrants citizenship, it would be the death knell of the conservative movement. During the 2012 election cycle, Newt Gingrich proposed a rather brilliant idea. He proposed that we deport all illegals who have committed serious criminal offenses, and allow the rest to stay. However, those who stay would never be given citizenship, and therefore, would never have the right to vote. This proposal should satisfy the bleeding-heart liberals who just want families to stay intact, and who simply want illegals to have a better life in the United States, right? Unlikely.
The left has an agenda, and that agenda is to get more votes, and more power. It’s a simple goal, but one that goes unnoticed, even by many conservatives. Ted Cruz knows what’s going on behind the curtain, and given that, he’s the only one we should support in 2016. If we select a “pathway to citizenship” candidate, we will have lost before the election has even taken place
|
|
ping
first and foremost, the socialist welfare state needs to be brought to an end. than we can talk about immigration. that’s just my opinion of course.
BS x 10.
Agree. He needs to declare ASAP and make sure the H(F)uckabees, Bushes, and Romneys stop hogging the media attention and siphoning off the streams of cash.
And THIS is the primary reason that ALL conservatives need to UNITE (& unite EARLY and FIRMLY) behind Ted Cruz for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination. Cruz holds firmly to his core constitutional conservative beliefs, the other conservatives are “flexible” at best and poseurs at worse.
Bolton is for fake gay “marriage.”
huh?
The Rats aborted themselves out of existence.
So they’re desperate for a replacement cohort since theirs was murdered in their mothers wombs.
Mexicans are a win win for them: poor and non- white.
The Rats offer welfare ad affirmative action to them, if only they will vote to keep the Benificent and Wondrous Rat politicians in power.
A match made in hell.
Amnesty? Let Rats fade into oblivion with their insane suicidal lifestyle. We dont need to help them with their reinforcments.
It will be found unconstitutional to have a class of people who are permitted to live in the US, to work in the US, to build lives in the US, but are never permitted to pursue citizenship. We would be creating a form of serfdom, caste, some demeaning status that has no future.
I know liberals. They aren’t saying it now, but they’ll start saying it as soon as they get comprehensive immigration reform. “We can’t have slaves...they need to be freed and given the right to vote.”
Scotus will be on that faster than Obama covets taxes.
Sorry, I guess I was snoozing when it was decided the POTUS can be someone born out of the country to parents that are not both US citizens at the time of birth.
Can someone gently steer me to the change in the law that permits this previously illegal practice?
After all, I am a US citizen who was born in Canada to an American father and a Canadian mother (who became an American after my birth). I am naturalized (and I do have papers) so if Ted Cruz (regardless of his unquestioned good qualities) can be POTUS then so can I!! True?
Palin absolutely
Bolton - NEVER! He did nothing at the UN....he complained about the UN but did nothing to disestablish it or make it a non entity. I just don’t think he is good at running things.
I don’t have the energy left to explain...
Ferrrget it.
Yes you can. You were Born an American Citizen.
Now, please Post a link to the “Law” that says you can’t.
Reposting for clarification. You say you were Naturalized?
Your Father, being an American Citizen, automatically makes you an American Citizen as well, no matter where you were born.
My Wife’s Stepbrother had two Children who were born outside the United States, both are U.S. Citizens.
If I am mistaken, please correct my assessment.
huh?
Palin because you can’t just be right on the issues. You have to be able to deliver the message. I love Cruz, but please explain to me how he electrifies the crowd?
According to the immigration and naturalization office at the time (I was 16 so I did not get the college course on the process) I was not. I was required to accumulate documentation on residences, fathers name and residences, same for my mother, my places of schooling and other identifying and historical data.
I submitted all of that to someone.
I was living in Anchorage Alaska at the time and my mother lived elsewhere in Canada.
It seemed fairly quickly that I was given an appointment with a judge downtown. I went and he and I had quite a long conversation (1966, Vietnam etc.) and then he swore me in as a United Sates Citizen.
Some time later a naturalization certificate appeared in the mail.
When I went in the military I was required to show that documentation and explain the paper trail.
I think this means that your assertion that I was born a US citizen is based on hearsay rather than a foundation in law.
Using the debate trick to turn the burden of proof back on me is unworthy of a conservative in this context. That is not a friendly move.
I am sincerely trying to find out why it seems like FR has rolled completely over on the point of ‘natural born citizen’.
Again, what makes it OK that Ted Cruz with a very similar birth circumstance to me is automatically a citizen and I was not?
And I was not.
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.