Posted on 01/25/2015 12:02:31 PM PST by Laissez-faire capitalist
With Republicans in Congress split over the best approach to Obama's executive amnesty - and with many establishment Republicans splitting form grassroots Republicans on the issue of illegal immigration more generally - it's clear that immigration will be a hot-button primary issue in 2016. ...
So where do the potential candidates stand? Here's a rundown:
...
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Singapore’s healthcare system is considered to be one of the best in the world.
.
That he gave away SanDiego is illustractive of how the anti-illegal voices have not thought through their position. The mix the good and the bad and can’t see that it is a mixture of inconsistencies.
Stop welfare to immigrants (legal and illegal). No immigrant should come here to get welfare.
Stop the murderers, rapits, DUI drivers.
Stop the terrorists, of course.
But God Bless those who work and support their families.
They are what we are all about.
From a pragmatic perspective, to focus on 12 million is no focus at all and nothing can get done, not even by the most well intentioned adminsitration.
Focus on the 10% (1.2 million) is a focus that can be achieved.
Stopping welfare for legal immigrants is a lot more important than anything else except stopping terrorists.
I think there’s also an issue on whether Congress would push back against certain candidates more than others like they did with Bush.
I think Jeb is the last person who’d actually convince congress to pass an amnesty.
Rand is another. I don’t think Congress is as likely to trust Rand on Law and Order than if some Conservative Messiah like Walker or Carson tries to push amnesty.
“Because they are sure losers to Hillary in 2016.”
It’s funny that everybody knew that Dole, McCain and Romney were bound to lose except, apparently, Dole, McCain and Romney. Some men are blinded by their own light, which to the rest seems like a candle against the sun.
Don’t they also have the death penalty if you get caught with drugs?
Rand Paul's immigration speech...The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.[Posted on 03/19/2013 7:04:07 AM PDT by Perdogg]
Unfortunately, like many of the major debates in Washington, immigration has become a stalemate-where both sides are imprisoned by their own rhetoric or attachment to sacred cows that prevent the possibility of a balanced solution.
Immigration Reform will not occur until Conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution. I am here today to begin that conversation.
Let's start that conversation by acknowledging we aren't going to deport 12 million illegal immigrants.
If you wish to work, if you wish to live and work in America, then we will find a place for you...
This is where prudence, compassion and thrift all point us toward the same goal: bringing these workers out of the shadows and into being taxpaying members of society.
Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers.12 million more people assimilating into society. 12 million more people being productive contributors.
Rand Paul calls on conservatives to embrace immigration reformLatinos, should be a natural constituency for the party, Paul argued, but "Republicans have pushed them away with harsh rhetoric over immigration." ...he would create a bipartisan panel to determine how many visas should be granted for workers already in the United States and those who might follow... [and the buried lead] "Imagine 12 million people who are already here coming out of the shadows to become new taxpayers...[Posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:42 PM PDT by SoConPubbie]
[but he's not in favor of amnesty, snicker, definition of is is]
Actually, I’d like to keep San Diego and let them have San Francisco. Now, thats a fancy fence.
(Obviously, I meant San Diego rather than Los Angeles... :) )
As for the Rio Grande, we don’t want to fence Americans away from their own river. So I assume thats where you put a larger number of agents. Just my thought.
Thats true, and thats a continuing problem that would have to be solved with enforcement. In the last several years, I don't see a lot of enforcement happening away from the border. But step one, you have to control the border. If you won't even do that, you aren't serious about anything else.
Of course, the will to enforce the law is key. If there is a will to secure the border and a will to enforce immigration and citizenship law, it is possible to do it. Where there is no will, no fence in the world will be enough.
Eisenhower and I believe I read Truman and even FDR had a mass deportation. The mindset in America now would make it difficult to ever win a war like WWII. Maybe we could but I’m not certain.
“Don’t they also have the death penalty if you get caught with drugs?”
—
Yes-—and they don’t think too much of gum chewers either.:-)
.
LOL, I remember that, about the gum. They seem to have a very polite society. Our Liberals wouldn’t last a week there.
I’m not sure I support Walker or Kasich
I like your plan.
“he told the Journal Sentinel in an interview Sunday he hasn’t taken a position on citizenship for illegal immigrants”
This was about Walker. If he has no opinion, then he doesn’t believe our laws matter nor has any concern for those waiting in line.
That’s all I need to know. He’s not a true conservative and I wouldn’t vote for hum.
Illegals have ruined mexifornia- I’m escaping in exactly 5 days and anyone who doesn’t think this issue will destroy this country ought to visit the invaded states, better yet live there and suffer the consequences of the invasion.
You can only vote for 1 in primaries.
So vote your 1st choice.
In general, consider the alternative to Hillary.
Unless you absolutely despise the republican, do not abstain. I for one will not vote if it is Jeb or Mitt.
Any others in my list, I should be able to.
in the general, I will vote my principle and if the GOP nominates another squish, count me out
Do whatever makes you happy.
Since I despise Hillary & Obama type democrats much more than most GOP candidates, I will be out there voting unless it is Mitt or Jeb.
For whatever reason, Breitbart’s web pages absolutely fry my (fair new) computer’s brain. Some good stuff there, but I tend to avoid it.
Could you list the politicians and each one’s stance on immigration?
Many thanks,
WildHighlander57
Xzins
GMTA, similar things happen to me... which is why I asked laissez for a list of candidates and their positions on the matter ...
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.