Posted on 01/29/2015 9:42:15 AM PST by SeekAndFind
“If that bothers you to the point that you’d say, ‘I’d never vote for you,’” he told an audience in Virginia, “then you’re never going to vote for me.” Oh, now. There are plenty of reasons never to vote for Huck without dragging the poor DREAM kids into this.
Lefty Greg Sargent says this is a big deal. Is it? I think it’s a “big deal” in the sense that righties who don’t like Huckabee now have another reason not to like him, but realistically, how many candidates in the nascent GOP field will be coming out hard against DREAM this year? C’mon.
“I don’t believe that it is a just thing to punish someone who had nothing to do with the breaking of the law,” Huckabee told a crowd hosted by the Family Foundation, a Christian advocacy group that lobbies the Virginia legislature. “What I want to do is see, what can we do to put that person in a position where they do abide by the law and become a citizen? I would like that person to become a very generous tax-paying citizen rather than somebody who is going to take taxes away from the rest of us.”…
As an example, Huckabee related the true story of one son of illegal immigrants who started in Arkansas schools as a child and went on to graduate from the state’s largest high school as the valedictorian.
“Does he get the scholarship and go on to college so that he can become perhaps a doctor, a lawyer, an accountant, a teacher?” Huckabee said. “Or do we say, ‘No son, you’re as far as you can go. You need to pick tomatoes.’ ”
“I don’t know how in the world that we’re going to punish that kid for something he had no control over,” Huckabee added.
Reality check: Scott Walker, the buzziest GOP contender in America right now, supports a path to citizenship not just for DREAMers but for adult illegals too. Marco Rubio, the next buzziest guy, led the charge for a Senate bill which would have added a path to citizenship for adult illegals to federal law. Jeb Bush, the establishment frontrunner, preposterously pretends to oppose citizenship for adult illegals but does support citizenship for DREAMers. Even Mitt Romney, who famously proposed self-deportation as a remedy to illegal immigration in 2012, said at the time that he’d support DREAM for kids who enlisted in the military. (He also said that, rather than simply rescind Obama’s 2012 DACA amnesty for DREAMers, he’d replace it with his own solution.) I’m guessing that the new and improved “softer” Romney will extend his support to making all DREAMers eligible for citizenship soon enough. Rather than ask whether Huckabee can survive supporting citizenship for DREAMers, then, ask this question instead: How many of the 20-30 Republican alternatives running for president actually disagree with him? Maybe Ted Cruz will, but I wouldn’t even bet on that. Everyone running, even the stalwart tea partiers, will want to make some concession on immigration to hopefully blunt the Democrats’ edge with Latino voters in 2016. Cruz can come out strong against amnesty for adults; he might even come out against citizenship for DREAMers. (He’ll certainly come out against chain migration for DREAM families, as will most everyone else.) But is he willing to oppose any form of legalization for DREAMers, knowing full well that once legalization is granted, citizenship will eventually follow? As of last year, more than 60 percent of white evangelicals, a group for whom Huckabee and Cruz will be competing, supported allowing adult illegals to stay in the U.S. What happens to those numbers when you ask specifically about the more sympathetic class of DREAMers, kids who came here through no fault of their own? Again, c’mon.
Explain to me, then, how Huckabee ends up taking a beating for his position when it’ll be, at worst, the overwhelming consensus view of the field and, at best, a comparatively restrained approach when people like Walker and Rubio are up there making the case for citizenship for everyone. One of two things will happen with the citizenship issue in the primaries. Either it’ll blow up as a litmus test for the base, in which case it’ll consume Walker and Rubio before it reaches Huckabee, or the fact that strong candidates like Walker and Rubio are endorsing the idea will move the Overton window for the party as a whole and make citizenship for a smaller class of illegals, like DREAMers, a viable compromise position for 2016. My hunch is that the second reaction is more likely than the first. Whenever I half-jokingly suggest prospective GOP tickets on Twitter (Romney/Bush? Bolton/Carson?), one of the strongest responses I get is for a Walker/Rubio or Rubio/Walker ticket. A lot of people want at least one of those guys on the ballot, but both support citizenship for illegals; the cognitive dissonance involved in being an anti-amnesty conservative but liking one or both of them will be resolved, I’d bet, in favor of “well, I guess citizenship for DREAMers is okay so long as it’s just for DREAMers.” It won’t be just for DREAMers in the end, but that little lie we’ll tell ourselves will be good enough to keep Walker and Rubio viable.
I wonder if he's receiving some compensation from the elitists to run a campaign he won't win just to siphon off conservative votes.
And to sell books, get another TV show, be a pundit on cable news, get paid for speeches, etc.
The only running I want to see him do is to take all the weight off he's regained.
This whole path to citizenship is stupid.
If you polled all the latin-americans on this issue, very few would want become us citizens. They want to work, earn money and mail it home. They would want o stay Mexicans, not Americans.
Here’s one other solution that we can consider — Change our immigration laws from JUS SOLI to JUS SANGUINIS.
HuckaSchmuck tries to make an unprincipled position look principled. Film at 11.
Well then huck off *uckabee orsomethinglikethat...
RE: If you polled all the latin-americans on this issue, very few would want become us citizens. They want to work, earn money and mail it home.
So, is there anything wrong with enacting another version of President Eisenhower’s Bracero Program?
I have not heard any politicians talking about fast tracking the processing of those who’ve been waiting legally in line to become American citizens.
All I hear is politicians looking to fast track the citizen process for scofflaws who have engaged in identity theft and falsification of paperwork for years.
Again, it sounds discriminatory to me to give preferential treatment to those who broke laws over those who have been patiently doing the right thing.
The Funnel To Citizenship.
Huck wasn’t going to win anyway.
There ought to be something for kids who know NOTHING else....
Un todo engleshablante aqui. Please help me out...
Fair enough. I’ll never back down saying that Huck is a doofus socialist posing as conservative Christian with a lower skillset than Jim and Tammy Baker.
A friend of mine already did his taxes. He paid the Obamacare tax because he does not have insurance and did not qualify for the exemption (which included being an illegal alien).
It doesn’t pay to be a citizen here these days.
And THAT is the most succinct way to put it.
No one wants to be "mean" to somebody who's only memory is growing up in the U.S.
But they are simply pawns of those who want to use them for their own power - because they know that if they are amnestied, the rest of the family then gets brought in legally as happened as a result of the '86 Amnesty.
Within one generation you have entire Mexican villages living in a few houses on the same block in Los Angeles. And all screaming for more freebies from the Gringos.
Today's jobs report, while overall very strong, showed a slight tick down in the labor force participation rate, from 62.8% last month to 62.7% this month. It's now at the lowest rate since 1978. Why the participation rate has fallen so much is one of the most hotly debated questions in economics.Oct 3, 2014
Labor Force Participation Falls To Its Lowest Rate Since 1978
www.businessinsider.com/labor-force-participation-rate-sep...
Business Insider
Enjoy your “Dreamer” votes, Huckabee, because real Americans will not vote for you.
Those are legal terms IN LATIN, from which many of our legal terms derive (e.g. HABEAS CORPUS).
Jus sanguinis (Latin: right of blood) is a principle of nationality law by which citizenship is not determined by place of birth but by having one or both parents who are citizens of the state.
Jus soli (Latin: right of the soil), also known as birthright citizenship, is a right by which nationality or citizenship can be recognized to any individual born in the territory of the related state.
Our citizenship policies are based on Jus Soli and that is the problem... many illegals come here and have babies born in the USA who are CITIZENS BY BIRTH.
We then do not deport the parent because the child is a citizen and needs his/her parent to raise and take care of him (in his country ).
The illegal parent then becomes a DE FACTO permanent resident.
I can’t imagine a scenario where I’d vote for the huckster whatever his stance is on the “dreamers”.
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.