Posted on 03/29/2015 6:33:23 AM PDT by Din Maker
Thanks to Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, it's becoming even clearer that immigration is the banana peel of 2016 Republican presidential politics.
Just ask Florida Sen. Marco Rubio. He stepped up as a Senate leader on immigration only to slip and fall in a tea party ruckus over the issue. In a moment of candor, Rubio remembered the months of trying to get back up as "a real trial for me."
Now it's oops for Walker. In 2013, Walker said it "makes sense" to offer a way to citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally. Early this month, however, he said he no longer supports "amnesty."
The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday that he actually said he favored a path to citizenship, though Horn denies Walker said that.
Even former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who has a strong voice — and a book — on immigration, has wiggled.
"All the candidates have mixed statements — they have statements that seem to support amnesty and they all have ones that seem to oppose it," said Roy Beck, executive director of Numbers USA, which seeks to reduce immigration. "They're torn between the big-money people who gain from high immigration and the voters who oppose it."
Luis Alvarado, a California-based GOP strategist, said most Republican officials privately acknowledge that the country has to legalize the status of people who are here unlawfully while also bolstering border security. "They believe that no one in their conscious mind can deport 11 million people from this country," Alvarado said. "But, politically, they have to play word games to be elected in the primary."
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, the only declared candidate so far, has kept a fairly consistent tough line on the issue.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Not really. But what it will do for sure is to put the federal government in charge of whether YOU, and every other American citizen, can or cannot work to earn their daily bread.
E-Verify is the death of liberty in its most fundamental form.
You are a troll or a libertarian type. We used to use e-verify type hiring practices requiring birth and baptism and marriage certificates and divorce papers and history of redacted tax returns and utilitie bills and old check statements, any three just like for passport. High enough fines on employerd would stop this crap.
First of all it is only mess because laws have been ignored for 50 years. If someone was born here I assume they have a birth certificate otherwise AMF.
You’re an open border squish. Unemployment rate in Mexico is 4.5% the USA U6=14%. So bite me.
F-no. Jeb is that you?
“They believe that no one in their conscious mind can deport 11 million people from this country,” Alvarado said. “But, politically, they have to play word games to be elected in the primary.”
So we just throw up the white flag and say America it was great but FU! If a nation can’t protect itself from invasion then I guess it’s not really a nation.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, the only declared candidate so far, has kept a fairly consistent tough line on the issue.
And this is the bottom line for me.
All other issues are inconsequential if we lose the country.
I’m neither a troll nor a libertarian type. So you’re mistaken again.
E-Verify requires a national database of every American. It then requires every American to get permission from the custodians of that list, federal bureaucrats, in order to work and earn their daily bread.
So, our “representatives” fail in their fundamental duty to secure the states and We the People against invasion, and their “solution” is to grab a point of complete control over the most fundamental of our freedoms.
I know lots of conservatives have gotten sucked into this idea because they are sick of the invasion, but they’re just plain wrong if they think this is the way out of the mess.
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
- Benjamin Franklin
A national database of every American... Like social security or the IRS?
They have either agreed to work off the books for those many decades and used our healthcare system lying to qualify, stole or used stolen documents to work under someone else's Social Security number, driven cars without driver's licenses illegally, received government benefits illegally, and on and on.
If I, as a U.S. citizen, do any of the above, and get caught or not, I am committing many felonies. I don't lose my citizenship but I do lose many of the benefits of that citizenship, i.e. the right to vote, just for starters.
I believe already on the books for those wishing to come to the U.S. and work or in the U.S. I'm already and wish to become a citizen and committing felonies are denied that privilege. As such, I may not become a citizen as a convicted felon.
Please, someone, tell me why those rules should not also apply to those already here illegally?
Lastly, such "wiggle words" should be tossed right back into the faces of those saying them, "If I a citizen, commit unlawful acts and felonies for which I would be sent to jail, why do you propose erasing those same laws that would send me to jail, to someone who has broken the law by either coming across the border illegally or over-staying their visa? Is that not first and foremost unfair to judge me on laws you propose ignoring for an illegal alien?"
O.K. Norseman, that’s enough; damn it. I’m reading your Posts and they all make sense. You must stop that, and stop it NOW! A lot of people on here don’t like it when a sensible solution is proposed that is in opposition to their “my way or the highway” mind-set. Now, be good and play pretty with the other boys and girls.
>>First of all it is only mess because laws have been ignored for 50 years. If someone was born here I assume they have a birth certificate otherwise AMF.<<
You’re right on the cause of the mess. I don’t think you’ll much support for your AMF solution, however. You’d be more effective if you’d become a little more discriminating because the debate needs people who feel strongly that most illegals need to return to their home countries.
But few people try to reason with the unreasonable for very long.
>>You’re an open border squish.<<
By your definition of “an open border squish”, so is Senator Cruz and so are all of the other choices you will find on the ballot. That’s got to be frustrating for you.
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.