Posted on 04/19/2015 3:14:32 PM PDT by VinL
Republicans lost the 2012 presidential election during their primaries. By the time Mitt Romney secured his party’s nomination, the seeds of his defeat had already germinated. The challenge for Republicans in 2016 will be to keep that from happening again. And no issue is more fraught with dangers for Republicans than immigration.
Of the three announced Republican candidates — Sens. Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul — Rubio is probably in the best position to avoid the mistakes of the past.
OPINION
Paul’s problem is that he has been all over the board on immigration. Although he has recently said he favors legislation that would give work permits to many of the 11 million immigrants now in the U.S. illegally, Paul wants to revoke birthright citizenship. But the nation has, from its founding, embraced birthright citizenship, albeit denying it to the descendants of slaves until passage of the 14th Amendment. A constitutional amendment revoking birthright citizenship has no chance of adoption, and those who argue that simple legislation would suffice ignore the plain language of the 14th Amendment, the legislative history and debate at the time of adoption, and Supreme Court precedents.
Cruz, on the other hand, has made opposition to illegal immigration a cornerstone of his political identity, pushing to shut down the entire Department of Homeland Security to prevent funding for President Barack Obama’s executive amnesty. But even Cruz has adopted a softer tone in the aftermath of the announcement of his presidential bid, saying he favors a legal guest-worker program — a position opposed by restrictionist anti-immigration groups, such as NumbersUSA and the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
So how would Rubio fare in the immigration debate within the party? Rubio (snip)
(Excerpt) Read more at chicago.suntimes.com ...
I will compassionately drive them back to our southern border and wish them well on their journey south.
“Compassionate” as defined by whom?
It is not “compassion” to advocate breaking the law, coming here illegally, and rewarding same.
Yeesh.
They have their own countries.
Put hay in the boxcars.
That's as far as I'll go.
There is too much here to be worried about without having to worry about every other countries citizens.
Bull Crap!
Being right is more important though
These leftists know that if the GOP takes their advice, the Dems win
Compassionate for whom?
U. S. Citizens that always come first in my book and last in hers, or foreign nationals that always come last in my book and first in hers?
WRONG PREMISE to start from.
Linda Chavez has been a longtime apologist for the illegal invasion.
We need to cut legal immigration significantly from the current 1.1 million a year to around 300,000.
So we are supposed to listen to this lib rag for advice about our candidate?
/spit
Hey, Linda: I want to know what laws I can break, that by breaking not only will I not be punished, but will be rewarded, as well!
My but the Conquistador class is desperate to get their gusano slave army into the U.S. permanently.
Chavez claims we had birthright citizenship from the beginning?
Yeah. For the children of natural born white freeholders.
It took an amendment to the Constitution to change that. And it still doesn’t apply to the children of invaders here illegally, unless you willfully misinterpret Wong Kim Ark.
“Linda Chavez has been a longtime apologist for the illegal invasion.”
And it goes back before she employed illegals as domestics, and did not withhold taxes, etc.
She is a long-time La Raza supporter.
When did it become compassionate to void American citizens’ votes?
Thats what we would do if we had intelligent, far sighted people running the country who have the nations best interests at heart instead of their own.
Of course we low thats not the case.
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.
