Posted on 08/28/2011 7:17:37 PM PDT by mnehring
Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) was first elected in 1976 but has never authored any legislation to stop illegal immigration. This has occurred despite the fact he represents Texas which has the nation’s longest border with Mexico.
He is against the E-Verify program to stop employers from hiring illegal aliens. In fact, he is against all laws prohibiting employers from hiring illegal aliens. He opposes Arizona’s get tough policies and the deportation of people who are here illegally. If a state wants open borders that is fine with him. NumbersUSA gives him an “F” rating on immigration.
When he ran for president in 1988 as a Libertarian, Paul advocated the official policy of his party. He said, “As in our country’s first 150 years, there shouldn’t be any immigration policy at all. We should welcome everyone who wants to come here and work.” At the same time he advocated the complete elimination of the Border Patrol, which he said was unconstitutional.
He has since changed his mind and now has strong rhetoric against illegal immigration on the campaign trail. This is not supported by his voting record or other actions. He claims to be against amnesty but his new book advocates it. He claims to be against birthright citizenship but his book supports it. He voted for the 2006 Secure Fence Act and claims he supports the Border Fence, but he also voted against it on numerous occasions and always says it is not needed. He claims sensors at the border are enough. He also says the military is not needed on the border, and the Border Patrol is sufficient. Some of Paul’s votes against using the military on the border include:
The Congressman was in the forefront of those who stopped the real ID program, which is not a national ID. It was designed to make sure we did not give ID’s to illegal aliens.
TOM TANCREDO SAYS PAUL IS PRO-AMNESTY
I regret having to quote WorldNetDaily, but this where former Rep. Tom Tancredo’s (R-CO) May 23rd article appeared. Excerpts are below.
“I served with Ron Paul in Congress for 10 years. He was a member of my Immigration Reform Caucus, and I consider him a friend. . . Unfortunately, it appears that Paul’s views on immigration have now shifted into the pro-amnesty camp. Last week, Rep. Paul released his latest book, ‘Liberty Defined: 50 Essential Issues That Affect Our Freedom.’
“One of those 50 issues is immigration, and Paul gives a more detailed explanation of his views in the book than I have ever seen before. The result is not pretty. Ron Paul’s book misrepresents the views of immigration-control advocates and then insults their motivations. He insinuates that patriotic Americans who oppose mass immigration are lazy and motivated by race. . .
“According to Paul, deporting illegal immigrants would be “incompatible with human rights.” That is an off argument for any true libertarian to make, since the protection of true human rights begins with the U.S. Constitution and our ability to enforce the rule of law.
“The truth is that we do not need to deport all illegal aliens to make them go home. If we simply prevent employers from hiring illegal aliens by using E-Verify and step up interior enforcement as Arizona, Oklahoma and other states have done, most illegal aliens will go home on their own. Paul comes out against both these policies. . . He absurdly calls the idea of fining employers for hiring illegal aliens ‘involuntary servitude.’
“Paul comes out against Arizona’s popular SB 1070 law using absurd arguments of the type normally heard only from America-hating leftists: ‘Arizona-type immigration legislation can turn out to be harmful. Being able to stop any American citizen under the vague charge of ‘suspicion’ is dangerous even more so in the age of secret prisons and a stated position of assassinating American citizens if deemed a ‘threat,’ without charges ever being made.’
“I am still scratching my head trying to figure out what supposed secret prisons and political assassinations have to do with enforcing our immigration laws. The Arizona law’s definition of ‘reasonable suspicion’ is the same standard that applies for federal immigration officials and local law enforcement for non-immigration violations, so the law does not expand police powers.
“So if we can’t enforce the law, what does Paul want to do with the 12 million illegal aliens here in this country? While he says he opposes amnesty, he argues, ‘Maybe a ‘green card’ with an asterisk could be issued.’ This ‘asterisk’ would deny them welfare and not grant them immediate ‘automatic citizenship.’ Both these qualifications are meaningless because every amnesty proposal makes illegal aliens jump through some symbolic hoops before they get amnesty. I have no idea why he has changed his position on illegal immigration, but one thing is clear: Asterisk or not, Ron Paul now supports amnesty.”
PAUL DOES NOT SPEAK FOR ALL ISOLATIONISTS
Many isolationists disagree with the Congressman. They agree with him that all U.S. troops should “come home,” but unlike Congressman Tancredo, they want these soldiers deployed on the border. Even if that did happen, it has been demonstrated many times it is impossible to establish perfect border security. That is why Republicans believe it is vital to clamp down on employers and eliminate the reason illegal immigrants are in the United States.
America has a 5,525 mile border with Canada, a 1,969 mile border with Mexico, and 12,383 miles of coastline. Thousands of Chinese immigrants have arrived illegally by ship. Searching every container on every ship has proven to be impossible.
The real answer is E-Verify and restrictions on employers who hire illegal immigrants.
Wrong RP, albeit, Perry isn’t much better on immigration issues than Paul.
I’m all for open borders; HOWEVER, open borders and a welfare state are incompatible ... Pick one!
Normally I would oppose those things but we need to stop Obama from winning! Ron Paul has an R by his name, let’s stop the attacks and get behind Ron Paul.
Best Parody Ever!
Your a supposed Palin supporter but Palin supports Perry so why do you peddling Perry hate ? You seem only to trash anyone who threatens the Dem candidates ?
You don't seem too concerned that your Left Wing astro turfing help the Marxist ?
Just like your trashing Meg Whitman when she up against Jerry Brown ?
But then again you hated Whitman way more that Jerry Brown.
In fact you never attacked Jerry Brown just the
Republican candidate just like
Now with your Perry Hating posts! Are you happy you helped work to get Brown elected ?
True. It wouldn’t bother me a bit if he (Perry) did a big flip flop on some border issues. But to Perry’s credit, he did sign a law requiring photo identification to vote.
Tempest,
You’re sarcasm is unhinging the most unstable of Perry Apologists, keep it up!
Um. No thanks.
I’ve heard the libertarian position on immigration expressed a number of times as: Any immigrant who can come to the US and not become a ward of the state, i.e., be self-supporting, then an many as desire to come should be allowed. No limits.
And that sounds about like what RP is saying in so many words.
My statement made it clear that immigrants must be self-supporting under the libertarian idea. I'm totally against the libertarian ideas on immigration and many other issues.
I often heard Neil Boortz state that libertarian idea before the amnesty debates of 2006 and 2007. Haven't listened to Boortz much in years so don't know if he still states that position.
If Ron Paul is all that is standing between Obama and a second term get ready to swear him in again. He would be squashed like a fruit salad.
I have yet to see anything wherein he is not clueless and would sell out every US interest because of his false view of the constitution.
I find it interesting that you are opposed to a candidate who would not only crush Obama but bring in an overwhelming Republican majority with him. Hence on the surface you have no concerns about conservative victory.
California will elect to give aid and be the gateway.
A fence of sensors will work just fine — as long as triggering the sensors sets off landmines that blanket the entire area with anesthetic sliver shrapnel & tear gas so when the border patrol responds they just cart away the unconscious bodies.
This should tell you that we need to stop fighting because it only helps George Soros when we fight. Because George logs on here every night just to hear us bicker over Ron Paul to his utter glee.
Get behind Ron Paul now before it's too late. Anoint!!! Anoint!!!!
What's an "u mad"?
I would think that Sarah Palin endorsing someone for governor against a liberal opponent at the state level should not be construed as an endorsement at the national level....
I think you could buy 3 miles of fence for the price of one of those awesome sounding landmines.
I think some Paul supporters are playing games trying to change the subject of any critical threads about Paul to starting fights between other candidates. I’m in the Palin or Cain camp (with Perry tied in my third tier choices) and have seen this kind of stuff on threads about all of them. Paul people love to play games and really want to get the Palin and Perry people fighting and ripping each other to shreds so Paul can be the ‘last man standing’.
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.