Posted on 08/07/2007 7:36:00 AM PDT by Calpernia
Good name anyway. :o)
Nice article!
bump!
Next year? The media has picked the liberal GOP nominee for the last 4 elections. At least. Unfortunately, some here are willing to let them do it again. Boggles the mind.
Sorry, NOT good enough.
Amnesty/aspirations of citizenship for NO illegal aliens.
“I think that most people would be willing to cut illegals who have been here for many years - say 5 or more years - a break, especially if they had a family, were working and not on welfare, were paying taxes, had no criminal record and WANTED TO STAY HERE AND BE AMERICANS.”
That would be amnesty.
NO AMNESTY for illegal aliens.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1864263/posts
Excerpt:
Irving Baxter: Let’s say that these fences really work and become air tight and I believe that is possible. What do we do about all the people that are already here?
Duncan Hunter: I think we ask them to go home. This country has lost 619 thousand Americans on the battlefields around the world in the last 100 years making the world safe. The reason we are not sending people back to Nazi Germany because we took care of Nazi Germany and we liberated the Germans and the reason we are not sending people back to a Communist Poland is because we brought down the Berlin Wall. The reason we are not sending people back to a Marxist Dictatorship in El Salvador is because we liberated El Salvador. We have made the world much freer. And we have pumped billions of dollars into lots of countries to improve their economies. So I think the United States, more than any nation in the world, has a right to tell folks, you folks stay in your own country, make it work and when you want to come into America knock on the front door.
Irving Baxter: We are interviewing today, U.S. Congressman Duncan Hunter, from California, Republican candidate for President of the United States. We are very happy to have him with us. Congressman, I don’t want to just pound away on a single issue I want to give you a chance to speak to some other things that are very important to you and our nation. But before we leave the immigration issue, I just want to follow up a little bit. So we got an estimate of 12 - 20 million illegals here. I’ll be honest with you, this gives me a mixed feeling because I know some of them. I’ve met them. They are working, some have been here a long, long time. They broke the law to get here. Our government has broke the law to allow them to get here. So I think our government has some responsibility. Do you really think we can require them all to go home?
Duncan Hunter: Well, sure. I think we can. And the point is, going back to Mexico is not the end of the world. Mexico is a wonderful country. It has enormous natural resources. We have put billions of dollars into Mexico to give them an economic shot in the arm.
And you know something else, a lot of folks that come to the United States, who are here illegally, have homes in other countries. Now one reason politicians in Mexico City like the open border, is because people come across and send back billions of dollars. The last figure I saw was between 6 – 10 billion dollars a year, of money that they make in the United States to their real homes, in this case in Mexico. But other people come from lots of other countries. In fact in the year 2005 we apprehended, and these are just the folks we caught, we caught a 155 thousand people coming across the border from Mexico that weren’t just citizens of Mexico. They came from virtually every country in the world, including 1100 folks from communist China and a few folks from North Korea and Iran. So the idea that the guy that got smuggled into this country in December because he had an affective smuggler, has the right to have citizenship in the United States, I can’t accept that.
Once again, a whole lot of folks that are here have second homes or have original homes. To make them an American citizen would basically be giving them 2 citizenships. They would be having the citizenship in their original home, where they send their money and they would now have a citizenship in the United States. The problem with giving Amnesty is this, we gave Amnesty in 1986 for 3 million people. And we said that’s it. No one else can come across. The U.S. Senate put up a little stop sign and put it on the border. That stop sign was promptly run over with Goodyear Tires and you had 12 million people stampede for that border after the 1st Amnesty. If we give a second Amnesty, we will have a third wave of people rushing the border of the United States because that is human nature. You will have people coming over expecting the 3rd Amnesty. Just like people came over the 1st Amnesty saying I’ll come in now, 5, 6, 7 years from now they will have another one and I’ll be legalized. Once you abandon the rule of law you are in real trouble. There is nothing wrong with folks going home and then applying for admission back into the United States. Now if they come from a country where people are in danger of being killed if they go back and that happens sometimes. During the days of the Cold War, and before we brought down the Berlin Wall, there were some very dangerous places. There are still a few of them, where people can’t go back and they probably will be killed if they go back. And we give humanitarian exception for those folks. We have done a lot to spread freedom and economic prosperity around this world if they would take it up.
The other thing is, I think the politicians in Mexico City like the open border because it is a pressure release valve for them. If they don’t take care of their people if they don’t provide economic opportunity, and they don’t, than instead of their voters throwing them out of office they want people to vote with their feet and just leave the country. And that is what they do. They vote with their feet and leave the country and come to the United States. I think there is nothing wrong with letting that pressure build up and result in a changed political system that hopefully results in freedom for the people rather than have them vote with their feet and come to the United States and do another Amnesty.
Irving Baxter: You make wonderful points Congressman. The recent immigration bill that was defeated, I got the impression, that was, although I am not saying we should be for Amnesty I think we would have a huge problem, ….But, I don’t think it Amnesty is what killed that bill. A lot of people say it was an anti Amnesty vote and yet when Kay Bailey Hutchinson presented her amendment that people had to go home and apply and come back that amendment was defeated. It was killed that is not the reason the Senate killed this bill it was when the Balicus (?) Tester amendment came up. And that striped out of the bill, the Real ID provisions. That appears to be what killed that bill. Do you have any comments on that?
Duncan Hunter: You know, it’s hard to tell. Because when you have an amendment that comes up you may have a Senator that votes for the amendment even if he doesn’t agree with it on the basis that it will make the bill so ugly that the bill can’t pass. So it is very difficult to read the motives in the political cross currents when have a bill with a lot of amendments coming up. I think the Amnesty provisions did jam the senate switch boards and I think that’s the issue that convinced lots of Senators to take a second look at this one.
(snip)
And there is our whole problem in a nutshell... we are content to have an “acceptable” candidate... And don’t get me wrong, I like Fred, and honestly, if Hunter is not the candidate, then the only other one I see myself supporting is Fred. But why do we insist on cutting our legs out from under ourselves time after time?
All a person has to do is hang out here on FR and read post after post about how we need a solid conservative candidate for a change (and I don’t mean that false doctrine of “compassionate-conservative”). We continue to preach to the choir, and then when the time comes to put up or shut up, we say - ok, an acceptable candidate...
We harp how we want change, then vote for the same-old thing.
What the heck? We need a conservative. Fred kind of plays that roll - kind of. He is likeable, which is a plus. But that does not mean he will be a great president. Better than ObiminaHitlery - sure. Better than RudiMcRomney - probably - but why do we not look towards trying to elect a truly great candidate? One that might actually make a tangible POSITIVE difference? Because we are afraid to go out on a limb.
Fred talks a big game about wanting to come in to make a change - and that is great. But if he were honest about his reasons - he would look at someone like Hunter first - and then, if that candidate didn’t look to be able to deliver, then sure - jump in. Maybe that is what Fred is waiting for - or maybe he has an alternative motive...
But if we continue to settle for less than what we really want and believe in, then we have lost the right to complain when we get another turkey in office. Just think about how great most here on FR thought about GW - and now it isn’t hare to find anger, frustration, and even a desire for him to be out of office sooner rather than later. Heck, I have even heard (and written a few) suggestions that he should be impeached over his attempt to give away US sovereignty... Such a far cry from suggesting his face be on Mt. Rushmore...
Thanks!
The difference between Duncan Hunter and Fred Thompson on this issue is like night and day.
Hunter is a no nonsense, ‘get it done’ guy on both securing the borders (6 months) and no-amnesty enforcement of our immigration laws.
As far as I’m concerned, CFRer Fred Thompson will do no more than Bush would. I’m looking forward to him explaining exactly how he’s going to determine who is here, determine who is faced with attrition, and since he opposes ‘blanket’ amnesty, the criteria he’ll use to determine which and how many illegal aliens get “aspirations of citizenship” (amnesty).
Ain’t that the truth.
There you are.
Better late than never!
Long read, but well worth it.
Looks like this one is well worth the BOOKMARK!
Wow, Great Article! That makes the case for Duncan Hunter better than anything I have read yet. The campaign should distribute that everywhere.
Hunter BUMP
You don’t have to convince me. You’d have to kill me to get me off Hunter’s train!
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.