I don’t support amnesty. Newt actually said
“I don’t see how the party that says it’s the party of the family, is going to adopt an immigration policy which destroys families that have been here a quarter century,” the former House Speaker said. “And I’m prepared to take the heat for saying ‘let’s be humane and enforce the law without giving them citizenship but by finding a way to create legality so they are not separate from their families.’”
That is not as extreme as what Reagan said in 84. Create legality, not give them citizenship. Get the difference?
Sounds like amnesty. They get to stay, their crime is forgiven and no doubt they keep drawing entitlement benefits to boot. Probably get to vote too.
So, what part of being a citizen do they not have? The responsibility and accountability?
“I don’t support amnesty. Newt actually said ... Create legality, not give them citizenship. Get the difference?”
No.
Because there is no difference. If by “creating legality” you mean making what was illegal, legal ... well—that’s the definition of “amnesty”.
We’re used to this kind of obfuscation from Zero (and Clinton). Spare us the bovine excrement.
You and Newt are full of beans.