Posted on 11/24/2011 5:37:51 AM PST by NaturalBornConservative
During the CNN GOP National Security Debate on 11/22/2011, Newt Gingrich recommended a comprehensive approach to address illegal immigration. Just for the record, what Mr. Gingrich really said about Amnesty may be viewed here.
Gingrich said that such a plan must (A) start with securing the border, then (B) establishing a guest worker program, and finally (C) setting up a board to review the status of each person here illegally. Such a board would distinguish between those who recently came here, and those who are more established. He said that those who recently came here, who don't have family ties, or are otherwise not established, should be sent home. While those who are established, who have been here for 25 years or more, who have children and grandchildren in America, who belong to churches, who have obeyed the laws, and who have paid their taxes, should be allowed to stay legally, but not automatically granted citizenship. For the latter, he recommended using something similar to the Red Card Solution, which would be used as a form of identification, to grant legality, and place them on a path towards citizenship.
The Krieble Foundation's Red Card Solution is a proposal which would allow companies to recruit workers from Mexico. The Red Card would permit workers to enter America, and would allow employers and immigration authorities to track them. It would aid in enforcement of immigration laws, with less intrusion by the government. According to the Krieble Foundation:
"It’s a simple solution. Private employment agencies would be allowed to open offices in foreign countries, and authorized to issue temporary non-citizen worker permits. The permits would be “smart cards” with a microchip that includes a photograph, fingerprint or other biometric identification data, and information needed so that border agents, police, and employers could swipe the card and know who the holder is, where he works, where he lives, who issued the permit, when it expires, and any other required information. Employment agencies would be licensed by the government and would be required to run criminal background checks before issuing non-citizen worker permits, much like gun shops do today. Employers would simply post jobs with employment agencies like they do today. Best of all, the program would be funded by user fees, not taxpayers."
Gingrich also recommended that H1 Visas be granted with every graduate degree in math, science and engineering, to encourage foreign students to stay in America.
For the most part, I concur.
Total nonsense that's been repeated so often some people have been brainwashed into accepting it (or they are actually open borders believers). Any president who desired it could begin enforcing immigration at the employer level today.
We see the result in every state that passed their own laws; illegals begin to leave, often just in anticipation that the new laws will be enforced.
That "secure the border first" is the Juan McCain Ruse that he used in 2008 campaign and during his 2010 senate reelection campaign. It's nonsense, and nothing but the latest procrastination technique by politicians who have no intention of enforcing the law, now or later.
No, I call you a "purist" for your vociferous rants. While the situation sucks, until the borders are sealed, it will continue to get worse. On the other hand, try to picture the logistics of actually trying to ship 10 million or more back to where they came from. To put it bluntly, it aint gonna happen. In today's world, we won't even do things of that proportion to those we are supposedly at war with. Plus, the border is so porous that as fast as we can move them out, they and others will pour back in. Read an article the other day about a perp who was deported 4 times, yet there he was do ing the crime.
Unless you can see the reality, you will remain a rabid "purist" - break out the guns and blindfolds because it would take a lot of "posses" of like mind going around and exterminating them to have it your way.
I guess it is asking too much for you to engage your brain enough to acknowledge how McCain has pushed the secure the border first mantra while actually doing nothing to help secure the border.
I guess it is asking too much to point out Janet Napolitano has declared the border to be secure, and that those pushing for amnesty will simply declare the deed to be done, facts on the ground to the contrary. That's how DC works.
And I guess it is asking too much to notice that this outfit, Krieber, is pushing for more immigrant workers at a time we are facing rampant unemployment.
And it is also asking too much for you to notice that Newt is opposed to a border fence, so he is opposed to one of the single most important line items in border security.
So in other words, I am rabid for engaging my brain and you are rational for disengaging yours.
Hey, at least you are as inconsistent as those who say long-term illegal immigrants are not breaking any laws.
Gingrich is complete phony. He fails the first principled test, whether or not he supports equal protection for the unalienable rights of all in his words and political actions.
And we have several decades of examples of how that failure works itself out.
Your post 61 on this thread:
Yeah, what ever. You are clearly so over wrought and angry, so filled with hatred of Newt
You are such a pathetic shill, you can't even keep track of what you posted on this thread. But, then again, what can you expect from someone who buys into the notion that someone who has been here illegally for 25 years hasn't broken any laws?
You and newt are part of the establishment and part of the problem.
We should vote for someone who can beat Barack H. Obama, instead of a guy who's not sure about anything. Illegal immigration is only one subject of many.
If Newt is "dead wrong", then what's right? Racially profile and question anyone who looks Hispanic, or Muslim? Kick down doors and deport them all? Deport the parents but leave their legal-citizen children here? Deport the illegal wife, but leave the legal husband? Deport the illegal grandparents, but leave the rest of the family? Cain has no plan, so there's nothing there to judge him by, other than his own misguided rhetoric. So what's your plan?
McCain held many of these same views on amnesty. All it got him was smoked in November 2008.
If Newt is "dead wrong", then what's right? Racially profile and question anyone who looks Hispanic, or Muslim? Kick down doors and deport them all? Deport the parents but leave their legal-citizen children here? Deport the illegal wife, but leave the legal husband? Deport the illegal grandparents, but leave the rest of the family? Cain has no plan, so there's nothing there to judge him by, other than his own misguided rhetoric. So what's your plan?
Well, let's see. Repeal federal and state laws requiring bennies to illegals. Fully implement e-verify (something Newt opposes). Continue work on the border fence (something Newt opposes).
And push for deportation when caught being here illegally when caught on other offenses, like the Arizona law stipulates. No kicking in of doors required.
It would be a mix of legal law enforcement methods and self-deportation.
Amnesty shills love to raise the specter of kicking down doors and filling boxcars to make their critics seem like Nazis. We're not. We just want the laws on the books upheld. And there are ways to do that without the draconian measures you love to dangle as the only alternative to your amnesty position.
That's a good thing. And I don't have a problem with enforcing the laws at the state level. We do it here in Georgia. But we were talking about some people like I know, who have been here for 25 years or more, own a home, have children in school who were born here, and have worked and paid taxes here for 25 years or more. Yes, I do know some too. Should we just deport the parents now, but allow the kids to stay? Or have some kind of a panel look at the facts in such cases, and make some exceptions?
The Simpson-Mazzoli amnesty was 25 years ago. So, you want to award the grand prize now to the very first lawbreakers to enter illegally immediately after that amnesty which was to correct the problem for good?
And why is Newt even spewing this nonsense? Does anyone really think the present House and a new Senate with a Republican majority will pass this garbage, as much as the voters oppose it?
No Republican should be proposing this amnesty nonsense because it will cause a rift in party again just as it did under W and Rove and their non-stop pandering and amnesty pushing. And it won't win any new Hispanic votes for Republicans.
Where have I heard that one before? Sorry but we’ve done this before with same promises and results are 11 million+ illegals.
Newt lost my vote on this one. In fact I am sending him an email asking for my campaign contribution back!!
I agree. And come on folks: Newt blew up his chance at the nomination the other night on purpose. He’s running a vanity effort for president....he never thought he was going to be in fist place. I don’t like, or trust the guy, but he’s not stupid. He knew what he was doing when he came out with this nonsense.
I didn't vote for McCain in the primaries. Had to hold my nose in the generals. But I don't think his stance on immigration is what caused him to get smoked.
So your theory is that the most clueless, inarticulate candidate will do in 2012. I beg to differ.
Well, let's see. Repeal federal and state laws requiring bennies to illegals. Fully implement e-verify (something Newt opposes). Continue work on the border fence (something Newt opposes).
I don't know that Newt opposes what you say he does, simply because you say so. The link to the video containing what he said is in this post.
Enforcing the law is a good thing. And I don't have a problem with enforcing the laws at the state level. We do it here in Georgia. But we were talking about some people like I know, who have been here for 25 years or more, own a home, have children in school who were born here, and have worked and paid taxes here for 25 years or more. Yes, I do know some too. Should we just deport the parents now, but allow their citizen-kids to stay? Or have some kind of a panel look at the facts in such cases, and make some exceptions?
And push for deportation when caught being here illegally when caught on other offenses, like the Arizona law stipulates. No kicking in of doors required.
This still fails to address the point. Until the person breaks a law, or is miraculously somehow caught, nothing changes. And if one is caught, then what? Deport the illegal mother, father, or grandparent, but leave the "legal" family members? In other words, break up the family?
Enforcing the law is a good thing. And I don't have a problem with enforcing the laws at the state level. We do it here in Georgia.
Funny, Gingrich is opposed to a border fence. Opposed to e-verify.
Not the sign, to me, of someone serious about combating illegal immigration.
And seriously, the BIG difference between 2007 and now in this amnesty debate is the economy. Can you seriously back an outfit - Kriebel - that wants companies to be able to bring in low-cost third-world labor into this country at a time when millions of Americans are out of work?
Yep, humanity for the illegals. Guest-worker jobs for non-Americans. And out-of-work Americans can go suck eggs. THAT to me is the biggest issue here.
Uh, let's see... Ronald Reagan!
Leave it up to the family members as to whether they go back to the home country. We don't ask this kind of question about criminals being sent up for a jail term.
Oh, and given how many illegals left Arizona and Alabama, just the possibility of getting caught triggers a lot of self-deportations.
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.