Posted on 10/28/2007 6:01:51 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson today discussed his new immigration proposal which, he said, distinguished him from his key rivals on the hot-button issue.
“This does draw a distinction between myself and others,” Thompson said in a Des Moines Register interview before attending the Iowa GOP’s annual Ronald Reagan dinner in Des Moines.
Thompson, a former Tennessee senator, said he would end the policy of sanctuary cities, where illegal immigrants can obtain government benefits without fear of deportation.
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who also is seeking the 2008 GOP presidential nomination, has been criticized by some Republican candidates for New York’s status as such a city during Giuliani’s term in office.
Thompson also appeared to be subtly criticizing GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who has been critical of bipartisan legislation in Congress to allow illegal immigrants to stay in the country. But Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, has not proposed an immigration plan.
And his promise to allow no amnesty was a shot at Arizona Sen. John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate who led the failed effort on the bipartisan bill last year.
Thompson’s plan also would double the number of immigration agents, increase border patrols to 25,000, prosecute illegal workers and their employers, and make English the official language of the United States.
“It’s strong on enforcement and it basically addresses what needs to be our commitment and that is to secure the borders and enforce the law,” Thompson said.
Iowa Republicans rate immigration as a top priority. A Des Moines Register poll in May showed 27 percent of likely Republican caucusgoers considered immigration extremely important, closely behind the war in Iraq. Fighting terrorism and values were the only two issues to rank higher.
Thompson had previously said rounding up the estimated 12 million people in the country illegally was unrealistic. He said Saturday the number could shrink quickly through enforcement of existing law.
“I think that we would have attrition if we had enforcement,” he said. “Over a period of time, we would begin to see the system rectify itself.”
Here are a few links
HERE or HERE or HERE or even as far back as 2005 HERE
The first one is spot-on correct.
I like Fred, but I think it’s only fair to say that Tom Tancredo beat him to the punch on this issue. Fred’s position on immigration is spot on. He’s just not the first to articulate it. Fred’s got plenty of other good positions, as do Tancredo and Hunter.
Maybe so, but what are Tom Tancredo’s chances of being the GOP nominee? Or Hunter’s?
Heh, he.
Fred, on the other hand, did exactly what he said he was going to to. He came for two terms, and when they were over, he left.
I still prefer Duncan Hunter as my first choice, but Fred is certainly acceptable.
Tancredo would make an excellent choice for Attorney General in a Thompson administration.
“I think that we would have attrition if we had enforcement,” he said. “Over a period of time, we would begin to see the system rectify itself.”
Is this what you’re so excited about? If so, you are pretty easy.
Some good ideas, did he mention the Fence and 25,000 BP agents is not enough.
So far Fred’s plan is the most realistic that I’ve heard from our front running Candidates.
As if a Mittwit would have any room to talk on immigration (Illegal Guatemalan grass-cutters, anyone?)
Illegal Immigration Hardliner Mitt Romney Hires Undocumented Workers To Tend His Lawn http://thinkprogress.org/2006/12/01/romney-illegal-immigration/
Point well made, but you have to start somewhere, and I for one won’t be herded by the M$M on issues of “electability.” That’s their code for “RINO.” I do like Fred, and he’s at the top of my short list at this time. I could care less that he doesn’t play the game the way the media wants him to. What I do caution Freepers about, is that when Fred says “Federalism,” he really means it. That will not get some folks here what they want.
Let’s take abortion for example. A Federalist approach, would mean that Roe v. Wade was wrong, and the issue should be up to the states, where it was before that (expletive) court ruling. Many here want a Federal preemption of the issue in favor of banning all abortions, minus the rigors of a constitutional amendment. President Thompson wouldn’t play it that way. Anti-abortion folks would have to actually use the system the way it was supposed to work, and couldn’t count on Fred to carry their water, against his understanding of how republican government was designed to work.
Does that make sense?
Rep. Hunter explained , “I can tell you that my proposals to significantly increase and strengthen deportations, penalties, interior and border enforcement, and to curtail the incentives for illegal aliens generally had few vocal allies in the US Senate… Mr. Thompson certainly was not among them."
WHAT?!? A Thompson article that didn’t start out with “lazy” or “stupor” or some other nonsense? My thanks to the writer, Thomas Beaumont. I don’t know who he is, but, “Bravo!”
What year did Congressman Hunter propose building that fence, if you happen to know?
And there was someone before Tom, and someone before them and so on. The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll has Fred and Rudy within ONE point of each other for the lead spot in the pubbie primary. That is about the total average level of support for Tom
Now I am not picking on you or any one specifically. I am picking on all here that want to keep knocking the guy that is responding to the will of the people and actually has a good chance at being able to carry it out. Or have we all forgotten so quickly how disgusted we were with a certain administration that turned it's back on the American Citizens?
We have someone right in front of us that was literally pulled from the sidelines because of that very characteristic. He is responding to the will of the people with a solution that will actually work and NOW I am hearing "oh, it is this guy's idea, it was that guy's idea, Fred did not think it up."
Well DUH! Guess what? We thought it up.
It is called "from the consent of the governed."
You got to start watching something other than the “Lord of the Rings”.
The true conservatives are going to stick it out, if for no other reason, to see who gets the VP slot.
Mitt has not proposed any plan on many of his "ideas"
Haven’t seen that phrase for a while. Bravo!
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.