Posted on 11/01/2009 11:07:45 AM PST by lonewacko_dot_com
Hoffman's immigration stance - all three sentences of it - is here:
Where do you stand on illegal immigration?
There is no question that our immigration policies are flawed. The answer, though, is not to put up a wall and stop all immigration. The answer is to create an easier path for immigrants to enter the United States - and to work here - while at the same time getting tough on illegal immigrants who commit crimes.
For those who don't follow this issue that closely, the above is Bush-like boilerplate. For instance, compare what Hoffman says to what Bush said in 2004:
I will work to ensure a system of safe and orderly migration. Earlier this year, I proposed a temporary worker program, not an amnesty program, that will offer legal status as temporary workers to undocumented men and women who were employed in the United States when I announced this proposal.
Much more at the link, and there are some questions for him here. It might be better to ask him about that now - and perhaps get him to change his mind and oppose "guest" workers - than to find out later what exactly he supports.
(Excerpt) Read more at 24ahead.com ...
A politicians answer.
It still doesn’t explain his stance on illegal immigration
And where is Owens on illegal immigration?
In other words, the issue doesn’t matter - this guy has enough conservative credentials at this point.
Sorry, but I still like a person that is willing to address situations
and not set on the fence. It’s true, we need immigration addressed
but not the “let’s put down the red carpet” mentality of the left.
It’s not going to be easy but a wall is only a band aid.
I say, give him a chance.
Oh please, now at this late date we’re going to find problems with Hoffman? And do what, elect a democrat over the conservative we all insisted on? Let’s get down to business and win now.
But it’s best we get his vow of no amnesty now
Hoffman? It's hard to say what he would do. We only have Bush's record to track. The main difference is that Bush was running for President and Hoffman is not.
Ah, the attempt to destroy him has begun.
Leaving aside the merits of whatever Hoffman said (or didn’t say), ANY Democrat is going to be worse than ANY Republican on this issue.
Sounds like he may be another Mel Martinez.
We need fiscal and social conservatives in office immediately. We will straighten them out later on immigration. Let’s work on getting people back to work and protecting our Constitution.
“Ah, the attempt to destroy him has begun.”
Good point - and NO DOUBT it’s coming from the same bunch that nominated Scarface. They are obviously SCARED TO DEATH.
Even if he’s sympathetic to Amnesty, we have a better chance of stopping it with him than we do with a Democrat.
Thanks for pointing that out. One minor issue: if you ask any politician if they support “amnesty”, they’ll say no.
You have to ask him whether he would ever support “comprehensive immigration reform”, what form of “reform” he’d support, and under what exact conditions.
|
Too bad we didn’t have the Internet back in the ‘70s to prevent that moderate Reagan from getting elected./sarc
So he is not perfect. No one is.
And that’s how you get Rino Creep.
Heaven forbid if we actually make a small move back in the same direction!
Sheesh! No wonder we keep losing!
If these people who criticize Hoffman and others like him are so damned perfect, why don't they run?
So which Leftist propaganda outfit do you work for?
3 days before the election and SUDDENLY you notice this? I smell a rat.
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.