To: Man50D
There is nothing disingenuous about making a distinction between an amnesty that puts people who entered the country illegal onto a track toward citizenship, thereby rewarding their contempt for law, and an amnesty that regularizes their status by ‘grandfathering’ them into a guest-worker program as part of a reform of immigration policy that simultaneously secures the borders and addresses the reliance of some industries on economic migrants.
I have long been absolutely opposed to the former, which is what everyone from G.W. Bush left seem to mean (in Orwellian fashion) by “comprehensive immigration reform” and supportive of the latter, which is what the phrase should mean. It sounds to me like Palin is spot on on the issue.
47 posted on
02/16/2010 10:56:15 AM PST by
The_Reader_David
(And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
To: The_Reader_David
There is nothing disingenuous about making a distinction between an amnesty that puts people who entered the country illegal onto a track toward citizenship, thereby rewarding their contempt for law, and an amnesty that regularizes their status by grandfathering them into a guest-worker program as part of a reform of immigration policy that simultaneously secures the borders and addresses the reliance of some industries on economic migrants.
It is disingenuous when we already have laws that put foreigners on a path to citizenship by standing in line like those who have waited to enter the country legally for years but instead pretends as if existing immigration laws don't address this situation thereby allowing these criminals, who knowingly and willingly violate our laws, to remain in the country.
51 posted on
02/16/2010 11:46:39 AM PST by
Man50D
(Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson