Posted on 11/22/2011 10:05:37 PM PST by VinL
After tonght's debate, Mitt Romney's campaign clearly saw an opening to go after a surging Newt Gingrich, after he argued for considering a path to citizenship for immigrants who had originally come to this country illegally 25 years ago, but had spent decades integrating themselves in a community.
“Newt Gingrich supported the 1986 amnesty act, and even though he conceded that was a mistake, he said that he was willing to repeat that mistake, by extending amnesty to immigrants who are illegally in the country today," Romney adviser and spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom said in the spin room following the AEI/Heritage Foundation debate in Washington, DC. “Mitt Romney is against amnesty, and Newt Gingrich made it very clear he was for amnesty.”
(Excerpt) Read more at campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com ...
My only question for Newt is, within this realm of moral relativism, what's the difference between an illegal family living here 25 years, and a family here 5 years with five kids in school,or a illegal teenage age kid living here 6 months whose sole purpose is to make money to send home to his destitute parents? And since there is no moral difference, then obviously, they all must stay– or go. Right?
Bad business here.
Mitt’s from Massachusetts. Has he ever even met a Mexican?
Only Bachmann is running on blanket deportation.
All the rest have forms of selective Deportation (’cept Mitt and Hunts)
Mitt hired illegals, got caught, then continued.
Then there is his aggressive moves to shut down the many “amnesty cities” in Massachusetts... lol
To Newt’s credit, he was the only candidate that mentioned deportation. Most everyone else avoided the controversial issue of how best to attend to the illegal relics.
I am not advocating for illegals getting instant citizenship.
However I have a question for the pols, these illegals that have SSN#’s have been paying SSN tax have no hope of collecting SSN at end retirement time.
Are the pols advocating returning ill gotten taxes to the illegals who have been sucking ill gotten services for the last 25 yrs.
I had never thought about the SS issue until legal resident of mexican origin pointed it out.
That rephrases your question and should make it a bit easier for you to see the correct answer.
Mitt to Gingrich:
“You’re pinker than I am. Now I’m off to buy Masscare before the ‘open’ enrollment period ends.”
The point I am trying to make is that pols are complicit in this arrangement, they get tax money that is to be returned at retirement time without needing to return said monies.
The pols get free monies knowing full well that they will never need to repay, do to the fact that the illegals have no recourse.
The dirty secret of illegal immigration.
I do not know personally whether those who buy SSN cards are aware of this issue or if they consider cost of doing business to get better life for their family.
I am willing to bet that politicians are well aware of the issue and are willing to let status quo stand.
As to someone knowingly buying stolen goods— I despise thieves, be they a man on the street with gun in hand or a politician in office lining his/her pockets from the public coffers.
The difference between the 2 examples above is at least you know the intentions of the man/woman with gun in hand stealing your wares.
With politicians who the hell knows, just elect me and I will end all your woes.
I will send you the bill later in the form of taxes.
The first example assuming you survive is quick.
The second goes on until the next politician picks your pocket
Just those he had mowing his lawn.
Newt could not help but expose himself, as he always does, as he would in a debate with Obama. He is a RINO hypocrite, pure and simple. I could show 42 video clips here demonstrating that. Do I really need to? Isn’t it obvious? Do not FReepers realize this is the SAME Newt Gingrich we ALL bashed relentlessly for years on this forum? Are you really all so easily fooled by the Pied Piper of Debates to forget that this “historian” has an actual history?
Pretty damn good history, when he was in office.
You with Mitt on this one? :-)
I’m stickin with Herman Cain. I don’t want another 8 years of a Republican President trying to push Amnesty through and lecturing us about how we have to make lawbreakers into citizens.
“My only question for Newt is, within this realm of moral relativism, what’s the difference between an illegal family living here 25 years, and a family here 5 years with five kids in school,or a illegal teenage age kid living here 6 months whose sole purpose is to make money to send home to his destitute parents? And since there is no moral difference, then obviously, they all must stay– or go. Right? “
GREAT POINT...because the courts will ask the SAME QUESTION...and then we’ll have a full Amnesty before we can blink.
You are correct.
Team Mitt, from Romney’’s illegal alien Belmont
sanctuary, slammed Newt for endorsing “amnesty”.
Romney is ineligible and is from a Mexican father.
ROMNEY REMOVES OBAMA’S INELGIBILITY which
is why Romney is backed by Soros.
Romney we all know is the ultimate insider. Ron Paul's foreign policy is more suited for the 1930s than for today. Newt killed himself on amnesty. Perry is Bush 43 all over again. Huntsman is a Democrat. Cain is a latecomer to pro-life. Bachman and santorum have no shot because they are not given a chance.
That leaves us in a dilemma - either we have 0bambi for four more years because PUBs are not serious about winning. OR Governor Palin reconsiders her decisions.
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.