EL UNIVERSAL, (CARACAS, VENEZUELA) Original in Spanish "ESTADOS UNIDOS: Gingrich favorece políticas migratorias más humanas" ...
Candidato republicano se pronuncia a favor de la inmigración"
Posted on 11/23/2011 5:55:17 PM PST by AmericanInTokyo
EL UNIVERSAL, (CARACAS, VENEZUELA) Original in Spanish "ESTADOS UNIDOS: Gingrich favorece políticas migratorias más humanas" ...
Candidato republicano se pronuncia a favor de la inmigración"
Wednesday November 23, 2011 24:08
("FREEPRANSLATION" TO ENGLISH): "Washington, D.C. - Newt Gingrich, the newest candidate in the race for the Republican presidential nomination, has run the risk of scaring the conservatives saying that favors the establishment of legal channels for illegal immigrants who have behaved peacefully, within the law paid their taxes and lived in the U.S. for many years. During a televised debate on Tuesday night, former House of Representatives Speaker said his break with the current thinking of his Party on illegal immigration and tried to capitalize recent gains in the polls, the AP reported. "I do not see how the Party that says it is the "Party of Families" will adopt an immigration policy that destroys families who have been here a quarter century,'' Gingrich said during the debate televised by CNN. "I am prepared to withstand attacks by saying that we are human in the application of the law,' 'he said. The other candidates immediately lambasted the statements and said that Gingrich supported what many in the party is an "amnesty''that would allow most or all immigrants who entered illegally stay in the country.
Many conservatives strongly oppose granting legal residency to illegal immigrants, especially from Mexico and Central America, under almost any circumstance. Mitt Romney (former governor of Massachusetts, venture capital investor and a favorite of the elites) was the one who attacked Gingrich. He argued that any path to legalization would be a magnet to make more if the to cross in illegally from Mexico.
The immigration issue has divided U.S. politicians for years. Many analysts say that Republicans run the risk of angering the rapidly growing Hispanic population, showing little sympathy for the millions of residents already in the country but with illegal status. The conservative Gingrich is near the top in the polls, but it is unclear whether he can stay there now. Beyond the questions about his divorce, extramarital affairs and business, his previous views on climate change and other issues could be seen as too moderate for some Republican conservatives." (END OF TRANSLATION
Newt treats conservatives like his wives. In the end he always betrays them.
If he is the candidate, what will YOU do?
"Sul tema dell'immigrazione clandestina, Gingrich si è distinto dagli altri candidati, assumendo una posizione decisamente più "moderata". Un'apertura forse studiata ad arte per cercare consensi tra gli ispanici. Gingrich ha detto che non tutte le persone entrate illegalmente devono essere respinte: "Se sei qui da 25 anni hai tre figli e due nipoti, hai pagato le tasse e obbedito alla legge, appartieni a una chiesa locale, non penso che possiamo separarti dalla tua famiglia e mandarti fuori a calci". Il Partito repubblicano, ha argomentato, non può definirsi un gruppo per la famiglia se separa i genitori dai loro figli nati negli Stati Uniti. E su questo tema si è acceso il dibattito, con Gingrich preso di mira dai suoi sfidanti. Già Rick Perry aveva espresso una posizione simile in materia di immigrazione lo scorso settembre, pagandola poi con un vistoso calo di consensi. La Bachmann ha bocciato la linea "buonista" di Gingrich: permettere agli immigrati irregolari di rimanere negli States sarebbe, per lei, un'inaccettabile forma di amnistia. E i vantaggi raggiunti, ha argomentato in perfetta intesa con Romney, finirebbero con l'attrarre nuovi arrivi irregolari."
And your credentials on the issue of “El Universal” out of Caracas? May I ask what you know about them? Why you say this about them? Looking forward to your post ASAP so that you can show you are not scouring the web for a pre-formatted answer”. Show us the reasoning behind your claim about “El Universal” in Venezuela.
Wellll?????
And you are following where the PRESS leads?
By the way, I read the entire article from Venezuela’s article in Spanish....and is sounds VERY much like those who are constantly attacking the candidate not of their choice here lately.
If you have a candidate that you support, name that candidate and share the positives.
The troll-type attack mode is getting boring and seems more and more Alinsky-like to me.
Newt said specifically he will enforce the border and he will not make these people citizens.
Therefore Newt is AGAINST amnesty. Rush Limbaugh confirmed this on his show today.
Romney on the other hand is FOR amnesty because he supports citizenship. I heard his clip from Meet The Press. Romney is clear as day pro amnesty.
And then you changed the subject and ignored my direct question for your evidence to make such a statement.
Prove it.
Romney is horrible on this issue as well, and would sell us out in a New York Minute.
Hmmmmm ...Have you noticed what Chavez has done to the TV/News media sources that oppose him and/or his policies?
Just tell us why we should vote for Mr. Cain (who I like, by the way).
“...paid their taxes...
If they are illegal, how are they paying “their taxes”. What is the tax on a case of beer anyway?”
Well, technically it is possible for illegal workers to pay taxes. If they are using a phony Social Security # and working for an employer that withholds federal, state, local and SS taxes. I would suspect though, that the smart ones (if there are any) would claim like 9 exemptions so no federal tax is withheld. Then all they would be paying is SS and Medicare tax.
This brings up a point that none of the candidates want to talk about-one “dirty little secret” as Rush likes to say is that the IRS has a list somewhere (I read this a couple years ago so I’m a bit fuzzy on the details) that has Social Security numbers of people who are paying into the system, but they don’t match a real person (citizen or permanent resident). I believe there are something like 4 million of these.
If the 4 million figure is accurate, that would be about how many illegal workers we have, not including those paid under the table, of which there are probably at least a million or two more.
Bottom line is the IRS could solve this problem by simply contacting the employers who send in witholding taxes on these phony Social Security numbers and telling them to either verify their accuracy or dismiss the employee, then threaten them with a fine if they don’t.
As Newt said last night on a different topic(ironically), “if we were serious about solving this problem, we have the means to do it” (I’m paraphrasing). The IRS could resolve the employment verification problem tomorrow, but they don’t because:
1. This administration and previous ones want these workers here mainly for political reasons.
2. If the IRS were to do this, they would be cutting off a sizable source of revenue to the treasury. Think about all that SS money that comes in from 4 million illegals that never has to get paid out in the future. If they lost that, the SS System would be in worse shape than it already is.
Okay, well I guess I got a bit off topic with that rant, but it feels better to get that off my chest.
First you are to kindly clarify why the anti-Chavez, opposition daily, large circulation newspaper “El Naccional” in Caracas, is unreliable, rather than going off in all other tangential directions on smokescreen issues. You still have not answered that. When will you?
Just call me heartless and inhumane but I’m not voting for Romney or either of the other two CFR, open borders loving, one world Soros following, la Raza supporting, unrepentant RINOs — Perry and Gingrich.
Are you drinking too much coffee...or what? I made NO personal attack on you.
So, what will Mr. Cain do about the problem?
Please do refer to your prevous post in referring to the discussion I have generated here, and the term used, I believe it was “troll”. Was that meant for me? If so, why did you say it and in what way do my comments come off as “troll-like”? And, if not, well then, thank you very much and have a Happy Thanksgiviging, I am thankful you place merit on this article from “El Universal” out of Caracas, Venezuela, and my further analysis of it.
I did not comment on El Nacional.
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.