[Notwithstanding]

Gingrich and Paul seem to have very similar views on immigration. In fact, Gingrich's recent debate statements seem to pulled from Paul's own statements, including Paul's 2011 book.

You can read Ron Paul's statements on immigration issues here: http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Ron_Paul_Immigration.htm

[RC2]

I have to disagree with your statement about Newt. He simply wants to open serious discussion about illegals. Putting it off will only increase the problem.

[Uri’el-2012]

Paul says deporting illegal immigrants will require "splitting up families and deporting some who have lived here for decades." .

When we convict someone of a crime
and send them to Jail,
are we breaking up a family ?

Fatuous logic !

[bigbob]

I must be heartless because I don’t have a problem with “splitting up families and deporting some who have lived here for decades.”

They have lived here illegally for decades. Not to conflate the two, but when people who are wanted for crimes committed years ago are identified, they’re required to face justice. Is being forced to face the consequences of coming to this country illegally that much different?

I realize as a practical matter it’s probably not ever going to happen, but I can’t understand why we would ignore, or even do things that minimize or reward prior illegal acts.

[Paperdoll]

How nice to see the name Tancredo again! I wonder who he would endorse for Republican candidate?

[mnehring]

Newt still hasn’t gone as far left as Paul, calling a border fence a Berlin Wall too keep citizens in.

[org.whodat]

As if paul was a serious person.

[PoloSec]

No amnesty is a basic conservative tenet...you are for amnesty in any way, shape or form, you are not a conservative candidate. IMHO

[xkaydet65]

I’d no more listen to Tom Tancredo than I’d listen to Rob Blagoavich.

[=8 mrrabbit 8=]

This is why even though I consider Paul to be the best candidate of our current slate of candidates - I think our current slate is simply downright awful.

To go with any of our current candidates including Paul simply means the Democrat Party has a fighting chance.

Polls suggest otherwise - I don’t buy those polls for one second.

We are being hoodwinked big time.

We would have 10X a stronger slate of candidates if our slate were composed of the likes of:

Tancredo
McClintock
Hunter

Ron Paul conveniently forgets that even our very libertarian founders understood that if you are going to create even a minimalist nation-state at best with just an inch of oceanfront property - you have to provide for a Navy and it’s Marines without qualifications - and you have to allow the Executives - federal and state - to repel invasions and suppress domestic disturbances.

Too many libertarians try to tiptoes around that - far as I’m concerned they’re anarchists - not libertarians.

Illegals are exactly that. Even moreso, they’re invaders. Don’t care what country they’re from - if negative incentives don’t get ‘em to leave - actual arrest and deportation is absolutely appropriate. To argue otherwise is sedition in my honest opinion.

=8-)

[dirtboy]

So ... Newt is a stupid as Ron Paul on this subject.

Not the greatest sales pitch I have seen in my time.

[New Jersey Realist]

Ron Paul reminds me of Alan Simpson - feeble of mind.