Posted on 11/25/2011 11:40:23 AM PST by TBBT
Did Newt Gingrich really propose a general amnesty in this week’s foreign policy debate? Or does his plan have more to do with general-election strategy than replacing a decade of Republican rhetoric on the issue of immigration? My column for The Fiscal Times today looks carefully at what Gingrich actually said during the debate, and also what the problems would still be with his proposal:
First, consider how Gingrich framed the quoted statement above, to which the candidates and activists reacted. “So I think you’ve got to deal with this as a comprehensive approach,” he told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, “that starts with controlling the border….” In other words, Gingrich didn’t propose anything that would replace or subordinate securing the border as the first step in any immigration reform.
What happens once we secure the borders to the 11 million illegals inside the country? Gingrich’s plan calls for discretion in the application of deportation, not a blanket forgiveness of illegal status, as was the case with the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli Act, which Gingrich has called a mistake. Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy, writing in the National Review Online, called Gingrich’s position “common sense” not amnesty and noted that it would not even require a change in the law to implement.
In other words, Gingrich still wants to wait on any other policy changes until the border gets secured. In that, his position is no different than any of the other Republicans in the field — and that’s going to take a long time to accomplish, whether we’re talking about a physical wall or a high-tech barrier system that can shut down the flow of border jumpers...
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
I would replace reasonably conservative with marginally conservative when describing Newt. But at least you understand that supporting amnesty for illegals is a liberal idea. That is more sense than I’ve seen from some of Newt’s supporters here.
Thanks. No argument here.
“Call me crazy but US citizenship dosen’t look it’s of paramount importance to this crowd.”
OK. You’re crazy. It isn’t of paramount importance ot our crowd either. What’s your point?
Define "our crowd".
My point is, your crowd aside, citizenship is valuable to most Americans. It's for that reason Newt is using it's denial to illegals as a selling point for his (alleged partial) amnesty. It's hardly much of a concession for the recipients of that amnesty when nearly all of them don't want it anyway.
You may have noticed the usual groups are coming out in favor of newt's proposal.
“OK. You’re crazy. It isn’t of paramount importance ot our crowd either. What’s your point?”
Maybe I can help a bit here.
Consider the following. I have a crappy $50k job here in the states. However, if I go to Germany, I can work there for $250k per year, tax free. But I would be illegal there, subject to arrest and deportation.
Now, some politician came and said something to the effect that “I will legalize your status, and you don’t have to worry about being sent home, but you WILL NOT get to vote here”, how would I react:
1) “What a jerk, if he won’t let me vote here in Germany, he can go to hell, he’s no better than anyone else”, or...
2) “OUTSTANDING - I can work here forever, make great money, send it home to my parents. Sure, I’ll never get to vote here, but who cares...it’s not my country anyway”
I suspect most Illegals will side with #2, which is why we call Newt’s plan Amnesty - as they get what they really want...which is to make a lot of money and be left alone.
By the way, if you divide the dollar amounts above by about 10, you’ll pretty much see the numbers that the Mexicans (and other illegals) are looking at.
Your analogy is excellent, but it could be tweaked. First, some illegals are already voting. That is why Dems get hysterical about voter ID and verification. Second, replace Germany w Canada. They don’t have to cross the Atlantic to get here, or to go home for a visit. They just have to cross the southern border. Otherwise, you nailed it—great job.
This title should have had a BARF ALERT.
Someone here is tampering with tag lines!
Of course. Here's the most important part. Citizenship in NOT a requirement to vote in some local elections now. You can bet the farm on their new 'legal' status clearing the way for the ACLU et al suing for voting rights in local elections nationwide.
>> “Here’s the rub. Everyone liked Newts no-nonsense plain speak answers in the debates. Now this?” <<
.
Newt’s amswere in the “debates” were not from his Heart, but from his deceptive intellect.
Telling us what we want to hear, to get elected, so that he can move Left when in office. He has done that successfully since 1978.
All we have to do is jail time for those that employ illegals.
They will self-deport when the jobs and benefits dry-up.
By Jove, I think he's got it!
No, that will be the fault of the voters stupid enough to believe that Newt isn't the same lying criminal that he has always been!
.
“Otherwise, you nailed it—great job.”
Thanks...you were awesome on this thread also.
.
It is obvious from reading these Noot threads that the Noot supporters are a very small and devious minority here.
.
I think I am going to apply the Gingrich/McCain philosophy to my diet plan....If I just SAY that the jelly donut in front of me is a carrot stick, it’s actually GOOD for me.
“No, that will be the fault of the voters stupid enough to believe that Newt isn’t the same lying criminal that he has always been!”
Hard to argue with .... whatever the hell that was.
“Maybe I can help a bit here.”
“Consider the following. I have a crappy $50k job here in the states. However, if I go to Germany, I can work there for $250k per year, tax free. But I would be illegal there, subject to arrest and deportation.”
But that wasn’t going to happen, really, because you were there when they granted amnesty...ley’s say, sometime in the ‘80s.
But........suppose you loved it there and wanted to be live there. A lot of others did the sam thing...it was like gambling at Rick’s American Club. You had kids and they practically became German, even joined the army. You married a German girl. 25 years later they came to put you on a truck to send you back to who knows what. Your life is there.
Now what?
That was what was being so loosely bandied about. Let’s compare apples to apples, shall we?
You paint the exact same picture of illegals as do the radical leftists at DU. It’s always this idyllic, idealistic image of great Americans who just happen to have been illegal so many years ago nobody cares any more.
The truth is so different. Illegals are a scourge here. They suck up services, close down entire hospitals, shove anti-American pro-Raza propaganda down our kids’ throats and wave their Mexican flags. You can’t grant legality to just those few illegals that fit your rainbows and unicorns description. As soon as you say ‘25 yrs’, magically they’ve ALL been here 25 yrs. We can’t prove they haven’t been. And this includes the reconquista movement, which is strong in many states. It is a prescription for disaster...as a conservative, I would think you’d care.
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.