Furthermore what do you want to do with the illegals and how would you get 11 to 30 million out of this country? Our current laws are unenforceable.
Do I look like I care what Newt’s definition is? If you are forgiving someone’s crime and allowing them to stay in the country, that sounds like the normal definition of amnesty to me. Most of them don’t want citizenship anyway. And they certainly don’t need it to vote if they’re in a Dem state.
And how do you know the laws are “unenforceable”? Have you tried to enforce them lately? I haven’t seen that happen. Maybe give more freedom to the states to go ahead and pass their own Arizona style laws? Maybe make it mandatory for employers to check immigration status? Maybe make it a crime to hire an illegal or rent an apartment or sell a car to them? Maybe build a border fence, deploy the national guard, and stop being nice to them? Let’s deport whoever we get ahold of, regardless of what church denomination they go to or how nice and “hard working”, REAL EQUALITY UNDER THE LAW.
What happens next is that living here becomes a real hassle. So. They. Self. Deport.
Now they are Cainbots after Sarah fizzled and Cain too will not mass deport
Were they sincere they would be Bachmann folks but she too has wobbled in the past on this and is hyping it now
Newt is for Amnesty. He changes the definition because he knows that no one will like what he proposes if he calls it what it really is. So he uses semantics to try to confuse those who don’t know any better.
This definition is much more apropos to the subject:
Just because they don’t get citizenship doesn’t mean it isn’t amnesty. If they are not held accountable to the law as it existed at the time they violated it, they are getting amnesty. The law they violated REQUIRES deportation and anything else IS AMNESTY.
You and Newt may have your own pet name for it, but we all know what it really is.