Posted on 11/26/2011 1:01:37 PM PST by presidio9
GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich defended his immigration stance Friday, claiming that he was "not for amnesty."
“I am not for amnesty for anyone. I am not for a path to citizenship for anybody who got here illegally,” Gingrich said at a town hall event in Naples, Florida according to media reports.
“But I am for a path to legality for those people whose ties run so deeply in America that it would truly be a tragedy to try and rip their family apart," said the former House Speaker.
Gingrich has been under fire from some anti-illegal immigration groups since last Tuesday's GOP debate where he spoke out against deporting many illegal immigrant families.
During Friday’s town hall, Gingrich said that if elected he would make securing the border a priority and would support efforts to make English the country's official language.
He said he would also establish a guest-worker program to allow migrants to work in the U.S. But under such a program, businesses which hired undocumented workers would be hit with fines.
"I would have very, very stiff economic penalties for anyone who hires somebody who is not legally inside the system," Gingrich vowed.
At last Tuesday’s GOP debate, Gingrich said that he supported efforts to allow tax-paying illegal immigrants without criminal records to remain in the country or gain citizenship.
“If you've come here recently, you have no ties to this country, you ought to go home, period,” Gingrich had said. “If you've been here 25 years and you got three kids and two grandkids, you've been paying taxes and obeying the law, you belong to a local church, I don't think we're going to separate you from your family, uproot you forcefully and kick you out.”
"I don't see how the party that says it's the party of the family is going to adopt an immigration policy which destroys families which have been here a quarter-century," he added. "I'm prepared to take the heat for saying let's be humane in enforcing the law."
Gingrich has faced criticism for his comments from other Republicans. Rep. Michelle Bachmann (Minn.) said in an interview that Gingrich had the “most liberal position on illegal immigration of any of the candidates in the race.”
Influential Iowa congressman Rep. Steve King (R) described Gingrich’s proposals as a “form of amnesty”
“I wouldn’t agree with him on that policy,” King added, suggesting that Gingrich had hurt his chances of winning his endorsement prior to the Iowa caucuses.
The furor over Gingrich’s immigration stance comes as new national polls place him ahead of Romney in the GOP field.
We all may be overlooking that there’s an election on the horizon...one which is predicted to be very close. One that is crucial insofar as removing the Marxist in Chief. That being said, some of the LEGAL Hispanic vote could make the difference in certain areas. Double speak? Maybe, but remember we’re not electing a republican King; we’re trying to depose a democrat King. Unfortunately, politics does play a role, and Newt may be thinking three moves ahead of a lot of us.
Whoever wrote that 10 point plan document for newt.org should be required to take remedial English at the local community college.
Newt’s plan is nothing more than the same closet amnesty Bush proposed....empty words with ZERO enforcement. A couple of raids, a trip to the border for a quick photo op, and it’s back to BUSINESS AS USUAL.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2811381/posts
If you’re here illegally, it doesn’t matter if you committed the crime yesterday or anytime since 1986, you broke the law and should not be allowed to stay or gain citizenship. You think deporting illegals won’t work? It worked for Eisenhower with less manpower...
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0706/p09s01-coop.html
I guess the “professor” doesn’t learn from history. You just have to put someone in charge with the ‘stones’ to get it done instead of making excuses for not enforcing the laws already on the books. Enforcing the laws already on the books (including the border fence) would be good start in making the job easier. NO MORE AMNESTY!
It doesn't matter if it's 1 or 4 pages. RINO Rick Perry said, "Sure" he would be open to a path to citizenship for ILLEGAL aliens.
Thankfully, he's in single digits and dropping so he will never have a chance to foist his pro-ILLEGAL alien agenda on this nation.
He also did not say he was for amnesty. An open path to citizenship is not Amnesty. He is saying he would not preclude a path to Citizenship just because your VISA had expired or some other situation.
He is currently on record as saying that if you are in one of these situations you should be able to gain citizenship, BUT you go to the back of the line.
You should read the rest of the article. You might realize that Perry is the most conservative candidate that we have got.
What is Cains stance on all of this stuff today?
He keeps changing his tune.
Bachmann too.
Well I'm sure you know best. However, he did say he wanted the verification handled by private enterprise, not the government which is already rife with fraud in its entitlements programs.
FWIW, I personally don't care whether it's a whole new layer of bureaucracy, insofar as the government has to get involved, as in certain aspects it must. We're talking at least 12M people needing to be reviewed, verified, documented, carded, registered...How else would you go about it?
Fine. And I'd like to see a border fence too, but I have some bad news for you: Regardless of who wins the election, the border fence is not going to happen any time soon. St. Sarah of Wasilla could stage a convention takeover, and even she won't make a border fence happen in the next five or six years a the earliest. The way to stop illegal immigration (and this seems to be Jim's main point too) is to take away incentives. Access to entitlements and jobs seem to be the major ones. Any candidate who is telling you that he or she is going to solve immigration with a border fence in his or her presidency is either in over his head or lying to you.
Newt is up to his old tricks. A snarling tiger trying to hide behind the new stripes he has painted on himself.He forgets those stripes come out in the wash to reveal his treacherous double think by his unctuous double talk.
In any case, this man is not to be trusted!
I got news for ya brother.
So long as Mexico is poor and we are not, there is nothing that will stop the influx of illegals.
Canadians don’t sneak in because they are happy in their own country.
Perhaps you could try to make the same point with resorting to racial slurs?
That is no defense of RINO Rick. But then, there really isn't one.
CHILLAX PEOPLE
We cannot throw 21 million people out of the country the day after we elect even the most perfect gold-plated conservative
you have to have A PLAN ~~!!
And that plan has to take into consideration that we are suddenly trying to enforce immigration laws that democraps have ignored for 40 years, in order to buy hispanic votes, and there are people here who pay taxes and own homes and lived their entire lives here (which should not have been possible- try going to mexico and doing that)
That is all Gingrich is saying
Truth is,Cain doesn’t know what to think on the matter.
He is all over the map.
I am not the Cain spokesman around here, though I do try to stick to the facts.
Far as I can determine, Cain has not recently answered the question directly, as to what to do about the 12M illegals already here. The only statement I could find from him on this point goes back to June 2007, when he mentioned a “reasonable program” for the 12M, and an expansion of the temporary worker program. The statement reads:
“The Immigration Bill could have succeeded if the political class in Congress and the president had listened to the public and addressed the four distinct problems. Namely,
secure the borders convincingly,
expand the temporary worker program for skilled legal immigrants,
establish a reliable legal immigrant identification program
and then propose a reasonable program for the 12 million (and counting) illegal persons who broke our laws to get here, but not amnesty.”
Source, http://www.economicfreedomcoalition.com/news/press-opinion-061107.asp
During the present campaign, Cain has not been asked about these 12M yet. I’m looking forward to that moment. In the meantime, the closest he comes to it is when he says “enforce the law!” The law, however, does not stipulate that illegal residents SHALL be deported, only that they can be. Generally speaking it’s up to a judge. Twelve million defendants...what do you think the decision would be?
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.