Posted on 11/27/2011 6:51:43 PM PST by TitansAFC
sounds like Mr. Cain would like the federal government to stop interfering with (and suing) states that are trying to make things difficult for illegals.
Herman needs some better advisors.
States giving out citizenships? That is simply insane.
..In response to whether that meant the states could allow illegal immigrants to “be put on a path toward legalization and toward citizenship,” Cain answered, “It would be up to the states...
He did say that. He said he’s okay with millions of illegals getting citizenship if the states decide it’s okay.
Yes, he did.
You Newtitos baffle me. Your taskmasters, the LSM and the likes of Karl Rove, have done everything short of stabbing Cain to get rid of him. According to these TOOLS, Cain is done for, gone , hasta la bye bye, dead man walking, end, Cain who...single digits, rapist,etc..etc...etc..etc...etc...
Why do you keep bringing Cain up..
But since you asked here it is:
There are 4 problems
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_aKqWXvM3g
he says WE DO NOT NEED AMNESTY!!!!
Now, what to do with the Perry bashers? He led on the issue of what is possible and practical and has already taken lemons and make lemonade. ALL other candidates are playing catch up, as their own commentary now lines up with Rick Perry. Bachman, Newt, Romney and Cain. Next?
Did you actually read the article, or better yet, go to the transcript?
“My position is: Secure the border for real. Promote the path to citizenship that already exists. The problem is the bureaucracy in getting people here legally. Now then the fourth — the way I would deal with those that are already here, which has been my stated position, empower the states to deal with the illegals that are already here. Not some big grandiose national one-size-fits-all.”
The Feds to empower the states (help them) deal with those here already. Nothing in it about allowing states to grant amnesty or path to citizenship outside the legal paths already established.
Every time he tried to state something about the states deciding how best to round them up, or deal with them within the law, Crowley tried to call that allowing amnesty, to Cain’s protestations that Crowley was not understanding what he was saying.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1111/27/sotu.01.html
Nice spin....and a big reach, jjw.
He thinks the breaking of federal immigrations laws is not a federal issue.
He’s okay with citizenship for millions of illegals as long as it’s not done at the federal level.
Not good. To the left of Perry and Newt, methinks.
This is because Cain himself probably has no idea what he's talking about. It is clear he doesn't understand the issue and the Federal responsibility for immigration enforcement.
Cain is just making it up as he goes along. He bluffed his way this far with motivational speaking skills, but on the issues he basically doesn't know what he's talking about. Fortunately, Cain will not be the nominee.
Did you actually read the article, or better yet, go to the transcript?
“My position is: Secure the border for real. Promote the path to citizenship that already exists. The problem is the bureaucracy in getting people here legally. Now then the fourth — the way I would deal with those that are already here, which has been my stated position, empower the states to deal with the illegals that are already here. Not some big grandiose national one-size-fits-all.”
The Feds to empower the states (help them) deal with those here already. Nothing in it about allowing states to grant amnesty or path to citizenship outside the legal paths already established.
Every time he tried to state something about the states deciding how best to round them up, or deal with them within the law, Crowley tried to call that allowing amnesty, to Cain’s protestations that Crowley was not understanding what he was saying.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1111/27/sotu.01.html
Against federal law? Just asking. It’s not up to the states to enforce federal law; unless the fed’s won’t do it.
I don’t think the Supremacy clause would allow the states to do this in the first place. I think what he means is a state can “hang out” with the illegals or attempt to enforce like AL. States like FL & TX are locked into Bush progressivism R-machinery so its gonna be damn hard to pull off..never mind CA.
As it stands now from a legal perspective...states can successfully stop the hiring if they craft very smart E-Verify laws. It is like a swiss clock to get it right and draw in monies to enforce, allow cops to ask for ID on probable cause pullovers and they can ban “business transactions” between entities and aliens. Believe me there are tools but you have to press down on the gas pedal.
I guess Cain missed that part of the Constitution which places an imperative obligation on the national government to protect each of the states from invasion.
Section. 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence. Article. IV.
Willful ignorance is very ugly and you are becoming a poster child for it. Just what is it that scares the hell out of you about him in the first place that you cannot be honest pr provide the full context of what he said. I heard it and he handled Crowley very well and made her look like the fool she is.
Cain should quit, really.
The best solution possible in the current political environment is to seal the borders and wait about 50 years. Make it almost impossible to work without valid paperwork and most illegals will self-deport. Those who stay will pass away eventually leaving only their citizen children.
Doing anything more will be untenable, I’m afraid.
Hey, OW! Love the popcorn graphic! Is this Cain revelation not a kick? And after all the yowling against Rick. Some little boats around here are springing leaks and taking on water fast, as we speak.
That's been obvious for a very long time.
Don’t tell me you agree with the fed court that SCREWED Arizona on SB1070?
9th circus on sb1070
http://www.legalactioncenter.org/clearinghouse/litigation-issue-pages/arizona-sb-1070%E2%80%8E-legal-challenges-and-economic-realities
DeCanas v baca http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=424&invol=351
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.