If the law doesn’t demand deportment then the problem is the law. You could ask Cain, Newt, Perry, etc if they support a law forcing deportment, amnesty, or whatever, but the POTUS can’t tell judges what they have to do. The judges enforce the laws. If we want different enforcement of the existing law, we need to change the laws. A person who wants to do that should be running for Senate or House.
Perhaps the issue we’re all tangling with is whether there should be any discretion regarding who - if anybody - can stay in the US after coming here illegally. Are there ever circumstances in which it would be OK for somebody to stay here if they came illegally? That’s what the nation has to deal with. Do we allow judicial discretion for individual cases? Maybe that is the question Newt is answering, but Cain doesn’t think it’s the question he’s been asked.
They all should be asked the question directly so we can compare apples to apples when we compare their answers.
What do you think? Should there be any discretion for individual cases? If so, should it be clearly stated what kind of circumstances could be an exception to deportation?
“What do you think?”
I think presidential candidate Herman Cain ought to tell us clearly what HE thinks, not wait to be asked by some interviewer (most of whom aren’t as informed as 90% of freepers).
And I think he’s a shucky ducking fog emitting tin plate phony.
Everyone’s sitting at their keyboards, trying to parse his emissions and tweak out the meanings, like a college of theologians engaged in...what do they call that? Oh, yes: hermeneutics!