Posted on 03/19/2013 1:56:47 PM PDT by BarnacleCenturion
The AP claimed this morning that Paul was set to endorse a path to citizenship in his speech today. Not so, countered conservatives on Twitter: Read his prepared remarks and you’ll see that citizenship is never mentioned. Which is true, and also irrelevant.
The whole point of Paul’s speech is GOP rapprochement with Latino voters; he spends nearly two-thirds of it extolling Latinos’ work ethic, reminiscing about his friendships with Latinos growing up in Texas, name-checking Jaime Escalante and Pablo Neruda, and of course citing the ancient canard that Latinos are really just Republicans who don’t know it yet. (He mentions abortion and gay marriage as particular areas of overlap).
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
cut off the bennies
giving them MORE benefit of breaking our laws is not a solution
How about visa enforcement as well -- and he can start now.
During the 2006 amnesty debate, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) commissioned a Zogby poll offering respondents not the false choice between mass deportation or amnesty (a word CIS did not use in the survey), but rather a three-way choice between mass deportation, earned legalization, and attrition — and attrition was preferred two-to-one over legalization.
She who hired a RINO to tank her own campaign and played attack dog for Romney should not be taken seriously on a whole lot.
“and walla?”
et voila? I think that’s right. Haven’t spoken French in 50 years!
Because Paul's is a political speech, I think it's relevant to consider Neruda's political views. Neruda was a Communist. That's not the political culture I want to "infuse" the American spirit. (Persons who aren't familiar with Neruda can confirm this in Wikipedia -- "During his lifetime, Neruda occupied many diplomatic positions and served a stint as a senator for the Chilean Communist Party.")
Another anti-American supporter of Communism. He's an admirer of Castro and "and for many years was denied visas by U.S. immigration authorities" (until Clinton overruled them). [Wikipedia]
I've read his novel One Hundred Years of Solitude (in Spanish), and though I enjoyed the humor at times, I consider it a step backward toward primitive irrationality.
The solution is simple and evident, yet everyone avoids/evades it. Here is the RIGHT plan:
1) Secure the border.
2) Declare a date certain, within 6 months, by which date every illegal must register and set a date, within the following 6 months, for processing within their legal country.
3) If stopped, for any reason, the person must have their registration with their upcoming processing date, or proof of legal entry. If they do not, they will be deported immediately and NEVER given the opportunity to return - FOR ANY REASON!
4) The illegal makes a choice. If they aspire to US citizenship, they must return to their legal country and go through the normal process, no shortcuts, no promises.
5) If they do not aspire to US citizenship they return to their country by the date stipulated on their registration papers, apply for legal resident status, allow for vetting and background legal checks. Possibly allow for expedited processing if they have family in the US and a job. But in no case will these people EVER be granted US citizenship, and in no case will they EVER be allowed to become wards of the state or receive any kind of government assistance. They will never be allowed to VOTE! NOTE: Anchor baby OFF! Their decendants will not be granted citizenship by virtue of being born in the US.
6) If a legal resident (non-citizen) commits a felony or certain types of misdemeanors (like attempting to vote), they will be deported and NEVER granted re-entry for ANY reason (even if their child is dying and needs their kidney to live...they will need to ship the kidney or ship the child).
7) If a legal resident commits an act whereby another person suffers loss, they must either make full restitution or be deported, as in #6 above. A third occurance will require restitution by seizure AND deportation.
Will they all register? No. But most will. And over time, the ones who didn’t register would be forcibly shipped home. And most importantly, most of them will choose the non-citizen option - thwarting the political designs of the dems.
As someone who has actually issued immigrant visas, most of these illegal aliens would never qualify for an immigrant visa. And if they truly went to the back of the line in their home countries, it would take years to get into this country even if they are qualified.
What would be the incentive to register versus remain an illegal alien? We have over 2 million criminal aliens in this country. I doubt they would register.
5) If they do not aspire to US citizenship they return to their country by the date stipulated on their registration papers, apply for legal resident status, allow for vetting and background legal checks. Possibly allow for expedited processing if they have family in the US and a job. But in no case will these people EVER be granted US citizenship, and in no case will they EVER be allowed to become wards of the state or receive any kind of government assistance. They will never be allowed to VOTE! NOTE: Anchor baby OFF! Their decendants will not be granted citizenship by virtue of being born in the US.
Never happen. We have birthright citizenship. You either eliminate it for everyone or no one. You can't cut them off of entitlement programs. And why would you give them preference over other intending immigrants just because they have a job in the US? It is illegal for an illegal alien to work in this country. More than likely they have committed ID theft, misused an SSN, evaded taxes, etc.
Will they all register? No. But most will. And over time, the ones who didn’t register would be forcibly shipped home. And most importantly, most of them will choose the non-citizen option - thwarting the political designs of the dems.
Why can't we just ship them home using attrition thru enforcement? Any legislation that allows the lawbreakers to stay and work here, the object of their crime, is amnesty. A path to citizenship is a bonus. Giving them to what amounts to green cards entitles them to all the benefits of citizenship except voting. In any event, such a solution would never pass Congress.
N.B. The very people you are depending upon to implement such a scheme, the Obama Administration, are the same ones who have granted a backdoor amnesty to 1.8 million illegal aliens. How can you put the fox in charge of the hen house?
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.