Posted on 06/21/2013 2:53:20 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Edited on 06/21/2013 8:35:29 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
There are multiple, multiple sources for this. From the Daily Caller to the Blaze to Townhall to US News and on and on. If you google, or use an alternate search engine, the following “Ted Cruz no path to citizenship for illegal immigrants” you get a bunch of them. I’ve included a link to just one of many...
Ted Cruz on Immigration
http://www.ontheissues.org/international/Ted_Cruz_Immigration.htm
There is no excuse, 9yearLurker.
Ted Cruz wants to legalize tens of millions of illegals.
Once that’s done, citizenship is inevitable.
Amnesty is legalizing tens of millions of illegals.
Cruz is essentially just a smart Rick Perry.
You Texans will ruin our country with your use of illegal labor and push for legalization.
Here’s a “twofer” immigration story that appeared right here on FR.
In the posted text it says, ***”Cruz previously attempted to amend the bill to eliminate a path to citizenship***”.
Then goes on to talk about another amendment he attempted that required states to require ID (proof of citizenship) before registering voters.
Ted Cruz Set to Infuriate the Left With Immigration Bill Amendment (Voter ID)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3032546/posts
Again, let’s not get lost in the weeds and forget what you have been posting. You keep on posting that Ted Cruz is nibbling around the edges by only addressing border security and not amnesty itself. Flat false. Has spoken out against any path to citizenship, ever, for those who entered illegally, and has offered an amendment that would eliminate the path to citizenship portion of the Senate immigration bill.
As a bonus, also offered an amendment on the issue of voter registration ID to prove someone is a citizen before being put on the voter rolls.
Amnesty, amnesty, amnesty. How much clearer can I get? He is in favor of legalizing tens of millions of illegals already here. Though his idea of this bill doesn’t include a path to citizenship, that is what the bill includes and what would be inevitable after the mass legalization.
This bill does forgive those tens of millions the massive number of felonies they’ve committed through identity theft, fraud and the like and excuses them from billions and billions of back taxes unpaid.
It is amnesty, amnesty, amnesty. Cruz is for the legalization of tens of millions of illegals—which is amnesty!
What Ted and his petition are focused on is the border security ‘issue’. But even at that, that’s not what he wants. As he has said, he favor comprehensive ‘reform’ (code word: amnesty), not just border security.
Border security and an immediately specified path to citizenship are the two tweaks that Rubio and his gang have been prepared to modify their bill with, if that’s what’s needed to get it through the Senate. They offered a slight tweak on security (which is meaningless), but are now confident of getting it through without further modification.
Then, all they have to do, as Michele Bachmann has warned, is go through reconciliation with a less harmful immigration bill which would probably be all that Boehner could force through the House, and have the noxious Senate version be what comes out of the process.
The country’s being sold down the river and all you can do is claim that Cruz’s support for legalizing tens of millions of illegals, with a law that explicitly ‘forgives’ them massive past felonies, somehow isn’t amnesty.
bttt
Here ya go:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m403mPh1Na4
Of course, no pol for amnesty calls it amnesty. Rubio and Ryan would tell you there’s no amnesty in their bill, only ‘earned legalization’, yet their bill would absolve illegals of tens of millions of felonies and billions and billions in back taxes:
Cruz is for legalizing illegals, as he tells Bolling, which is amnesty.
I’ve never heard him say anything other than this bill is crap, no amnesty, secure the border now, let’s not repeat the mistake of 1986 and legalize these law breakers. I listened to the interview, he said nothing, absolutely nothing that remotely sounded like you are claiming. Where are you getting your idea he is pushing amnesty? What the Hell is the matter with you?
He’s for ‘legalization’, just doesn’t want to call it amnesty. What part of ‘legalization’ do you not understand?
How could you post here at FR and not notice that every pol pushing amnesty loudly proclaims to be against amnesty?
He never said that, not once in the interview, not once that I've ever heard, not even close. I'm against amnesty, does that mean I'm pushing it?
Your standard is insane.
You seem to be logic-challenged here.
I was explaining why a claim to oppose amnesty in pol-speak means absolutely nothing.
Listen to that interview with Cruz and he repeatedly says ‘secure the border first’. He goes on and on against ‘legalization first’, saying his proposed amendment, for example, would have us ‘secure the border first’, where that ‘first’ is clearly ahead of the legalization that is the meat of the bill.
Of course he wants the border fixed, it needs fixing. He wants the influx to stop. And you call ME logic challenged......
HE NEVER HINTS AT WHAT YOU ARE CLAIMNG. And you call ME logic challenged..........
Go away.
I think mexico’s before the fact of not allowing US citizens to own land is better than allowing the ownership and subsequent expropriation.
No, clown, neither “Of course, no pol for amnesty calls it amnesty” nor “every pol pushing amnesty loudly proclaims to be against amnesty” is what you garble and then attempt to quote me at with “anyone who claims to be against amnesty is actually for it”.
Given that you can’t handle simple logic or truth in your argument re: my posts, I’m not even going to begin to address your denial of what Cruz repeatedly says in the link I provided you.
In the News/Activism forum, on a thread titled TED CRUZ Launches National Petition Drive to Kill Immigration Bill,
In response to suggesting reciprocity where Americans cannot own land in Mexico should apply to illegals living in the US.
Manta wrote:
“I think mexico’s before the fact of not allowing US citizens to own land is better than allowing the ownership and subsequent expropriation.”
Really ?
You're insane. Simply insane. Just go away.
It’s more honest than letting you buy then stealing. Usually, looters steal only after improvements have been made.
Praying for him. Enough said.
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.