Posted on 04/05/2014 5:08:15 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
HOWIE CARR, HOST: Who are you for, for president right now, Ann?
ANN COULTER: Well, don't tell him but I'm planning on giving Mitt Romney a little more time to rest -- flying out, kidnapping him and depriving him of sleep, food and water until he agrees to run again.
CARR: You're kidding?
COULTER: No.
CARR: You really want him to run again?
COULTER: Yeah, I think he was a fantastic candidate. As I've told you before, he would have won by a larger landslide than Ronald Reagan did in 1980 without Teddy Kennedy's immigration bill. And it's basically impossible to beat an incumbent, but he is head and shoulders better than the other candidates we had. And I don't want to name them, but I mean you go through the list -- and for one thing, as you and I discussed, and this is the most important point, that all of your listeners have to tell all of their friends knock it off with the Congressmen or inspirational figures. It's got to be a Governor or a Senator, preferably a Governor. And, you know, there is a limited world -- a list of who those people are, and they all have problems. None of them are articulate and reasonable, and as good on immigration as Mitt Romney! CARR: What about Ted Cruz?
COULTER: Well, he's a lot worse on immigration.
CARR: Is he that bad? I didn't think he was that bad on immigration.
COULTER: Well, most Republicans are, that's why you need to call your Congressman. I'm not singling out Ted Cruz, he has the same position a lot of these idiots have. 'Oh yes, let them come here and we have a special permit, we just won't give them citizenship. But we want to increase ...
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
I didn’t cite it as legal precedent. It’s just one example of many where a court has said there is nothing in federal law that prevents an illegal alien from renting property.
Hillary will be the next president. Her husband is the adopted son of Daddy and Barbara Bush. At least that’s what Billy says. He actually said the Bushes think of him as the black sheep of the Bush family. So, they’re daughter in law will have one term. Then her half brother Jeb will take over.
Actually I think the Bushes (for some strange reason) like Bill but despise Hillary. They are gracious people and are pleasant if forced to be around her, but usually it’s only Bubba they’re seen with.Maybe they feel sorry for him because his own family is a disaster. Who knows?
30 million new leftist voters will make this country better? What are you doing at FR?
And I won’t even get into that 30 million coming primarily from a population that is a majority on the dole at least three generations in, fraught with high school dropouts and other disfunction.
Yes, we can agree to disagree ;)
I know the work permits issued prior to 1965 did NOT allow workers to be registered into our system to become legalized. Chain migration also began with that 1965 (Heller/Teddy Kennedy) Act. That needs to go away, as well.
I think if those here illegally, now, were stripped of their welfare - and if even EXISTING laws were enforced, they’d leave. Then we could start the process over, the right way.
She's just jealous that Sarah doesn't have an Adam's apple and chicken legs.
In what you just posted, I’m right there with you. Go back to pre-1965 and have today’s Illegals self-deport. Definitely the way to go.
...now if only the Republicans would consider it - after all, I think most of them have kids, if not grand kids.
We are getting well off topic here…..
First let’s point out that New York is a self claimed sanctuary city.
Second, this case was about unlawful eviction of a tenant enjoying the protection of the Rent Stabilization Code. The new owners using the tenants status as cause to not renew the lease agreement.
The court found that “Thus, until defendant (landlord) is actually charged with violating federal immigration law, or is actually subject to civil or criminal penalties, it cannot maintain an eviction proceeding for illegal occupancy…”
So the owners have to be under indictment before they operate within the law. Nonsense. It would have been interesting to see if that held up at trial.
Point is, once you peel away a few layers in any of these cases you see that they aren’t the win immigrant activists claim they are. Nearly all end up falling back on the feds Supremacy on immigration issues, saying basically it’s not the law until the feds enforce the law. Unique here is the court using the city’s own sanctuary status, which makes it precedent.
The she/he Coulter has always been an establishment republican type and nothing else. She loves dating athiests and liberals because they like transsexuals.
... which results in illegals being able to rent property as I said was the case.
SCOTUS recently denied cert in Villas of Parkside v. Farmers Branch which left in place the 5th Circuit's opinion:
We conclude that the ordinance’s sole purpose is not to regulate housing but to exclude undocumented aliens, specifically Latinos, from the City of Farmers Branch and that it is an impermissible regulation of immigration. We hold that the ordinance is unconstitutional and presents an obstacle to federal authority on immigration and the conduct of foreign affairs.Back to the NY case ... I linked to it to point out the following section:
Do Illegal Aliens Have the Right to Rent an Apartment?My original statement was, "Illegal aliens are permitted by federal law to own and rent property." Until SCOTUS says local ordinaces can ban illegals from renting property or the Feds enforce immigration law, that statement is correct because permission is granted "in effect."A recent case decided in the Supreme Court in New York County, Recalde v. BAE Cleaners, Inc., affirms the right of an illegal alien to obtain an apartment and not be subjected to an inquiry by a landlord to verify “a tenant’s immigration status….” The Court found that there was no Federal or New York legal precedent which “prohibits a landlord from renting an apartment to a tenant who lacks legal immigration status.”
I put quotes because I quoted the article. I do that often rather than type the HTML for italics.
The fact is that the quote is what Ted Cruz thinks.
In the link above Ted Cruz makes it clear that illegals are not to be given any pathway to citizenship including a green card which allows for permanent residency because a green card holder is eligible for citizenship in 5 years. So illegals do not get green cards either. Nor are they eligible for RPI status because that leads to a green card.
So Sean asks him later in the above link what he would do with the people already here who have children that were born here (anchor babies) who are citizens. In other words would Ted Cruz break up families of US citizens. Regardless of what people might think of anchor babies, Ted Cruz said the best thing that could be said and that is that a bipartisan solution would need to be found. That does not mean that Ted is saying that 11 million or 20 million people will be legalized to stay here. It means what it says, that there will be cases that have the law determine what the best solution will be.
I researched the amendments that Ted Cruz proposed in the Senate Gang of 8 Bill:
May 9 2013 Border Security (5-13)
http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Cruz1-(MDM13528).pdf
May 14 2013 H1B Nonimmigrants (4-14)
http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Cruz5-(MDM13527).pdf
May 21 2013 Numbers Related To Permanent Residency (6-12)
http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Cruz4-(MDM13526).pdf
May 21 2013 No Welfare Benefits for Illegals (6-12)
http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Cruz2-(DAV13378).pdf
May 21 2013 No Citizenship for Illegals (5-13)
http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Cruz2nd-(MDM13677).pdf
Not one amendment mentions anything about legalizing illegals. In fact there is mention of denying them any federal welfare benefits or subsidies and denying them any chance at citizenship.
Ted Cruz is thinking like a law enforcement chief:
* Document the illegals including their biometrics so that no matter whether they say their same is Manuel Hernandez, Eduardo Lopez, Hector Gonzalez, Kamid Muhammad Mubarak or Hu Mee Nau, they will always be in the system by identifiable data.
* Take away any access to federal welfare or subsidies
* Take away any hope to permanent residency and citizenship
* Take away any advantage from employers to avoid the Obamacare penalty by hiring exempt illegals by denying RPI status to illegals
Ted Cruz intends to set up the large illegal population for rounding them up which is the first step to deportation. Those with children that are citizens will be problematic and will be adjudicated via federal immigration officers and commissioners.
Ask the question, if you were illegal in the USA, what would you do?
You have nowhere to go. If you get picked up your biometrics will be taken and if you’re not in the system as legal, you’re deported. You can’t get free medical, free EBT food stamps, free housing, free WIC and you can’t legally work. And you have no hope of permanent residency or citizenship.
So it’s obvious that Ted Cruz intends to put the illegal aliens into limbo as lawbreakers without any rights until justice is served. He is clearly deadset against reqarding or giving illegals any benefit or reqard at the expense of undermining the rule of law with respect to legal immigrants.
The 11 million or 20 million that are here will need to be identified. It’s hard to identify criminals that are hiding. Under Ted Cruz’s immigration views illegals will not come forward because there are no protections or benefits to coming forward. They will continue to hide out until caught or they will leave the USA. When they leave the USA the only real option they will have to get back in is the legal way because Ted intends to militarize the border and make it near impossible for anyone south of the border to enter illegally.
All of your criticisms of Ted Cruz regarding immigration fall flat. They are not accurate, they are not illuminating, they are devoid of anything more practical.
Here’s the link to the interview that I forgot to include in the previous post:
No it does not mean Ted Cruz supports legalization of illegals; in fact the opposite. See Post #315.
Ted Cruz is deadset against rewarding illegals with permanent residency. See Post #315.
Ted Cruz does not support work permits. See Post #315. Nowhere in his proposed amendments (all were rejected) was there any provision for work permits for illegals.
In fact, Ted has harshly criticized the idea of giving legal status to work for illegals because it puts Americans at a great disadvantage. Illegals awarded RPI status would be exempt from Obamacare and employers could avoid penalties and taxes by hiring RPI workers.
Ted is deadset against rewarding any illegals because of the message it would send to those who have been following the legal pathways to immigration.
Ted is deadset against any status that leads to a green card and against any green card eligibility because a green card held for 5 years allows for the holder to apply for citizenship. See the link in post #316.
I have no clue who or what you are responding to but it sure ain’t me or anything i 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.