Folks, 2016 is the supreme test for Conservatism. Can a candidate who is truly a Conservative, and stands true to Conservative principles, ever be elected again or was Ronald Reagan the last one?
Note the source: AP/Yahoo News. This is clearly the liberal press giving you your marching orders. Line up in your circular firing squad, and start shooting.
“Now it’s oops for Walker. In 2013, Walker said it “makes sense” to offer a way to citizenship for immigrants in the country illegally.”
I’d love the chance to ask Walker face to face if it ever crossed his mind that maybe it makes sense to take away the magnets and try to get rid of as many illegals as possible. Or why does it make sense to offer these criminal backdoor immigrants a path to citizenship. but I already know the answer.
“Luis Alvarado, a California-based GOP strategist, said most Republican officials privately acknowledge that the country has to legalize the status of people who are here unlawfully while also bolstering border security.”
‘Unlawfully’ - what part of illegal don’t you get, Luis!
We either have a nation built on laws, or we end up like Mexico.
Yea, but, Reagan despite warnings from the stronger conservatives at the time installed Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O’Connor to vote against his own policies.
The biggest problem faced by the GOP candidates is the confusion generated by the “no amnesty” demand of many in the base. That term keeps getting conflated with the far more rational “no citizenship” demand, which is actually quite rarely heard in isolation; usually it’s part of a longer list of requirements, such as no welfare, return to home country and get in line, etc.
Walker, for example, retreated on citizenship, but he, like every other GOP candidate, is unlikely to retreat all the way to a position of absolutely no amnesty. Even Cruz advocates amnesty in some circumstances, but not citizenship.
We would be respecting our candidates, and helping them, if we would instead settle on a “no citizenship” stance across the board for those here now illegally, and then get down to the more serious discussion of policing the border and establishing just who should, and who shouldn’t, be allowed to enter our country for purposes of work alone, or for the purpose of eventually becoming a citizen.
That discussion would be highly productive and might even result in abandonment of birthright citizenship at some point. The current discussion only smears our candidates, one by one. The Left loves writing articles about GOP candidates flip flopping and the “no amnesty” demand assures that such articles will continue to be written.
“They believe that no one in their conscious mind can deport 11 million people from this country,” Alvarado said. “But, politically, they have to play word games to be elected in the primary.”
So we just throw up the white flag and say America it was great but FU! If a nation can’t protect itself from invasion then I guess it’s not really a nation.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, the only declared candidate so far, has kept a fairly consistent tough line on the issue.
And this is the bottom line for me.
All other issues are inconsequential if we lose the country.
They have either agreed to work off the books for those many decades and used our healthcare system lying to qualify, stole or used stolen documents to work under someone else's Social Security number, driven cars without driver's licenses illegally, received government benefits illegally, and on and on.
If I, as a U.S. citizen, do any of the above, and get caught or not, I am committing many felonies. I don't lose my citizenship but I do lose many of the benefits of that citizenship, i.e. the right to vote, just for starters.
I believe already on the books for those wishing to come to the U.S. and work or in the U.S. I'm already and wish to become a citizen and committing felonies are denied that privilege. As such, I may not become a citizen as a convicted felon.
Please, someone, tell me why those rules should not also apply to those already here illegally?
Lastly, such "wiggle words" should be tossed right back into the faces of those saying them, "If I a citizen, commit unlawful acts and felonies for which I would be sent to jail, why do you propose erasing those same laws that would send me to jail, to someone who has broken the law by either coming across the border illegally or over-staying their visa? Is that not first and foremost unfair to judge me on laws you propose ignoring for an illegal alien?"