http://www.economicfreedomcoalition.com/news/press-opinion-061107.asp
it’s not out-of-context, his stance = Newt’s stance, really. He’s for selective deportation, not blanket deportation, just like Newt.
I will also post the interview where he reaffirmed his stance, when I am not going to bed and can look for it. ;-)
Again: “The Immigration Bill could have succeeded if the political class in Congress and the president had listened to the public and addressed the four distinct problems. Namely, secure the borders convincingly, expand the temporary worker program for skilled legal immigrants, establish a reliable legal immigrant identification program and then propose a reasonable program for the 12 million (and counting) illegal persons who broke our laws to get here, but not amnesty.”
BUT NOT AMNESTY. A “reasonable plan” is sending back from whence they came whenever they are found and telling them to apply to come in the right way. Nowhere does he say “AND FIND A REASONABLE WAY TO LET THEM STAY”. For instance, it’s not reasonable (or economically feasible) to knock on every door in the country and ask for papers. It is feasible to shift more responsibility on the employers to vouch for the legality of their employees. It is feasible to cut off all federal aid to sanctuary cities. It is feasible to ask for proof of being here legally when stopped for even a minor traffic infraction and sending the illegals back home. It is feasible to have a better way for people (especially skilled workers) to come here legally. When it’s easier to come here and stay here illegally than when you come here legally, that’s a problem. And an easier process for those coming in the front door is also is incentive. None of these ideas have anything to do with amnesty yet all of them are ideas that could deal with the illegals currently here. Whether they’re the exact ideas Cain has, I can’t say but they deal with the problem without amnesty.