Posted on 11/22/2011 7:54:13 PM PST by rabscuttle385
Edited on 11/22/2011 8:03:27 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Yes, I do too. No matter how much the masses hold to the unrealistic view of rounding ‘em up and sending them home, it isnt going to happen....it just isnt. Look, Im a “snipers and mines” at the boarder type of guy, but I think Newt is on point here.
Having the perfect position is of no value if you cannot get it enacted or enforced. And in that circumstance, I would not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. I'll take something that secures the border and eliminated 75% of the illegals already over here over the status quo in a heartbeat.
Show me where I misrepresented ......
__________________________________________________________
Univision: Governor, let me ask you about immigration. How many undocumented immigrants are there in Alaska?
Sarah Palin: I don’t know, I don’t know. That’s a good question.
Univision: As governor, how do you deal with them? Do you think they all should be deported?
Sarah Palin: There is no way that in the US we would roundup every illegal immigrant — there are about 12 million of the illegal immigrants — not only economically is that just an impossibility but that’s not a humane way anyway to deal with the issue that we face with illegal immigration.
Univision: Do you then favor an amnesty for the 12 or 13 million undocumented immigrants?
Sarah Palin: No, I do not. I do not. Not total amnesty. You know, people have got to follow the rules. They’ve got to follow the bar, and we have got to make sure that there is equal opportunity and those who are here legally should be first in line for services being provided and those opportunities that this great country provides.
http://mothersagainstillegalamnesty.com/?page_id=15
Show me where I am misrepresenting
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Univision: Governor, let me ask you about immigration. How many undocumented immigrants are there in Alaska?
Sarah Palin: I don’t know, I don’t know. That’s a good question.
Univision: As governor, how do you deal with them? Do you think they all should be deported?
Sarah Palin: There is no way that in the US we would roundup every illegal immigrant — there are about 12 million of the illegal immigrants — not only economically is that just an impossibility but that’s not a humane way anyway to deal with the issue that we face with illegal immigration.
Univision: Do you then favor an amnesty for the 12 or 13 million undocumented immigrants?
Sarah Palin: No, I do not. I do not. Not total amnesty. You know, people have got to follow the rules. They’ve got to follow the bar, and we have got to make sure that there is equal opportunity and those who are here legally should be first in line for services being provided and those opportunities that this great country provides.
http://mothersagainstillegalamnesty.com/?page_id=15
Show me where I am misrepresenting? She did indeed say “ impossible “ to deport all of them and she also said it’d not be a humane way. Also said she’s not for “total amnesty”.
Read below.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Univision: Governor, let me ask you about immigration. How many undocumented immigrants are there in Alaska?
Sarah Palin: I don’t know, I don’t know. That’s a good question.
Univision: As governor, how do you deal with them? Do you think they all should be deported?
Sarah Palin: There is no way that in the US we would roundup every illegal immigrant — there are about 12 million of the illegal immigrants — not only economically is that just an impossibility but that’s not a humane way anyway to deal with the issue that we face with illegal immigration.
Univision: Do you then favor an amnesty for the 12 or 13 million undocumented immigrants?
Sarah Palin: No, I do not. I do not. Not total amnesty. You know, people have got to follow the rules. They’ve got to follow the bar, and we have got to make sure that there is equal opportunity and those who are here legally should be first in line for services being provided and those opportunities that this great country provides.
http://mothersagainstillegalamnesty.com/?page_id=15
Atleast Perry isn’t a member of the global warming cult too!
Newt is for amnesty and in June 2011 Debate Newt Gingrich called Americans Heartless for wanting to deport 20 million illegals.
"GINGRICH: No, but let me say this, John. No serious citizen who's concerned about solving this problem should get trapped into a yes/no answer in which you're either for totally selling out protecting America or you're for totally kicking out 20 million people in a heartless way. There are -- there are humane, practical steps to solve this problem, if we can get the politicians and the news media to just deal with it honestly."
June 2011 Debate Transcript
Are you saying that if “Newton Leroy Gingrich” is the answer, it must be a rigged question?
“Newt was doing so well, then just cow flopped...”
So let’s recap..
Romney = RomneyCare same old same old get along establishment RINO
Perry = proven pro-Amnesty governor, no convictions, crony capitalist
Huntsman = Democrat
Santorum = raging social conservative, nation builder, neo-con
Cain = Pro NEW 9% sales tax, limited knowledge beyond business
Bachman = solid proven conservative, can she lead?
Paul = great on personal liberty, limited government, stopping nation building - naive on foreign threats
Newt = Totally understands the world, history and our place in it, great articulator of ideas/bashing the establishment - questionable desire to work outside DC
Nobody is perfect. To me, any combination of the bottom three are fine with me.
No, it's the day they thought they were writing their own personal social program. But the check hasn't arrived yet. They may have to wait until 2013 to collect.
Amen, Java4jay. And I agree too.
FReepers sometimes can be so knee-jerk doctrinaire.
Flame on!
Indeed. Gingrich's idea to "legalize" the illegals would be a political and national nightmare. Upon such legalization, how do you go about deporting anyone? But, more importantly, organizations like La Raza would have a field day. The next step would be to agitate for amnesty and citizenship.
The most expedient way to get to illegals to go is to enforce the existing laws, cut off government hand-outs by requiring birth certificates, punish employers who hire illegals and seal the confounded border.
Think carefully about what Newt said. He said,
“Is it inhumane to deport an illegal immigrant who came to the United States 25 years ago,”
Why did he choose 25 years ago and not 20 or 30.
People assume that 25 years was just a number that Newt pulled out of his ass.
It is not.
Think back about about what happened 25 years ago.
That would be 1986.
That was the year Ronald Reagan’s bill gave amnesty to the then current residents in exchange for sealing the border.
The border wasn’t sealed and millions more Mexicans and other poured over the border.
The people who came after 1986 were illegal. But the people who came before 1986 were legalized if they bothered to come forward.
So Newt is talking about a law that is already on the books.
No. We deport illegals. The Illegals need to make arrangements, or take their minors with them, like any other sentient human-beimg-type parent would do.
Those you speak of are exactly those who would be deported. Did you really hear what Newt state? He’s being realistic and there simply is no way deporting them all will ever pass thru our government. Not going to happen.
Is “beaner” an OK term here on FR?
But let's keep discussion on the debate threads to those candidates who are, you know, actually running.
This statement illustrates what I’ve been saying about Newt all along. He’s a big brain without the sort of common sense that real leaders have.
He’d be even scarier in the White House, because ideas like this would translate into working US policy.
As for pretending "our possible nominee is something that he isn't", I would say that YOU are the one doing that. You call him a moderate, and say his plan was an amnesty proposal. I'm sorry, but I think you are dead wrong on both. You don't trust him. I do. When he was in a position to gain power he proposed the Contract with America and then kept his word on bringing it to vote in Congress. I've seen him SAY some dumb things, but I've never seen him DO anything I hated when he had the power to affect something. Only things I've hated that he's done is saying those dumb things, and they didn't matter much because he wasn't in a position to act on them. He sometimes speaks rashly, but I've never seen him act that way.
I tried (once again) pretending in 2008, and look what it got us.
It got us one vote closer to McCain beating Obama than we would have been if you had stayed home. Listen, I'm all for arguing this out during the primary. I'm just concerned that we're about to get someone like McCain, Romney, who really is a moderate, because people like you label any conservative who isn't perfect a moderate. I hope we can all come to agreement. I prefer Newt, but I'd settle for Cain, Bachmann or Santorum if all you perfectionists could agree on one of them.
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.