Can your point be made without the left-wing hyperbole?
Can your point be made without the left-wing hyperbole?
Of course, though I would argue that it is not left-wing hyperbole, just hyperbole. Sadly though, even on this thread alone we have at least one who is in favor of cattle cars, and one who would prefer forced marches of 25 miles a day. The original cattle car comment came from another thread, but was actually used tongue-in-cheek by someone else to satirize some of the more fanatic "deport them all, no exceptions" posts. Perhaps that cattle car comment was more artfully posed than mine, but the tone of so many posts in this discussion is frankly, quite chilling.
After reading the firestorm of responses to me, I will venture a response.
I still believe that we are to "Do justice. Love mercy. And walk humbly with God." And my understanding is not, as has been suggested, "leftist heresy and historical revisionism."
Yes, we are to "do justice." If that's the end of the story, then even putting people into cattle cars and sending them back to Mexico would be justice. Although I am still trying to figure out exactly what the teenager who was brought here at the age of two is supposed to do. I guess, the consensus would be that he should immediately admit that he is here illegally, turn his parents and his siblings in to the authorities and head back to Mexico himself. He probably needs to learn to speak Spanish on the way, but who cares he is illegal, dammit, and is lucky we don't just toss him in jail and throw away the key.
But if justice is all that we are called to, there would be no human left on the planet. God would have simply destroyed the world at the Fall, or its inhabitants by the flood giving no inside information to Noah.
However, we are called to mercy, just as much as we are called to justice. That is not something I see in the forced deportation position, and I do see it in Gingrich's proposal. (For the record, I also see a degree of mercy in the self-deportation approach, elements of which can be found in Newts plan. Curiously though, Newt's plan has more traditional retributive and punitive justice than the self-deportation option.)
Newt's plan is not perfect. I doubt there is a perfect plan at this point.
He starts with controlling the border as a "national security imperative," and commits to providing the resources to accomplish it. So posters can argue that he is an "open-borders" guy, but they are wrong. Or simply lying.
He advocates a path to legality for some, but not all and takes a very sober-minded approach to distinguishing those who should go and those who can stay. But he is not advocating blanket amnesty regardless of how many times that accusation is posted against him. He is not advocating the abandonment of the rule of law.
Don' take my word for it. Read it for yourself. www.newt.org/solutions/immigration.
Newt is not the perfect candidate, and as I have said, he does not have the perfect plan. But it is reasonable. And, in my view, it more reflects the values that this nation is built on than any plan I have seen.
Say what you will about Newt, but he is a shrewd politician. He recognizes that no Republican will win without serious Hispanic and independent support in several swing states. Marco Rubio has made it clear that the continual, irrational call to deport them all is going to hurt the GOP's chances to boot the current occupant of the White House. Given that, providing a path to legality for productive people who would prefer repatriation and who have "deep ties to America, including family, church and community," is, in my opinion, far preferable to allowing the continued occupation of the White House by those who really do intend to destroy this nation.
And for those who have graciously offered to be embarrassed for me, please don't worry. When I feel it necessary I am perfectly capable of being embarrassed on my own behalf. But this ain't one of those times.