I can see your point, really hard to find them.
Posted on 11/25/2011 8:23:04 AM PST by TitansAFC
snips:
...."But "there is no path to citizenship in my Tuesday night comment on immigration," Gingrich told Newsmax. "There is a path to non-deportation for certified, very long-term community members but they would not have the right to vote."
The goal of his plan, Gingrich said, is to gain control of the border in 12 months while ensuring that English is the official language of the U.S. government. He wants even faster rules for the deportation of criminals and a guest worker program "outsourced to American Express, Visa or MasterCard to minimize fraud..."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
If you understand what a Green Card is, the Red Card is basically a permanent Green Card. Were what you suggest even a remote possibility of being an issue, it could be done today by a Green Card holder. Assuming that hell froze over and the SC decided to take it up, it would be one of the fastest smackdowns in history. Elimination of the Green Card program (which is what would have to happen in your scenario) would eliminate the ability for the US to allow anyone to enter the country LEGALLY and apply for citizenship. Essentially, citizenship ... and therefore the Constitution, would cease to exist. Like I said, I have heard some serious dumbass strawman arguements before, but this one takes the cake.
I brought up birther as an example of something that upsets a LOT of people, that impacts our country greatly, and the SC will never ever touch it.
Finally, your example of the local elections is sad, but at each level where the D’s implement something like that, a citizen (citizen in this context would mean someone who the court would consider to have standing) has the right to challenge it in court. If those statutes still exist, I can only assume they have not been challenged. Were they challenged and found lawful, then they should have been appealed. Where are they in the appeal process? If nobody is suing, and nobody appealing, then idiocy like that can exist.
Theodore Roosevelt had a few words on the subject.
This is not a new problem!
”There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all.”
More at :
I believe 50% is just about what the rates are today, depeneding on where one lives.
When you add up federal, state, county, city, and sales taxes. Even a little higher for certain income brackets, perhaps.
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall have mercy.
“We need to get control of our borders first. It does no good to talk about people living here now when anyone in Mexico can acquire that status tomorrow. Once we gain control of our borders then we can talk about all the other implications and permutations of illegal immigration.”
Sounds like what Perry said at the last debate....
And continues doing it.
An oft repeated solution is Temporal Reciprocity."
Apply the immigration laws of Mexico as it applies to Mexican and Latin American illegals.
When their laws become benevolent, we can stop beng "heartless and mean-spirited." Totally up to them.
Of course they would. They'll get millions to perform something they already do.
It's not surprising Newt wants to privatize that part when he's in favor of privatizing the guest worker process. A monumental mistake IMHO.
You are correct. But it’s not the federal tax rate, which is the off topic point.
Most of them are here legally as a result of special legal government policies and conditions as refugees from Cuba, Haiti and other repressive and murderous regimes.
They don't like illegals any more than other American citizens and legal residents.
Apples and Oranges.
Wait a couple of years.
If the amount spent on welfare in all forms results in wholesale further increased unemployment, mortgage defaults, homelessness, and inability to feed their families, the solution will be mass deportations or worse, and entirely beyong the control of "government."
All except the ultra rich will be victims of inflation and/or spending that will make even the ignorant "compassionate" embrace the most radical of solutions (including the few outside of government employment still lucky enough to have a job.).
Imagine 30 or 40% unemployment, in addition to the 50% who currently pay NO income taxes.
If they are hungry they will. Some of us remember "The Great Okie March."
A hamburger today for which I will gladly pay you tomorrow........
Sometime something is not better than nothing.
Big difference between not able, and not willing. Strange how we confuse that word all the time, it must suit someones purpose.
The government/corporate cancer treatment industry doesn't want a "cure."
That would destroy their cash cow and make their current investment in such therapies worthless.
The only way they are going to allow a "cure" is if they own it and get to harness the cash flow.
And they have no problem with perverting the rule of law to steal what they want.
The link I gave before documents this.
I am sick and tired of being lectured by a bunch of crybabies how we have to feel sorry for the kids of these illegals that got caught. Tough.
Oh, yes, and before you characterize me a some knuckle-dragging, heartless Neanderthal, my mother's father and mother immigrated legally from Sweden to America. Grandpa came first, got established, and then brought Grandma over. They learned English and they became American citizens. They were PROUD to be Americans and they did not consider themselves as Swedish-Americans — they were AMERICANS.
This is something that cannot be said about our flood of illegal aliens who want to replicate the corruptness of Mexico in the United States and who owe no allegiance to the U.S. If they love Mexico, why aren't they living in Mexico? Oh, that's because Mexico told them to leech off the stupid gringos across the border. Yeah, and do it for the children.
Exactly! What happens when politicians talk about any plan that gives illegals any type of legal status it only encourages more and more to come here.
Candidates should stick to how to secure our border, it is a security issue and needs to be done no matter what we decide to do about the illegals in this country, we are importing the cartel war and it is known that smugglers are getting firendly with terrorists.
The liberals and open border supporters love to say “we can’t deport them so we must make them legal” their other favorite is to muddy the water between legal and illegal immigration, and pretend as though there is no legal way for those from other countries to come here to work or live. All of these are simply liberal talking points and conservatives need to be smart enough to recognize that and not include liberal talking points in their own discussions about the border issues.
Many politicians also use vague language- and they do it deliberately in order to pander to the illegals and their supporters without ticking off those that are concerned about the border. We need to be smarter than to fall for it. Make the border itself the issue first and hold politicians feet to the fire on securing the border. If they won’t secure the border they surely won’t be willing to be conservative in the way they deal with illegals already here.
I can see your point, really hard to find them.
Awww ... farmers who got used to illegal labor now have to develop a domestic work force.
Cry me a river.
</sarcasm>
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.