So that's what you've been up to! :o)
Posted on 11/28/2011 3:51:13 PM PST by Kaslin
Now that Newt Gingrich has become the latest in a series of Republican front-runners, he is getting the kinds of scrutiny and attacks that have done in other front-runners.
One of the issues that have aroused concern among conservative Republicans is that of amnesty for illegal immigrants, especially after Gingrich said that it would not be "humane" to deport someone who has been living and working here for years.
Let's go back to square one. The purpose of American immigration laws and policies is not to be either humane or inhumane to illegal immigrants. The purpose of immigration laws and policies is to serve the national interest of this country.
There is no inherent right to come live in the United States, in disregard of whether the American people want you here. Nor does the passage of time confer any such right retroactively.
The usually sober and thoughtful Wall Street Journal, on issues other than immigration, outdoes Newt Gingrich's claim that it would not be "humane" to deport illegal immigrants who have been living here a long time. A Wall Street Journal editorial says that it would be "psychotic" to do so.
"No one honestly believes the government should or will mount a nationwide manhunt to deport millions of people," according to the Wall Street Journal.
What we have today is virtually the opposite of that. Cities that openly proclaim themselves "sanctuaries" for illegal immigrants put their own policemen under strict orders not to report illegal immigrants to the federal authorities, with the result that illegal immigrants who have committed crime after crime are free to stay here and commit more crimes, including murder.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
Looks to me like you are not clear on the appropriate use of quotations:
"I am not for amnesty for anyone... I think the vast majority [of illegal immigrants] will go home and should go home and then should reapply. I do not think anybody should be eligible for citizenship. I am suggesting a certification of legality with no right to vote and no right to become an American citizen unless they go home and apply through the regular procedures back home and get in line behind everybody else who has obeyed the law and stayed back there." -Newt Gingrich 11/25/2011
As for Newt Gingrich, his position on immigration is just one of the items in the "baggage" he has to overcome. But what the voters have to overcome is an insistence on a perfect candidate. Ronald Reagan, after all, supported an immigrant amnesty bill, but that did not prevent him from being a great president otherwise.
I wouldn't call Sowell's words an endorsement, but they weren't an attack either.
It sounds like he's committed to the nominee being some conservative.
So that's what you've been up to! :o)
Can't see you you come to that conclusion when everything Dr. Sowell has to say leads to precisely the opposite conclusion.
Well, I did.
Newt’s on BOR right now saying whatever he thinks he needs to say that will clarify his “inhumane” statement last Tuesday.
Doesn’t sound like Newt is taking the heat, but trying to put out the 5 alarm firestorm he has created for himself.
The second to the last paragraph on page 2 is what I’ve been hearing from the Newt supporters. He ain’t perfect and we gotta quit looking for perfection, to paraphrase him. It’s not an out right endorsement by any means, but...
I wouldn’t say that Dr. Sowell is agreeing with Newt’s illegal alien idea, but read the second to the last paragraph. It’s the old no one’s perfect and we gotta quit looking for perfection in our candidates. That’s the same old song Newt’s backers on this forum have been singing.
Newt’s supporters are not interested in the facts.
Newtbots just follow their leader by making excuses for his past and present progressive political policies.
Bump to an excellent post
You didn’t finish. You know, the part about having “local boards” decide who stays and who doesn’t and that illegal aliens that have been here for 25 years shouldn’t have to go, etc.
You are very welcome
His second to the last paragraph on page 2 doesn’t lead precisely to the opposite conclusion.
I'm a Gingrich backer, and that's not what I am saying. As far as I am concerned, Gingrich is the only Republican candidate actually behaving like a president right now. You might HATE his immigration proposal, but you have to respect the fact that he is the only candidate who has actually presented one. His opponents have reduced themselves to fearmongering the same way the left has kept the Social Security debate going for decades.
Lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way." -George M. Steinbrenner III
There are two I will not vote for. One is Ron Paul and the other one is Mitt Romney
“But what the voters have to overcome is an insistence on a perfect candidate.”
Amen
I don’t respect ideas that will assist in the destruction of the republic.
In that case, you must really HATE all the other candidates, who are tacitly advocating doing nothing.
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.