[kabar]

If you look at Newt's written plan on immigration, there is no mention of any time limit. Newt is lying about the 25 years, which he uses to make the extreme case that is more favorable to this position. Sawyer was trying to nail him down on the time limit and Newt lied and said it was 25 years.

Politicians who respond that we should deport “criminal” illegal aliens and that “undocumented workers who play by the rules” should have their status regularized in some way by the federal government, i.e., pay a fine, learn English, and get to the back of the line on a earned path to citizenship are supporters of amnesty. Trying to create two classes of illegal aliens is a distinction without a difference, except if you are intent on treating them differently, i.e., providing one group with an amnesty.

[TomGuy]

Sawyer was trying to nail him down on the time limit and Newt lied and said it was 25 years.

I caught an after-debate interview with Gingrich after one of the other debates. He was questioned about the '25 year' requirement. At that time, he said it wasn't '25 years'.

That is what I mean by my previous post: he mesh-muddles all around the issue without giving any specifics that he can be pinned down on. I think I used the word 'slithering' to describe his movements on the issue. :)