For General Discussion.
He explained his steps for citizenship on one of the debates. It seems very fair.
"Gingrich ataca política migratoria de Romney "Washington, 25 ene (PL) El aspirante a candidato republicano a las elecciones presidenciales Newt Gingrich criticó hoy la política migratoria de autodeportación propuesta por su principal rival, Mitt Romney, la cual calificó de inhumana. La iniciativa, que busca privar de todo tipo de empleos a los extranjeros indocumentados para forzarlos a regresar, por su voluntad, a su país, fue considerada por el expresidente de la Cámara de Representantes una fantasía "propia del presidente Barack Obama". Según indicó en una entrevista desde el estado de Florida, donde ocurrirán comicios primarios del Partido Republicano el venidero 31 de enero, la propuesta es una muestra que Romney no se preocupa por el aspecto humano de la gente."
What I seem to hear is that Gingrich had been singing several different tunes on this same subject. Make them permanent residents and that’s all, or “quick citizens.”
Confusing.
From everything I gather, Newt’s stance is very close to what Palin endorsed. Many in the PDS brigade slammed that as ‘pro amnesty.
The thing that they then and the pro-Obama crew today faol to grasp (due to an inability or unwillingness to think critically) is that the plan results in practically no actual citizenship given to current illegals.
The key point is that they go to the back of the line.
Now look HONESTLY at that line. It is an ever growing line filled with tens if not hundreds of thousands of people across the globe who are applying for citizenship the right/legal way.
And as new people get in that line every day, they do so AHEAD of the illegals at the back. Over and over.
The end result is that until people stop trying to come to America, the illegals at the back will never make it to the front.
The fact of the matter is that Newt, like Palin before, neutralizes the Dems ‘you hate immigrants’ By in fact providing a very real ‘path to citizenship’ that they scream and demagogue for. It’s just that the path takes longer to walk than the lifespan of the illegal on it.
Legal immigrants don’t have that problem. They come just fine like they always have.
And in the mean time, the rest of the things are put into play. A fence, deportation, laws that leave illegals without work, a place to live, state bennies etc.
I’m not seeing a problem here.
(You didn't really think Newt Gingrich wouldn't have a position paper, did you?)
I want to know what Newt plans to do about LEGAL immigration.
10 million new citizens in the last 11 years.
5 million new Green Cards in the last 11 years.
500,000 temporary work visas each year.
Unemployment is 8.5%, but Newt wants more legal workers?
New immigrant citizens vote 80% for the Democratic Party, but Newt wants more immigration?
These numbers are economic suicide for America and political suicide for Conservatives.
“In three years and eight months, we defeated fascist Italy, Nazi Germany and imperial Japan. Today, we can’t build a (border) fence,” Gingrich said.
“I would propose cutting off all federal funds to any city that declares itself a sanctuary city.”
He said that if UPS and FedEx could keep track of millions of packages a day, the federal government should be able to track illegal immigrants in the country. But Gingrich added: “I don’t believe we’ll ever pass a bill which requires us to hunt down every single person” who has been in this country for some time illegally.
Gingrich also said he would favor a “very sophisticated, very clean” guest worker program. “I think we should go back to the World War Two selective service model where local citizens are certified at a local level, where they actually know the person,” he said.
“If the person is a good citizen, has genuine ties to the United States, has genuine roots, they still don’t get amnesty, they still don’t get citizenship, they still don’t get the right to vote.
=============================================
They might not get "the right" to vote by legislative fiat---but they do it anyway----voting multiple times with several identities.
A common practice among "impoverished" illegals is to buy several faked identitues for several thousand dollars each----the illegal then votes........ and profitably rides the US gravy train under several names.
One latino stole $3.2 million UI benefits using several identities. Jose Madrigal---the Washington state tapist---had some 30 identities.
Immigration is Newt’s real Pink Elephant in the room.
This issue will make or break a lot of conservative votes for the former Speaker.
For my part, the first step MUST be to secure the borders (all of them).
Second, sanction employers who hire illegals. Heavy fines.
Third, deny them subsistence or other support programs that are reserved for US citizens (health care, welfare, etc.).
Fourth, deny them ‘in-state’ tuition at universities and colleges.
Fifth, enact, deploy and require use of e-Verify.
No “guest worker” plan.
No amnesty. Continuing a criminal activity over a period of many years makes it no less criminal.
Hummm, surprisingly many the folks who hated Gov. Perry for his immigration stance don’t seem to have much of a problem with Next’s.
If Newt wins, we will have to get ready to put a full court press on Congress to block any amnesty proposal, just like we did with Jorge Bush. I wish Newt were as good on immigration as Bachmann; unfortunately, he’s not.
Immigration (yes, including legal immigration) is killing us.
It’d take a few years, but this is Newt essentially turning out the conservative and GOP lights in this country behind him.
If it’s not sufficiently ‘humanitarian’ to make illegals who “go to church and are in our communities” go home, there’s no way it’d be considered humanitarian to make these millions of now legal, permanent residents voting US citizens (their offspring of course already would be).
We are in a terrible fix re: this election and the future of our country.
The whole lot of them are part and parcel of the immigration problem which is destroying America.
They have allowed it, they have encouraged it, and they lack the COURAGE to do anything of substance to fix it (as it would mess up the little nests they have feathered for themselves).
Anyone who believes otherwise is an idiot. I truly detest these people, but we’re stuck with them as our nominees.
But after blowback from FLA GOP Hispanics (Rubio, et al), he immediately pulls the ads and is now all gung-ho for "Pathways To Citizenship" for illegals, and mocking Romney's plans to increase the self-deportation flow via actually enforcing existing laws.
What's the proper term for simultaneous FlipFlopping + Pandering?
A Flippander?
Panderflop?
Flipanderflop?