Posted on 04/18/2015 4:31:29 AM PDT by cotton1706
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), a 2016 GOP presidential candidate, said he believes that President Barack Obama’s first executive amnesty for so-called DREAMers—the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)—is “important” and he won’t reverse it himself if elected president. He delivered these remarks in a Spanish-language interview he gave to Univision’s Jorge Ramos.
“I believe DACA is important. It can’t be terminated from one moment to the next, because there are already people benefiting from it,” Rubio said in Spanish on Ramos’s television program, according to an English translation provided by the media service Grabien. “But yes, it is going to have to end. It can’t be the permanent policy of the United States, and I don’t think that’s what they’re asking either. I think everyone prefers immigration reform.”
Ramos followed up, according to the translation, by asking: “But then, to clarify, you would put an end to DACA once immigration reform is approved, but what would happen, Senator, if there is no immigration reform; would you cancel DACA anyway?”
Rubio answered that DACA will end only when a legislative substitute with the exact same or similar policy prescriptions—a legislative amnesty for illegal alien minors—is implemented. He also said in Spanish that, if elected president, he believes that America cannot deport illegal aliens here in the country right now, and he expects a legislative solution will be implemented that essentially has all the parts of the massively controversial “Gang of Eight” bill that he would pass piece-by-piece.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Marco is likely to wear the tag as the biggest disappointment of all time for conservatives with his stance on amnesty.
He will lose.
He was crossed off the list the first time he called for amnesty.
This just means keep him crossed off.
I haven’t figured the guy out...closest I can come is Rino...though he just speaks nicer than most...maybe because he’s trying to be something he’s not.
I guess it’s true that you can’t carry a false front indefinitly without being known for what you are.
However all candidates are eventually going to slide to the amnesty thing in one form or another...they really have no choice once they get to Washington.
Unfortunately for Rubio Spanish is not like some Central Asian village dialect - lots of people can translate it.
But he’s really cutting into Jeb now, by also supporting the re-polulation of this country...so he may wind up doing us a BIG SERVICE.
“How is it, that a candidate running for president, speaks in another language to potential voters? Should that not raise red flags regarding loyalty?”
No, depends what he says. In Rubio’s case, I certainly agree.
“I am not a Rubio supporter, but, to be fair, pro-deportation candidates win between 2% and 3% of the votes.”
I’m not sure it’s that low, but there are options in between (such as looking the other way), at least until one is elected - and then they can get to cleaning them out.
Being pro-Amnesty, at this point, is not going to get him the nomination.
A Gang-of-8er doesn’t change his spots. He just learns how to lie about it better.
You have a choice and your soul is at stake.
Is he nuts? He just admitted that he would continue Obama’s illegal executive actions.
The 11 million figure is the same number the media and most politicians have been using for years. Bet you it's a lot more than that.
Uh oh.
If he divides the RINO vote with Jeb in Florida it will have been worth it. That would represent Cruz' best shot.
I’m not an American,
but I can safely say I would not vote for any candidate that decided to speak in a foreign language on the campaign or give foreign language interviews. Utter madness.
Or is that too extreme a position? Just seems to be encouraging entirely the wrong values.
If we stop making it so beneficial for illegals to be here and actively enforce the law, and/or implement things like 5 years forced hard labor, followed by deportation for being here illegally.......self-deportation would be encouraged.
“Walker seems squishy on amnesty.”
Walker has flipped 3 times on amnesty. Not the thing strong conservative principles are made of, changing stance from thinking our laws are important to they are not and violating them should be rewarded.
Kerry and Romney only flipped twice.
Bump!
There’s a huge difference between illegal and legal immigration.
Not understanding the difference is the same problem the liberals have.
Rewarding lawbreakers and punishing the honest is the Obama way. Rubio is just another dime a dozen RINO.
“It would be worth accepting those already here if we could just stop any future violation of our borders.”
Reagan tried that - it didn’t work because the liberals wouldn’t secure the borders.
When laws are enforced stopping employers from hiring illegals, they will leave.
When taxpayers no longer have to pay for free food, housing, welfare, medical for them - they will leave.
Some years ago, Oklahoma enacted some strict anti-illegal immigration laws- which were never overturned in court. Illegals scurried into surrounding states rapidly. It works.
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.