Posted on 04/21/2015 2:36:11 PM PDT by kingattax
The state sponsor of terrorism list means nothing regarding immigration.
Tens of thousands of Iranians get immigrant visas, same for Cubans (heck they have their own separate quota).
I would not give them the right to vote. Anyone willing to violate border laws has surrendered their right to vote. Do we give felons the right to vote? No.
Let them work out what to do with the 12 million who are here. One thing they should consider:
If these squatters violate a crime and the crime merits a fine sufficient to transport the criminal back across the border, they pay their way back. How much is that? $300? Once in the criminal justice system, their fingerprints and DNA will be on file, if they get caught back in the country. Then, instead of being sent back, they get prison time. Word will get out that going back into America risks a prison term for at least 5 years. Then, deportation at the end of sentence.
Of course, seal the border to make it almost impossible for new squatter to sneak across. I would build a physical fence layored with a technological fence (drones, aircraft, proximity detectors and infrared cameras) and National Guard troops along areas most vulnerable.
I’m not sure there is a formal ban list either, but certain countries do have restricted quotas that essentially create a ban unless specific persecution or humanitarian reasons can be shown on a case by case basis.
And even in the case of Christian persecution in Somalia or other Muslim countries, we should probably have discretion to allow legal immigration, but our bar should be set much higher with a lot more restrictions in place (life/death situations only) and must be employable, willing to assimilate, etc.
Cruz supports amnesty by another name—called “temporary legalization” and “a pathway”.
They all suck when it comes to this issue.
Those who disagree fool themselves.
Senator Ted Cruz, on the “RIGHT” side of every issue.
Cruz is by far the best candidate, but this would keep me from voting for him. That and the fact that I can’t imagine a foreign-born candidate born to one foreigner and one naturalized citizen meets the expressly higher standard of citizenship required for the presidency (NBC).
Noob: 2015-04-20
“Welcome to FR.”
Here, you can listen to Cruz say it himself:
WELNA: And yet Ted Cruz wants to change the immigration bill with an amendment removing the path to citizenship.
CRUZ: The 11 million who are here illegally would be granted legal status once the border was secured. Not before but after the border was secured, they would be granted legal status. And, indeed, they would be eligible for permanent legal residency. But they would not be eligible for citizenship.
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=193585553
You do realize that he is speaking about the Gang of 8 bill...a bill that he did NOT support and that he provided ‘poison pill’ amendments to derail. That really isn’t helping your argument.
What I have noticed is that you keep dodging my question about what your State and preferred candidate has done to support the anti-illegal immigration cause.
That along, with the fact that you’ve posted more anti-Cruz and anti-Walker comments (the two leading conservative candidates) over the last 6 months than your total combined comments prior to that, all of which makes me question your motivations. Plus you use left-leaning rags for your supposed ‘evidence’ and then mock others for taking anything in the MSM with a grain a salt.
I’m beginning to wonder who you work for...
Cruz is my candidate among those running.
I wish we actually had a candidate who wasn’t for amnesty, however.
I’ve given you many press links in which Cruz is quoted as favoring legalizing illegals.
There’s nothing I can communicate to get through to you, however.
You are pro-amnesty and don’t want others to know that Cruz is squishier than he should be on the issue.
Just check his posting history, you'll see it over and over again. He is this cycles first concern troll and should be ignored.
Best thing he could do is go on and be a 10 or 12 year lurker
See my 51
You’re welcome to plump your pom poms if you’d like.
Some of us would like to save our country—and that requires a stronger candidate on illegal immigration.
You can see that Walker is reacting to pressure on the issue now. Cruz should be pushed too, and a real anti-immigration candidate would be a Godsend.
See, there you go again, making false assumptions.
I am firmly against amnesty and illegal immigration. Of course, so is Cruz.
However, I’m not even sure you know what amnesty is. You just prefer to be divisive. Instead, you should try researching from non-MSM and non-lib sites.
Also, after reading your posts, you will NEVER convince me that you are for Cruz. Lying about Cruz and then saying you actually support him is a little suspicious and is in true lib form.
Cut it out, I haven’t lied and I’ve offered link after link.
Amnesty is not enforcing immigration laws against those who have broken them to be here illegally. And a candidate who wants to legalize those who are here illegally is pro-amnesty.
So are you.
Snippet from the article:
What has not been as evident is what “he supports: legal status for millions of people here already, while making it easier for immigrants to come here through the front door”.
I think you also miss the irony in your posts.
You provided left-leaning story links that say Cruz is pro-amnesty, while dismissing the story links, including the one from this very story that you’re posting to, that all confirm that Cruz is staunchly anti-amnesty. Then you want to claim your links are more credible than the conservative links, which is not true, and you want to attack and criticize anyone that chooses to believe the actual candidate’s proven history, along with the conservative story links.
If fact, nearly everyone of your anti-Cruz posts have been in response to the many pro-Cruz stories from conservative sources, yet you still push the line that your liberal rags are more credible and you know better than anyone else. That is true liberal hypocrisy (and irony)!
Hey, RIchard, there are only two types of American citizens: natural born, or naturalized.
Cruz has never been naturalized; there was no need because he is natural born.
The crap about his citizenship isn’t going to fly.
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.