1 Didn't watch the debate but saw the bit about his call for a "humane" policy on the news this AM.

My first thought was "his supports on the HQ are going to be in meltdown".

2 Perry 2012

3 Anybody but romney

4 Happy Thanksgiving everyone, be safe cooking, walking, flying or driving and most of all when you sit down to chow give thanks to our Troops that will be getting fired upon as you stuff yourselves God Bless them ALL and their Families!

5 Yes, he hurt himself. Evidently he doesn't know what poison this issue is with the base.

6 I don't think it hurt him. He doesn't need to take the most reactionary position on every issue to show how he contrasts with Romney.

7 Repeat from news thread:

This is what I wrote for Newt on the border control issue way back at the beginning of all this mess.

The “On the Issues” site is not much good for this topic and it is not covered by the club for growth stuff. However, a Bing search (easily done) gives multiple hits for speeches and interviews (rhetoric) recently where he “reaches out” to Hispanics with reform ideas of immigration (sound familiar?). Basically he has gone squish/McCain on immigration while denying that it is amnesty (they all hate that label).  Again this is rhetoric as immigration laws were not a hot topic when he was in congress. But with his rhetoric on the wrong side now it doesnÂ’t matter.

So this is not the first time he has ventured out into this briar patch. Its just the most public one.

8 On the ONT last night, I came up with a request for what I call the "Moron Mic Check" if any Occutards try their bullshit where you shop. Kind of a Mic Interception if you will ....

Mic check!

Obama is ....

a Stuttering Clusterfuck ..

of a ...

Miserable Failure ....

9 It's undoubtedly true that there are a lot of long-term illegals here that are going to stay here, and that we'll never have the heart to deport in reality. It doesn't mean that we should make not deporting them official policy though!

10 Newt needs to write a book on immigration history and policy implications, he should have plenty of time next year. More people will read it now.

11 LOL. Newt educates the people about reality. This should be fun. Don't like his big-government immigration board idea though.

12 I hope perry catches fire. Though some may not like her, i think a palin endorsment would help

13 I am for amnesty for illegal immigrants and a pourous border, but against outsourcing jobs to other countries. I will protest corporations who move their companies overseas, but will stand silent while millions of people come to my country illegally and take jobs. I raged against Diebold and Republican election fraud in 2000 and 2004, iyet I defended the election process in 2008 and will proclaim the Black Panthers in Philly and Acorn both getting caught tampering with elections is nothing to worry about. I am for a national healthcare system of socialized medicine with every person being forced to have a health insurance, but yet I will call it racism if you are asked for ID to vote. Who am I?

14 And this statement is plain stupid for the topic:

You know, about five blocks down the street, you'll see a statue of Einstein. Einstein came here as an immigrant. So let's be clear how much the United States has drawn upon the world to be richer, better and more inclusive.

Einstein was LEGAL you dumb ass.

15 Not sure what people expected Newt to say on this, since he did vote for Simpson-Mazzoli and obviously backed Reagan on the issue.

16 The biggest problem for Newt is the soundbites that can be taken out of that that make him look weak on immigration. Discussing emotional issues like a professor teaching a college class is not going to work. Full disclosure :I don't want Newt as the candidate.

17 I think he's hurt himself with this, but probably not as much as we're thinking. Will his support bleed away any faster than Cain's has? This is one blunder; Cain makes 3 or 4 this size every single day that people are paying attention to him, and he's still got 15-20%(?) stubbornly backing him. (shrug) I think Newt will have a blip down, but not that much of one.

18 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

19 I hope perry catches fire. Though some may not like her, i think a palin endorsment would help

Posted by: Flapjackmaka at November 23, 2011 10:05 AM (ZDEMd)

It would, but the last I saw about that subject was that Palin is planning on backing Newt not Perry. That seems a strange choice given what she says she stands for, but after what we've seen this cycle so far, it surely wouldn't surprise me.

20

Newt is a great idea guy.  However, in his heart, he is a Progressive.  And this answer hurts him, even though it's not the worst answer and is certainly better, if it were to be implemented as he suggests, than anything we are likely to actually get.

Mitt's going to win.

21 Still supporting Perry in this race.

22 It's Krieble, not Creeble: The Krieble Foundation

23 5 Yes, he hurt himself. Evidently he doesn't know what poison this issue is with the base. Posted by: Vic at November 23, 2011 10:02 AM (YdQQY) Yeah. Taking a 2nd look @ perry here. Was looking to Newt to clean up on his purple sofa Scozzafava history, but he's really just making it worse. He wants to make immigration more efficient (six sigma!) by setting up a NEW bureaucracy WITHIN immigration to manage 30 million people that shouldn't be here in the first place? Flat. Out. Nuts. I think he was right about Paul Ryan's plan being the GOP version of social engineering. It'd be nice if he applied the litmus test he applied to Ryan's plans to his own.

24 ^{Did Newt Gingrich Hurt Himself Last Night With Immigration ?}

Yes, badly.

25 It would, but the last I saw about that subject was that Palin is planning on backing Newt not Perry.

I think Palin is going to pull a DeMint and not back anybody during the primaries. They usually work hand-in-hand.

26 Which of the candidates is actually good on immigration?  Gingrich saw everyone else doing seppuku with the amnesty blade and decided it looked like fun.

27 So, Rick Perry is a non-starter for calling people "heartless" who oppose in-state tuition for (according to the law) people who came here as minors, who have lived in Texas for several (3+?) years, have graduated High-School and have signed a legal document stating they are seeking legal status.

But it's okay that Newt is willing to conflate legal immigration with illegal immigration, and is okay with a "limited amnesty."

Sorry, no.  They stay 1 (Perry) and 2 (Newt) in my book, but Newt is more of a squish on the border than Perry.

28 15 Not sure what people expected Newt to say on this, since he did vote for Simpson-Mazzoli and obviously backed Reagan on the issue.   Reagan was dealing with 3 million crimmigrants in a population of 270 million.  We have 30 million in a population of 310 million.  Totally different scope.  Additionally, Reagan's amnesty was coupled with shutting the border, which, of course, never happened.   It's apples and oranges to compare what people were saying about crimmigration on 1985 and what they are saying now.   That being said, Newt will always look to expand government.  That's who Newt is.

29 The biggest problem with Newt's plan is that it will--if ever enacted--be declared unconstitutional before a single person is deported.
Because of the premise, that some lawbreakers are more equal than other lawbreakers, and should therefore be treated differently. I think even Scalia would have a hard time saying that doesn't violate the equal protection clause. (Because this'd be litigated under a race/strict scrutiny standard rather than a rational basis standard.)

Never mind that it is unworkable. Can you imagine the mountains of paperwork and regulations just to prove someone meets the "been here a long time, has many ties to the community" standard?

30 Einstein was LEGAL you dumb ass.

Posted by: Vic at November 23, 2011 10:06 AM (YdQQY)

He never said he wasn't. 

31
I see his answer last night as an attempt to move beyond the current debate to something closer to what could actually be implemented.  I'm undeterred (as yet) from supporting Noot, but I sure hope he strays no further from the conservative orthodoxy.

32 I will protest any Republican that is against gay marriage, but yet if Obama says he is too I will in my heart know he is just lying to fool the silly rubes in flyover country and thus I will support him. I will call Newt Gingrich a 1%er and lobbyist too, but yet turn a blind eye to Obama raising a billion dollars for his campaign and giving taxpayer cash to donors.

33 That being said, Newt will always look to expand government.  That's who Newt is.

Posted by: Truman North at November 23, 2011 10:14 AM (I2LwF)

THIS x 1000

34 After all the smoke clears (still 1 year until election) I'm hanging with Perry.

35 Not sure what people expected Newt to say on this, since he did vote for Simpson-Mazzoli and obviously backed Reagan on the issue.

He could have talked about the promises that were broken after Simpson-Mazzoli passed. The tougher enforcement that was supposed to happen after giving amnesty. Which is why after the country got screwed that time so many people call for enforcement first amnesty after.

36

He never said he wasn't. 

Posted by: Washington Nearsider at November 23, 2011 10:15 AM (wnbjH)

But he was answering a question for ILLEGALS.

37 Here's the deal: we can either round 'em up and ship 'em out or we can take steps to assimilate them. Clearly, we aren't going to round 'em up, so we better assimilate them. Because if we don't, and they can't get educated and improve themselves legally, they will turn to crime to get by. I live in a place where there are quite a few illegals. They work their ass off at whatever job they have and they have kids, now in their late teens and early twenties, who were brought here while very young. Those kids didn't do anything wrong, yet. But leave them uneducated and shoved to the side long enough and they will find ways to get into trouble. As distasteful as it is, and I understand that it is, we need to lock down the borders, straighten out this situation for these young people and move on. Turn them into productive citizens and then make sure that we don't have another wave of illegal immigration.

38 Im not with Newty on this one, but I cant get worked up about it either. He made clear that controling the border is a priority and somehow I ve got the feeling that this premise makes this a subject for Newts successor. If thats Newts biggest policy drawback, Ill be voting for him with a smile.

39

Nothing he said here precludes securing the border. They are distinct issues.

1. What will you do to secure the border?

2. What will you do with the illegals already here?

The FIRST point he made (after the obligatory 'Nation of Immigrants/Einstein' reference) was that Reagan and other conservatives were conned into accepting amnesty-without-border-security. So, his first real point was about the border.  So I think you've got to deal with this as a comprehensive approach that starts with controlling the border.

Conservatives care more about #1 than #2. And voters agree with us overwhelmingly on #1. Without #1, the rest doesn't matter.

40 17 I think he's hurt himself with this, but probably not as much as we're thinking. Will his support bleed away any faster than Cain's has? This is one blunder; Cain makes 3 or 4 this size every single day that people are paying attention to him, and he's still got 15-20%(?) stubbornly backing him. (shrug) I think Newt will have a blip down, but not that much of one.

Agreed. 

Speaking of Cain, did I catch this right?  Did Cain say that Syria was a large oil exporter?  IIRC, Syrian oil production constitutes about 0.5 to 1% of all global oil production. 

41 Yeah, I think what makes this a problem for him is that it shows him as another person who, when asked about illegal immigration, talks about the contributions of legal immigrants. Take that one line out, and disagreements with GingrichÂ’s ideas become disagreements about where to start discussions; instead itÂ’s an argument over the fundamental issue, that there is a difference between encouraging the kind of people who follow the law and encouraging the kind of people who break the law.

42

I actually liked Newt's answer here I thought it was sensible and pragmatic. Now, I am a Romney supporter so I guess I'm a bit RINOish on certain issues - like immigration. To me, Newt's answer was the most practical and appealing to the broadest section of America. He doesn't want to allow recent illegals to stay in the country so I don't know how someone can say he is soft on illegal immigration. It simply doesn't make sense, to me, to deport people who have been in this country since Bush the Elder.

43 Probably does some minor damage. They should all really stay away from the word "comprehensive" on immigration since that's seen as meaning amnesty first and border enforcement second if at all.

44 Here's the deal: we can either round 'em up and ship 'em out or we can take steps to assimilate them.

No that is NOT the deal. What we MUST do is eliminate the employment by punishing employers who knowingly hire them. Do that and eliminate welfare for them and they will leave on their on.

45 I will take Newt's realism over the other's pandering. He talked about controling the border first, so I see no problem with it.

46 But he was answering a question for ILLEGALS.
Posted by: Vic at November 23, 2011 10:16 AM (YdQQY)

No, the original question given to Santorum was about legal immigration for high skilled workers. Blitzer then changed it to illegals. Newt was going back to the original question before getting to Blitzer's follow up.

It's a case where the transcript isn't clear on how things flowed.

47 Speaking of Cain, did I catch this right?  Did Cain say that Syria was a large oil exporter?

Yeah, he stepped on his dick again hard.

48 Here's the deal: we can either round 'em up and ship 'em out or we can take steps to assimilate them. Posted by: DaveyNC at November 23, 2011 10:17 AM (75czV) False choice, but thanks for playing.

49 I will take Newt's realism over the other's pandering. He talked about controling the border first, so I see no problem with it.

Posted by: brak at November 23, 2011 10:19 AM (uo15i)

+1

50 He never said he wasn't.

No, he didn't.  But by bringing up Albert Einstein in a question about illegal immigrants, he hope to conflate the two.  His position is WRONG on so many levels, I'm having a hard time knowing where to begin deconstructing it.  By trying to hide behind the leftist rhetoric of "We're a nation of immigrants," he's trying to make you think that Abuela Martinez who came over illegally and hasn't done anything besides rear children on welfare who are rearing children on welfare is the same as Albert Einstein.

51

He could have talked about the promises that were broken after Simpson-Mazzoli passed. The tougher enforcement that was supposed to happen after giving amnesty.

I thought he did:

I did vote for the Simpson-Mazzoli Act. Ronald Reagan, in his diary, says he signed it -- and we were supposed to have 300,000 people get amnesty. There were 3 million. But he signed it because we were going to get two things in return. We were going to get control of the border and we were going to get a guest worker program with employer enforcement. We got neither.

52

But he was answering a question for ILLEGALS.

Posted by: Vic at November 23, 2011 10:16 AM (YdQQY) \

 

But he started his answer by talking about legal immigration and then segued into Einstein and then into the Illegal question. He didn't get a chance to answer the previous question which was about high-skilled legal immigration so he used his response to the illegal question to give a quick answer to the previous question.

 

Have I fallen asleep and woken up 50 years in the future where that is now unheard of?

53 I disagree with Drew.  I think offering comprimise is a good place to begin- so long as the context of the debate is completing the Democrat's side of the deal from the 80's FIRST.   

54 Oh, and that stupid canard about Einstein ought to chap your ass worse than the Perry "heartless" comment.
Einstein didn't come here to make a few bucks picking lettuce or hanging drywall--he had some actual threats to his life back home and he had very valuable, highly specialized skills.

I'm all for amnesty for any illegals who can meet the Einstein basics criteria--literacy, previous white-collar employment, advanced degree in any field of science.

55

Speaking of Cain, did I catch this right? Did Cain say that Syria was a large oil exporter?

Honestly, it's pretty much time to clear the stage and let Newt and Romney battle it out. Sorry Gov.

56 No one has ever called me RINO, and even I thought Newt's position was pretty sensible.  The truth is there are those you don't want out, those you'll never get out, and those you should really be focusing all of your time, money, effort and energy not only getting out, but keeping them out.  Now we just need a few more realistic specifics on how we're going to accomplish all that and we're good to go.  (Not snark.  I actually think its possible to all that.)

57 I am really loving "I am the 99%"ers posts. They are pure genius. Should be consolidated and put into a post or a sidebar.

58 if the Republican party wants to become the Michelle Malkin party i'm out, i'll sign up as a Liberterian, vote GOP over socialist Dem (because the Loserterians have no chance in hell of winning), and ignore the naive foreign policy of the Liberterians

59 Maybe Newt doesn't want to be the nominee, just wanted to increase his visibility for book sales.
Cain still isn't ready.
I still support Perry. Hope he is still viable by the time NY primary rolls around.
Suire dodged a bullet with that snowbilly didn't we?

60 Gingrich and Perry both made the most important point - it is just an intellectual exercise talking about what to do with the illegals here until you stop the inflow at the border.

61 OK, I wasn't there to here the whole thing, but as Drew said, the transcript is not clear on that. It doesn't matter though about the Einstein quote. He is still proposing "limited amnesty" which after tinkering by the commies and the RINOs will become full amnesty.

Piss on him and his big government shit.

62 Honestly, it's pretty much time to clear the stage and let Newt and Romney battle it out. Sorry Gov.

Posted by: CJ at November 23, 2011 10:23 AM (9KqcB)

yep

63 Can we please stop mixing up Newts answer to the original question about legal immigration and his more controversial answer to the follow up question about illegals?

64 No.  Romney came off looking rigid and black-and-white on immigration.  That may be appealing to the fringe of the right wing but looks hateful and unrealistic to the rest of the country.

Gingrich is recognizing reality just as Reagan did.  His position is essentially Reagan's and that of the Catholic church.  Border enforcement, deportation of criminal illegals, and common sense measures for long-time illegals is a mainstream position. 

It is the mainstream position of every Republican president in the last 40 years and all of the Republican nominees for president in that time frame. 

Tom Tancredo isn't going to be president of the United States and taking his immigration fantasies as a starting point isn't going to help Romney, either.  It is pandering of the worst sort to a fringe of the base.  No one believes Romney is a hard-liner on immigration anymore than he was believable going after Obamacare last night.  Both were desperate and pathetic.

65 Honestly, it's pretty much time to clear the stage and let Newt Perry and Romney battle it out.

66 At least he wasn't talking about publicly-supported goodies for illegals . . . like SOME heart-filled people do! It was clear from his answer he'd thought about the issue a lot - perhaps too much to actually think about it simply and rationally - but I'm not too exercised about it. I actually worry more about the high levels of LEGAL immigration we have in tech. Well not necessarily MORE, but I don't support it as he seems to.

67

Tom Tancredo isn't going to be president of the United States

oh my God, Michelle Malkin just orgasam at the thought of his name, oh and thank Tancredo for a Dem guv Colorado morons

68 Honestly, it's pretty much time to clear the stage and let Newt Perry and Romney battle it out.

Posted by: real joe at November 23, 2011 10:25 AM (Oy+Ok)

Let's compromise - let Romney, Gingrich, and Perry stay, and get rid of the other deadwood.

69 Posted by: CJ at November 23, 2011 10:17 AM (9KqcB)

Yeah, the problem is that whole "comprehensive" approach.  That's code for (and has been since GW) "amnesty."  Remember, it was "comprehensive immigration reform" that we were so against because it was amnesty.

We don't have to deal with it comprehensively.  Indeed, we shouldn't.  Enforce current law in regards to the border.  No one new gets to stay.  Enforce punishments against employers who knowingly hire illegals.  Once you've stopped the flow of illegals into our country, then we can think about what to do about the rest.

If you're enforcing current law, and actually punishing those who hire illegals, then you'll find most of them will leave all on their own.  If they're milking the system, make legal status a requirement for receiving aid- and tie WIC and Foodstamps to the number of legal members of a household (as a stop gap to fixing the idiocy of "foot-across-the-border birthright" citizenship).

If you make it uncomfortable to stay here, many of them will leave.  Once that's done, then we can see about anyone who is left.

70 it is just an intellectual exercise talking about what to do with the illegals here until you stop the inflow at the border.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at November 23, 2011 10:24 AM (9Uxl0)

Bingo.

And Democrats would LOVE for us to focus on deportations. Lots of melodrama there. They HATE talking about securing the border, because most voters side with the GOP on that.

71

Let's not forget that Newt's answers are as much intellectually dishonest as anything else.

1) He's confusing legal and illegal immigration.  When you're talking about illegal immigration and 30 million (not 12) undocumented foreigners in the country, pointing to a statue of Albert Einstein has absolutely zero relevance.  Legal immigration was and is good for America - when it's controlled and follows a pattern that weeds out the good from the bad.  Let's not forget that Ellis Island - the vaunted Ellis Island of open borderer mythology - was a quarantine station where a lot of potential immigrants were actually turned back and sent home because of disease, lacks of skills, criminality, and so forth.

2)  Focusing the discussion on people who have been here for 25 years is sort of like how people try to focus the debate about abortion on "rape, incest, and the life of the mother being in danger" - circumstances that make up a fraction of a percentage of the total number of abortions.  Likewise here, the large majority of illegal immigrants have NOT been here for 25 years, and the majority of them don't even HAVE family here.  Trying to make the long termers appear to be normative is disingenuous. 

If anything, Newt's answers were a good argument (though unintended by him) for ending birthright citizenship, not amnestying long-term illegals with families.

72

I asked [Gingrich spokesman J.C. Hammond] to compare this position to conservatives who would define amnesty as legalizing anybody who had ever come here illegally.

“Newt is for a local, community review board where local citizens can decide whether or not their neighbors that have come here illegally should find a path to legality, not citizenship,” he said. “Two distinctly different things.”

Now that does turn me off. I don't know how you can't have a national standard which requires them to pay back taxes before legalizing them.

73

He didn't call me heartless, but I heard tones of George W. McGrahamnesty in that response from Newt.

I was in Mitt's camp, then in Newt's, and now.........well that answer last night from him was damn troubling.

Newt's positions are usually complex and best delivered in long form, so I'll wait for further word from him.

 

74 Honestly, it's pretty much time to clear the stage and let Newt Perry and Romney battle it out.
Posted by: real joe at November 23, 2011 10:25 AM (Oy+Ok)

Just curious but what's the rationale for kicking out everyone but Romney and a guy who has fallen from 30% to 6% and can't get back in it? Newt, Ron Paul! and Herman Cain are all doing better than Perry, so why is he given a ticket to hang around?

75 GINGRICH: Let me start and just say I think that we ought to have an H-1 visa that goes with every graduate degree in math, science and engineering so that people stay here.

NO, NO, NO!  It should not be US gov't policy to encourage businesses to hire non-citizens over my children, one of whom will have a graduate degree in math, one in engineering.  Why on earth would a politician say that?

I do loathe Newt.

76 They HATE talking about securing the border, because most voters side with the GOP on that.

Posted by: CJ at November 23, 2011 10:27 AM (9KqcB)

Fuck, Hispanics side with the GOP on that themselves

the AZ Illegal Immigration bill was supported by Hispanics Nationally AND in AZ, it's this image of deporting every brown person on sight that the GOP has that hurts

77

@ 67  oh my God, Michelle Malkin just orgasam at the thought of his name, oh and thank Tancredo for a Dem guv Colorado morons

Er, I think there's a pretty good case to be made that we can thank the Republican in that race for the Democrat guv'ner...

78

Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at November 23, 2011 10:27 AM (+inic)

He answered 2 different questions (about legal and illegal immigration) and that was explained several times now.

79

...are all doing better than Perry, so why is he given a ticket to hang around?

because the 7% support for Perry seem to all hang out at this blog, they're still waiting for that comeback we've been promised of for months...

80

@ 76  the AZ Illegal Immigration bill was supported by Hispanics Nationally AND in AZ, it's this image of deporting every brown person on sight that the GOP has that hurts

So, are you saying that Hispanics aren't smart enough to figure out that if they're here legally, then they don't have to worry about getting deported?

Surely you can give them more credit than that?

81

Posted by: DrewM. at November 23, 2011 10:28 AM (dw7rB)

Gingrich leads in the polls close enough to actual voting to be included, Romney and Perry are the two that have the money to compete through the primary, while no one else does.

82

 Lol, the reason this country is supposedly trending Hispanic or Latino, is because of the idiotic immigration amnesty bills being passed.  You want to live in a Latino country, try one in Latin America.  I am bored to death with these morons calling me heartless or trying to weasel their way around this issue.  Enforce the law! 

If I speed along a stretch of road everyday for 20 years without being caught, does a police officer have the right to ticket me.  You bet your ass he does and Newt better get straight on this issue, I hope everyone puts pressure on the little unprincipled white haired weasel.  They will never secure the border, they will just declare it so and then destroy any sort of balance we ever had to restoring this country.  Just observe the governments currently ruling down south and ask yourself it you want their citizens voting here!

83

Let's compromise - let Romney, Gingrich, and Perry stay, and get rid of the other deadwood.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at November 23, 2011 10:26 AM (9Uxl0)

See I say keep Santorum and Bachmann around only if they promise to do nothing but attack Obama. Give them 2 or 3 soft ball questions about how the SCOAMF is screwing up America and let them go.

84

Dana Loesch, who was one of the CNN commentators, made an excellent point about the principle of the whole thing.  Why should people be rewarded for getting away with breaking the law longer than others?

 

As a practical matter I can understand perhaps prioritizing the deportation of newer, unassimilated arrivals of illegals.  The idea that we reward anyone who came here illegally with a legal status is anathema to me.

85 Honestly, it's pretty much time to clear the stage and let Newt Perry and Romney battle it out.

Posted by: real joe at November 23, 2011 10:25 AM (Oy+Ok)

I'm not looking forward to holding my breath every time Perry gets asked a question in the General Election, waiting to see if he's going to understand the subject and make sense. As different as Gingrich and Romney are, you don't have to worry about that with them.

86

Er, I think there's a pretty good case to be made that we can thank the Republican in that race for the Democrat guv'ner...

Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at November 23, 2011 10:29 AM (+inic)

why? to give it to the asswipe who didn't want to run for the GOP nomination himself but be a 3rd party spoiler? so Michelle Malkin could feel good to support that asswipe? no, fuck Tancredo

87 Eh, you're ALL a bunch of Heartless Rat Bastards!!

88

@ 78  He answered 2 different questions (about legal and illegal immigration) and that was explained several times now.

No - in the excerpt provided at the top of this thread by DrewM, unless it's been selectively edited, Gingrich answered a question dealing with illegal immigration by confusing it with legal immigration.  It's right there. 

89

Let's compromise - let Romney, Gingrich, and Perry stay, and get rid of the other deadwood.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at November 23, 2011 10:26 AM (9Uxl0)

Fair enough.

90 It's going to take the shine off of Newt, that's for sure.  I easily see it costing him 8 points in the polls.

I consider myself to be a reasonable, pragmatic conservative, but I have ZERO tolerance for any talk of amnesty, and seeing Gingrich at the debate, that's exactly what he's proposing.

I genuinely think Romney has the best record (vetoed Mass. DREAM Act for his state) and the best rhetoric regarding illegal immigration.  It's funny that the so-called "RINO" in the race is actually the toughest on the border.

Gingrich was never going to win it anyway, but you mix amnesty with Newt's support of the individual mandate,  his lobbying for Freddie Mac, support for regulating carbon, etc. I just don't see how he captures the GOP base.

91 If you're here -- if you've come here recently, you have no ties to this country, you ought to go home. period. If you've been here 25 years and you got three kids and two grandkids, you've been paying taxes and obeying the law, you belong to a local church, I don't think we're going to separate you from your family, uproot you forcefully and kick you out.

So the "smartest guy in the room" doesn't understand by the nature of setting foot on US soil, they're already not obeying the law?

92 lol lacey! Obeying, you know, SOME of the law. The cool parts.

93 “Newt is for a local, community review board where local citizens can decide whether or not their neighbors that have come here illegally should find a path to legality, not citizenship,” he said. “Two distinctly different things.”

Oh, my.

So "all" someone has to do is move to some 'Sanctuary City' in California for 6 months to year, go before their "local, community review board," and *poof* they're here legally.

No.  If you're going to support a "path to legality" (weasel words), it MUST be a Federal standard, because the Federal Government is in charge of securing our border and who gets to stay here legally.  It's one of their few real functions.  Far better is to say, "If you're here illegally, you will get no help from the US Tax-Payer.  You will find no employment.  You are not welcome."

94 oh my God, Michelle Malkin just orgasam at the thought of his name, oh and thank Tancredo for a Dem guv Colorado morons Posted by: AuthorLMendez Is Offering $ To ace If He Bans oZfic at November 23, 2011 10:26 AM (yAor6) Tancredo outpolled the GOP fuck-up candidate by over 3:1. The GOP was the interfering 3rd party in that election.

95

So, are you saying that Hispanics aren't smart enough to figure out that if they're here legally, then they don't have to worry about getting deported?

Surely you can give them more credit than that?

Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at November 23, 2011 10:30 AM (+inic)

i'm saying the media has succesfully made this image of the GOP and to be frank as a Hispanic myself I have bumped into fellow GOPers that want to deport any brown guy they see on sight. that's not a strawman it's a personal experience. it's not a majority of the GOP obviously but it's a frighteningly big minority.

96 Do I think his comments will hurt him? Not really. Who among the serious contenders IS 100 percent committed to no amnesty? Perry? Romney? Newt is the Flavor the Month, so for about another 4 weeks or so nothing will hurt him much. Then his erratic nature will begin to take its toll.

97 I don't feel that Newt's answer was a support killer, of course the media will try to make it into one. I think his answer was closer to reality then a lot of people want to agree to. More importantly I think Newt is a hell of a lot better then a technocrat like Romney. We all have our issues with Newt and he has said and done many stupid things but his general record is that of a Reagan conservative. We need someone who will be willing to slay the socialist/big government dragon, not pet it and say loving nurturing things to it.

98 We are already bringing in a LOT of the so-called H1 visa people with "degrees". At the last place I worked we had 3 engineers brought in from India in the last few years I was there.

Did they bring them in because we had a shortage of Engineers?  Only if you consider it a shortage because our new hire initial salary was low. Big companies will ALWAYS lobby congress for more cheap labor coming. They have done it since the Constitution was ratified and they will continue to do it.

But I don't have a problem bringing in these kind of people even if it does depress wages. It is something that is LEGAL! We can vote out the people that do it.

99

@ 86  why? to give it to the asswipe who didn't want to run for the GOP nomination himself but be a 3rd party spoiler? so Michelle Malkin could feel good to support that asswipe? no, fuck Tancredo

Well, you could start with the fact that the Republican in that race was a retard who was, in fact, the spoiler.  He should have dropped out and thrown his support to Tancredo.

But we can't have that now, since we have to value the Republican Party more than anything else.

100 The GOP was the interfering 3rd party in that election.

Posted by: alexthedude at November 23, 2011 10:33 AM (0+B+X)

Tancredo should have run for the GOP nomination, he's no better then Perot in 92 and 96

101

Mitt's (for now) employer sanctions and shutting down other "magnets".

Ah yes Mitt's employer sanctions.  That would be hiring the company that employs illegals and only fire them once you're running for president right?

102

Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at November 23, 2011 10:32 AM (+inic)

No the original question was about legal immigration and when it was Newts turn Blitzer posed a follow up, but Newt wanted to answer the original question as well. This is known to happen at these debates.

103 Let's compromise - let Romney, Gingrich, and Perry stay, and get rid of the other deadwood. We can let Bachmann stay, if she agrees to eschew bras.

104 He should have dropped out and thrown his support to Tancredo.

But we can't have that now, since we have to value the Republican Party more than anything else.

again why would he give it to the asswipe who fucked over a good GOP gain? so Tancredo and Michelle Malkin can have their deporting fantasies? fuck that

i'm sorry, I'm sick and tired of this be scared of brown people mentality

105 See, we already have an immigration policy that allows any future Einstein who wants to come here jump near the front of the line.

And anyone who can demonstrate a threat to their life--like Einstein could--gets a pretty much rubber-stamp of citizenship.

So yes, Newt's answer with any reference to Einstein in any way, for any reason, in relation to immigration--legal or not--was an insult prefabricated from the exclamations of the left. A false choice that any controls or reforms of our current immigration will deny us the fruits of a future Einstein.

I took a class on immigration law and I learned two things: 1) if you can't get citizenship in the US, you ain't trying hard enough and 2) the only people who come here illegally have no skills or anything of value to offer (otherwise, they'd qualify for one of the seemingly hundreds of visas).

106
Drew,

There is more than one significant problem with a Gingrich nomination. But his somewhat softish position on immigration is not one of them. In fact, this position would help him significantly in a general election. And if Gingrich were to be elected president, there's no way he pushes for - let alone and gets through - an amnesty-light program. (Like all Republican pols, Gingrich learned from President Bush's and Senator McCain's mistakes. They were harshly reminded by the conservative movement that amnesty won't be tolerated.) 

Now let's consider what is probably the biggest problem with a Gingrich candidacy. Senator Obama ran on being a uniter, and yet he has proved to be one of the most divisive presidents in history. So here's a simple question. Of Cain, Perry, Romney, and Gingrich: who is the most divisive? The answer is obvious: Gingrich. His career is rich with divisiveness.

This is not to say that Gingrich could not beat Obama in a general election. But why on earth would we run a divisive candidate against a divisive president?? We would be giving away a MAJOR ADVANTAGE.

Add to that the fact that Gingrich has a tendency to eventually step on landmines with his tongue, and we would have nothing short of a volatile prospect for unseating Obama. It is too easy to imagine Gingrich accidentally blowing up his own campaign with an ill-conceived remark or two that he would spend weeks walking back but never be able to completely remedy. Then after losing the election, he would just shrug and say, "Hey folks, I did my best. What do you want?" Then he would promote a new book. 

Let's not find ourselves in that position. Please.

107

Yeah, the problem is that whole "comprehensive" approach. That's code for (and has been since GW) "amnesty." Remember, it was "comprehensive immigration reform" that we were so against because it was amnesty.

I agree that the word is tainted. I think he felt that. If you look at the answer, as soon as he said "comprehensive" he added "starts with securing the border."

Personally, as long we assert our right duty to define and protect our border, as we see fit, the rest is secondary. If we scare voters with tak of mass deportations, we'll never get serious border control and the open borders crowd will win.

108 Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at November 23, 2011 10:32 AM (+inic)

You're wrong. It was two separate questions.

I didn't selectively edit it but I didn't include the preceding 5 minutes either. In debates candidates often go back an answer a question someone else was asked.

Follow the links and see for yourself.

109 If we scare voters with tak of mass deportations

Then don't talk about deportation at all.  Simply say, "Step one is securing the border.  That's a doozy of a step, so let's just focus on that first."

110 Yeah, he stepped on his dick again hard. Posted by: Vic at November 23, 2011 10:19 AM (YdQQY) Have Cain's poll numbers assumed their previous status yet? Seriously, nobody can think he's a viable Not-Romney anymore. (And when are the also-rans going to run out of money?)

111 I'm gonna step out before I have a Jeff B like head explosion. seriously you gusy wanna go ahead and doom my generation w/ socialism by disinfranchising (spelling?) the biggest growing minority? fuck that, Im not gonna be part of no Michelle Malkin party

112 They HATE talking about securing the border, because most voters side with the GOP on that.

Posted by: CJ at November 23, 2011 10:27 AM (9KqcB)

Fuck, Hispanics side with the GOP on that themselves

That's right. That's why muddying the waters with suggestions of deportations etc. is a gift to Democrats.

113 Tancredo should have run for the GOP nomination, he's no better then Perot in 92 and 96 Posted by: AuthorLMendez Is Offering $ To ace If He Bans oZfic at November 23, 2011 10:34 AM (yAor6) Stop being a retard. If Perot had polled at 36% and Bush I at 11% he not have been looked at as a spoiler, but ...

114

@ 91 So the "smartest guy in the room" doesn't understand by the nature of setting foot on US soil, they're already not obeying the law?

Even the smartest person says stupid things sometimes... 

115 Posted by: Dave at November 23, 2011 10:36 AM (SV650)

I'm pretty sure we could say the exact same thing about any candidate.

In reality the least divisive candidate in the general is Mitt. The problem is he divides the hell out of the GOP.

116

My thoughts on illegal immigration:

To say the Illegals broke the law and should face the punishment is a bit simplistic.  I don't put all the blame on them.  Maybe half.  The US government and the US society at large has given these people a "wink and nod" for quite a while by offering jobs and not enforcing the law.  It's as much our fault as it is theirs.  So let's stop blaming Mexicans entirely for this mess.  Enforce the border.  Enforce immigrant work laws.  And when that is all said and done I wouldn't mind seeing visas handed out to those who are already members of our society.  Sorry guys, that's the price we pay for allowing this under-the-radar employment shit.  No citizenship, though.

117 NO, NO, NO! It should not be US gov't policy to encourage businesses to hire non-citizens over my children, one of whom will have a graduate degree in math, one in engineering. Why on earth would a politician say that? I do loathe Newt. Posted by: VKI at November 23, 2011 10:28 AM (TKoA3) For the simple reason that we do NOT graduate enough native-born Americans with "hard" degrees like in math or science. Don't worry, if your kids have good grades with those skills, they will still be in high demand.

118 We can let Bachmann stay, if she agrees to eschew all clothing but bras. Posted by: CoolCzech at November 23, 2011 10:35 AM (niZvt) Fixed it for you.

119 you gusy wanna go ahead and doom my generation w/ socialism by disinfranchising (spelling?) the biggest growing minority?

The F?  Dude, now who is calling who "heartless?"  We're not disenfranchising anyone who is here legally.  If you're here as a citizen, you're able to vote.  You don't get to vote if you're not a citizen.  Period.  It's been that way for several decades now.

You are very specifically buying in to the lies of the left with that statement.  It's beneath you, and insulting to us.

120

@ 109 You're wrong. It was two separate questions.

I didn't selectively edit it but I didn't include the preceding 5 minutes either. In debates candidates often go back an answer a question someone else was asked.

Follow the links and see for yourself.

Okay, my bad then.  I'm so used to people doing exactly this - trying to purposefully confuse illegal and legal immigration in an effort to support the former by riding on the back of the latter - that I thought it looked like that was what Newt was doing here. 

121

@ 118 For the simple reason that we do NOT graduate enough native-born Americans with "hard" degrees like in math or science. Don't worry, if your kids have good grades with those skills, they will still be in high demand.

Which itself is sort of blowback from the cheap and easy H1 visa program.

Why bothered to get an engineering degree when some dude from India on an H1 will go for half the starting salary rate?

I've know Ph.Ds in synthetic chemistry who were here from India on visas and who were working for $20,000 a year. 

122
Noot ended his candidacy with his stupid Einstein remark.

Einstein wasn't a friggin illegal. And for the huindredth fucking time No One Is Talking About Deporting Immigrants or Ending Immigration.

123 To say the Illegals broke the law and should face the punishment is a bit simplistic.  I don't put all the blame on them.  Maybe half.  The US government and the US society at large has given these people a "wink and nod" for quite a while by offering jobs and not enforcing the law.

Yeah.  It's not all the fault of that (robber, gang-member, rapist, murderer, whatever).  Society gave him a "wink and a nod" by not capturing and convicting every single one in the US.

F that.  People here illegally (with the possible exception of people who came as children with their parents) made a choice to break the law.  They get all the blame for that.

Maybe that is "simplistic," but the thing is, the moment you start adding "nuance" to law enforcement is the moment corruption sets in and becomes endemic.

124 I listened to Newt's answer and my first thought was "Why didn't Perry handle it this way?" Yes, Newt suggested those who would oppose deporting illegals immigrants of longstanding were not "humane," but he did it in an unoffensive manner. I am about as hardcore as they come on illegal immigration (at least I think I am), but when the rubber hits the road, I don't know if I could simply uproot and deport a family started by an illegal immigrant 25 years ago, as long as they have been law-abiding. Legalizing such people (not granting citizenship though) would not be too hard for me to swallow as long as the border is finally secured. Having said all of this, we simply cannot nominate Newt. It will result in electoral disaster IMO.

125 122. Exactly. Oh and btw, try being a 40+ year old in IT or engineering. It's super-fun!

126

Posted by: Soothsayer at November 23, 2011 10:44 AM (sqkOB)

TWO FUCKING SEPERATE QUESTIONS!

127

@ 104  i'm sorry, I'm sick and tired of this be scared of brown people mentality

Did you know that only about half of the illegal aliens in America are from Latin America?  There are even a lot from wonder bread cracker countries like UK, Ireland, Australia, etc. who overstay visas and so forth.  They should be going too.

128 I want to know why the number they're all bringing up is 11 million.
Wasn't it 12 million?
8 years ago?
Maybe if we start dealing with realistic numbers folks might start to get an idea of how serious the problem really is.

Hell, there's 11 million in the local Home Depot parking lot this morning.

Newt is squishy on immigration, he always has been. He's squishy on AGW too, and his elusive answers and lack of details on his website confirm this.

Waiting for Perry to come up the back straightway.

129
It Doesn't Matter.

130 None of those people need to be deported. As Gingritch said years ago, enforce existing law in regards to employers and they will simply leave on their own. Thus, saving the taxpayer the cost of the bus ticket down to the border. Not that fucking complicated.

131 as long as they have been law-abiding.

But they haven't been.  They've been here illegally.  If they've been working, they've been breaking the law (either by SS fraud, or by not paying income taxes.  One of the two).  If they haven't been working, they've been committing (admittedly State-sanctioned) fraud by accepting welfare.

Do they drive?  They can't legally get a license.  Do they own a gun (many do?) they can't do that legally either.

132 The day is rapidly approaching for the first test and it ain't damn tilted poll from the MFM, it is the caucuses. Not a good test, but a test never the less.

I still say it will be a 4-way tie if things remain the same. Then NH is up for grabs. Romney had it sewed up but it appears he is losing it now. If Romney loses NH he is in deep trouble.

Right now the SC polls are essentially meaningless because 75% of the people polled said they fully expected to change their choice before the primary.

This is the strangest set of primaries that I have seen since they started after 1968. 

133

Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at November 23, 2011 10:44 AM (+inic)

Not only that, but countries like China and India have a better primary education system than we do here in the US.  Furthermore, usually places like China send their mid-grade to the "best of their best" people here to learn our methods so they can take them back to their home country. 

134

@ 127 TWO FUCKING SEPERATE QUESTIONS!

The more I'm looking at these in context, it still looks like he answered in such a way as to try to confuse the two. 

135 Rethugs don't like brown people.  I, on the other hand, am an excellent judge of character and qualifications.  For moar yars!

136

@ 129 Waiting for Perry to come up the back straightway.

That one's just too easy.

137

This is not to say that Gingrich could not beat Obama in a general election. But why on earth would we run a divisive candidate against a divisive president?? We would be giving away a MAJOR ADVANTAGE.

Why? To elect a conservative, not just a Republican. Yes, Newt is "divisive." So was Reagan. (That's not meant to be a gratuitous Reagan reference, or comparison, but he pissed off liberals.) Personally, I have not decided if I am OK losing with Newt or winning with Romney. That's why I want to clear the stage as quickly as possible, and leave those two men.

Newt, a much stronger conservative with a much greater chance of losing the General Election OR Romney, a weaker conservative with a much greater chance of winning the General Election.

That's what I'm wrestling with. And as much as Romney comes off like an overeager insurance salesman, I like having him and his money in the bullpen if none of the more conservative candidates prove practical.

138
Bummer, so out of the 3 potentials (in my eyes), Romney is tougher on illegal immigration than Newt and Perry.

Romney is naive in one way in thinking these people are going to self-identify without some incentive.  That's why I prefer a 3 time touchback rule, to jump the line.  You have to go back to your origin country, for 3 consecutive months 3 times over 3 years.  But only after we secure the border.

In any event, its only one issue, I can't find a candidate this time around that I think is electable and is down the line conservative.

139 Newt and Perry have similar positions. Perry was a dick about it and insulted his supporters. Newt didn't.

140 137. I know, seriously Titus! Thank GOD you aren't the Titus from Althouse!

141 As for the "two questions" stuff people are saying: It doesn't matter.

The question he was asked was about illegal immigration.  By bringing the "legal immigration" question in before he answered the illegal immigration question, he was attempting to combine the two; to make them "similar" (mathematically) if not "equivalent."

If he wanted to avoid that admixture, he could have answered the illegal question first, and then said, "Going back to the question you asked Mr. Santorum..."  He chose not to do that, because he knew that by bringing up Einstein first, he could make people think that enforcing current law and (yes: where appropriate) deporting people would have cost us having Albert Einstein here.

142 117 bernverdnardo

Good summary.
Several expert morons here, it would seem, also want to see legal citizens do jail time for jaywalking.  After all, that's breaking the law, too.  And we certainly can't make gray-area moral judgements on anything.

143 @132 You're right. I'm conflicted about this issue. However, I think the image of mass deportation and breaking up families is actually a diversion. Enforcing existing law, instituting employer verification with stiff penalties for breach, and removing the "magnets" would most likely accomplish our goal through "self-deportation."

144 140 Newt and Perry have similar positions. Perry was a dick about it and insulted his supporters. Newt didn't. Posted by: supercore23 at November 23, 2011 10:51 AM (bwV72) No, you are right - it was much better to phrase it as ultimatum of whether or not I am humane. I appreciated Perry's direct language in his screw up and apology much more, thank you very much.

145 Bummer, so out of the 3 potentials (in my eyes), Romney is tougher on illegal immigration than Newt and Perry.

The post 2007 Romney is tougher than Newt but not Perry. The pre-2007 Romney was in favor of McCain-Kennedy amnesty.

Newt and Perry have similar positions. Perry was a dick about it and insulted his supporters. Newt didn't.

Not true at all and has been refuted on here so many times it is pointless to argue about it.

146
Complete the dang fence!

Do it for Alberto Einstein.

147 Newt said he supported a "path to legality", not a "path to citizenship".  The two are hugely different and to assume they are synonymous is dishonest.

The thing I like about Newt is that he is smart and he is pragmatic.  He realizes that deporting every illegal and putting machine gun nests along the border won't fly with Americans.

So, if you aren't going full commando on them, what will you do?  You take out the bad parts (identity theft, crime, welfare state) and accentuate the good parts (contributing members of society who can have a legal manner of staying here).

Romney's camp saying this is Newt supporting Amnesty is bullshit and dishonest.  Since most people think of Amnesty in terms of granting instant citizenship and voting rights, this is NOT amnesty and Camp Romney knows it.

148

I think Newt was simply being practical.  Can we honestly say we will round up all illegals and ship them back to whatever country?   The logisitics alone seem daunting.  I can see where we would set up a system of proof of long term employment and stability and no criminal or civil legal issues and allow them to enter the citizenship program.  Again, logistics may be a problem.  There is no simple answer, unless you're running for office.  Then you have simple answers for everything.

My father took a long time to get citizenship, he was a registered alien for years.  And he had to re-register every year.  But he did register and eventually became a citizen. So I don't understand why these people don't do this today?  Am I missing something?  Don't they have that program any more?

 And anyone want to tell me how we know how many illegals are really here?  Always wondered about that.  

149
.....pssssssssst........Morons......

...........its the economy stupid........

150 When they talk about illegals paying taxes, they always leave out the fact that the majority of them do so with phony ID, Social Security Numbers and/or fake Birth Certificates. Possession or use of which is a CRIME!

Every illegal I've ever talked to or worked around has an underlying contempt for the law. They feel entitled to break them as they interfere with what they wish to do.

They particularly have contempt for US law as they have this idea that because back in some part of their ancestry lies the blood of an indigenous native of the current territory of the US, they're entitled to re-migrate over those borders with impunity.

SECURE THE BORDER. Use a fence, dogs, T-1000's, National Guard, Border Patrol whatever. THEN, when the flood has become a trickle, and only then do we examine the status of those currently here. Allow ANYONE, who wants to return to Mexico, do so on their own dime.

Once the situation is stable, a year or 2, then we sort out the criminals from the useful and the deserving. Everybody else goes back.

What part of this don't Pols understand? It's proven they TAKE JOBS FROM AMERICAN CITIZENS AND USE RESOURCES PAID FOR BY AMERICAN CITIZENS.

151 @147 Well, I don't think it has been "refuted" that Perry handled the issue in a more "dickish" way than Gingrich. Perry clearly did, although I am back on board the Perry train after his Fox apology (which for the love of God should have been made much sooner).

152 After all, that's breaking the law, too.  And we certainly can't make gray-area moral judgements on anything.

We shouldn't.  If someone is caught jay-walking, they should face the defined fine.  Why do you have a problem with that?  I hate the speed-limit laws, as currently written (It's a mess, here in TX), but if I get pulled over for speeding, I'm not going to whine that it's not fair.

Why should people who have knowingly chosen to break the law get a pass, just because they're... I dunno.  Just because.

However, I think the image of mass deportation and breaking up families is actually a diversion.

And I'm fine with the "just don't talk about deportation" approach.  If you're going with that theory (and I don't disagree with it, frankly) then just don't bring it up.  When someone asks you directly, say, "Any question of what to do with people here illegally who have been for a long time is premature and a distraction.  Let's get border enforcement under control, and strengthen the systems whereby we find employers knowingly (or willfully-ignorantly) employing illegals first.  Once we've got that kind of enforcement under control, we can examine the question of what to do about illegal families."

153 It is clear that in 2012 neither party can afford not to appeal to Latinos as the fastest-growing voter bloc in the country. If Latinos want to be loyal to a brand name that they have supported for the last 50 years, Latinos will vote Democratic to re-elect President Shitstain. However, if they want to be respected, thereÂ’s no way they can vote for OBummer. At the core of the argument about "not offending Latinos" is that means we must be down with illegal immigration. I think that is a fallacy: if Latinos are REALLY "Americans" in the sense we have traditionally used the term, they should not support illegal immigration - and be concerned about secure borders - just as much as the rest of us. On the other hand, if Latinos are a permanent "them" amongst "us," then we should say the hell with them and mine the damned border, because America in that scenario is eroded before our very eyes each time a new Latino joins the gene pool. I believe the first scenario is the case, though. I see no reason why some blue eyed, blonde who's last name happens to be "Hernandez" should therefore have some overriding desire to see the country flooded with illegals Mayans and Incas. For that matter, I don't see why some swarthy American of Mayan or Inca descent should want to see the country flooded with illegal Mayans or Incas. If nothing else, it makes it that much harder for them to get work, just like the rest of us.

154 November 2012 will show if Latinos will still back up Obamadama or if they will give their vote to the Republican candidate.

All you have to do is look at 2008. McCain who pandered shamelessly got 32% of the vote, Obama got almost all the rest.

Contrary to the popular myth, Latinos are not a "natural" block for Republicans.

155 Romney's camp spewing bullshit and dishonesty?

In other news, the sun came up in the east this morning and water is wet.

156 Words are wind. The only person up there who can prove what they will do about Illegals is Perry.

All the rest are just spewing HOT AIR.

157

once you've put every piece in place, which includes the guest worker program, you need something like a World War II Selective Service Board that, frankly, reviews the people who are here.

This.  I think this might be the middle way between simply amnestying everyone in sight, and tossing out people who have put down real roots over decades.

The plan ought to be: Every single person who is here illegal MUST report themselves, having, say, a year's span in which to do it.  During this time, there would be a moratorium on deportations so that people can present themselves without fear that it's all just a big trick to grab them and toss them.  Once you've reported yourself, your case will be reviewed and it will be determined whether you're fit to remain.  Having a clean criminal record (aside from breaking immigration law, of course) will be a plus.  Having positive community ties (church, charities, etc.) will be a mark in your favour.  Knowing English and having a reasonable amount of assimilation to our culture will be necessary.  Not being on social welfare programs will be good for you.  In short, showing that you've genuinely been contributing to our society and are trying to add, rather than detract, from our country means you get to stay and start down that "path to citizenship."

Conversely, a criminal record, gang membership, etc. will mean you need to leave.  Being on welfare of other subsidy programs means you leave.  And so forth.  If you're just here to mooch or to victimise, then you go home.

If you don't report yourself within the year, then you lose, for all time, any chance of qualifying for amnesty, and will face immediate deportation if and when you're caught. 

158 @156 Which is exactly why it is vital that whatever we do, we NEVER grant citizenship, and thus voting rights, to illegal immigrants.

159 Newt is playing to win. Perry is playing to be noticed. Romney is playing to be the last man standing. The rest don't matter. I see Newt in the lead for some time to come.

160 The problem is, many people (including many of our politicians, apparently) cannot or will not see that there is a difference between immigrants and illegal invaders.  Newt really strummed the old heartstrings last night with his sob sister stuff about the poor little children of illegals, and breaking up their families, etc. etc.  Phoney alternatives here folks:   the poor little children  can be put on the plane and deported along with their parents.  These children will not remain tiny, pitiful and appealing - eventually they will grow into adults, the sort of adults who believe that they should be rewarded for thumbing their noses at U.S. law.  We already have enough native-born, legal Americans with this attitude -- c.f. the OWS protests.

161 Penalty disproportionate to the crime?  When you get caught stealing something, you don't get to keep it.  Period.

162 Funny, Romney comes off as the most hardliner on illegal immigration.

163 Newt said he supported a "path to legality", not a "path to citizenship".  The two are hugely different and to assume they are synonymous is dishonest.

Bovine feces.  It's a weasel phrase so that people who want to hear "path to citizenship" can hear "path to citizenship" and those who oppose it can trick themselves into believe he "just" means a green-card or whatever.

There's also the fact that the two are the same.  Among the first steps to legal status in the United States is to reside here as a legal alien resident for some amount of time.  So, by granting "a path to legality" your are, in fact, granting a "path to citizenship."

164 SECURE THE BORDER. Use a fence, dogs, T-1000's, National Guard, Border Patrol whatever. How about Nexus 9 Pleasure Models armed with g-strings, CFM shoes, and Uzis?

165
Vic, fair point on Romney, you never really sure if that is his true position.  But I give other candidates a pass on previous mess ups (newt on the couch) so I will give Romney a pass on that flip.

166 Contrary to the popular myth, Latinos are not a "natural" block for Republicans. Posted by: Vic at November 23, 2011 10:58 AM (YdQQY) Who cares? This is a national security issue not a voter registration issue. GOP is going to have problems until they realize that. Don't give a damn who people who look like the people we need to stop coming into the country illegally are going to vote for.

167 DrewM:

I don't think that Newt got the cart before the horse as much as the conclusion of your post (last two paragraphs) implies.

"So I think you've got to deal with this as a comprehensive approach that starts with controlling the border, as the governor said. I believe ultimately you have to find some system -- once you've put every piece in place, which includes the guest worker program, you need something like a World War II Selective Service Board that, frankly, reviews the people who are here."

Sounds more like the order of steps that you advocated for...

Of course what he actually said will be lost in the noise as the narrative is birthed.

168 Time for some grub. bbl

169 long term illegals with roots in this country are never going to be deported

Long term speeders who learned their driving habits in this country are never going to be stopped.

You enforce the law and people tend to obey it, more often than not.  Ask the IRS.  They don't audit everybody.

170
"I'm not gonna call up a soldier that's fighting in Iraq today and tell him I'm gonna deport his mother. I'm not gonna do that. You can do it."

--John McCain, Loser of North Carolina & Virginia
January 2008

171 I heard Simpson himself speak on Simpson-Mazzoli and he said he regretted his involvement in it. He admitted he got rooked on that deal.

172 Entitlement/Immigration reform:  Does anybody have access to a dollar amount to clarify what percentage of our tax dollars go toward undocumented occupiers?  Or is that, like our budget, undocumented as well?

173 162 The problem is, many people (including many of our politicians, apparently) cannot or will not see that there is a difference between immigrants and illegal invaders. Thank You. As an immigrant myself, I am sick to effing death of Liberal SCUMBAGS equating "immigration" with illicit border jumping. Is it too much to say that Liberals are the scum of the Earth that deserve liquidation? Maybe.. but it's nice to think about.

174 The thing I like about Newt is that he is smart and he is pragmatic.  He realizes that deporting every illegal and putting machine gun nests along the border won't fly with Americans.

You're right. The best political move is to take a position on an issue that is contrary to the stated wishes of 75% of the population - Democrat, Republican and independent. Anf then double down on it by using rhetoric and imagery that misrepresents that position. That is fucking genius.

175 @173 Simpson is an idiot, way past his sell-by date.

176 Funny, Romney comes off as the most hardliner on illegal immigration.

Today, sure.  Yesterday?  Tomorrow?  Who knows.
Except, of course, for the part where he hired illegals, and the only reason he got rid of them was that he was running for President.

177 The other aspect about the immigration debate that I get pissed at is the "consensus" that we need to grant more H1N1 Visas.  Why?  So we can bring in more foreign workers to our nearly 10% unemployment rate?

I'm not an engineer, but I remember vividly how our firm hired an Indian engineer right off the boat for around $12 an hour that they would normally pay around $75k.  Do you really think that's a good thing for a middle class family where an AMERICAN has spent a considerable sum on their education and training to suddenly be competeing for Fast Food wages?

There's no "shortage" of engineers in this country, there's just a shortage of engineers that are willing to work for "Burger Flipping" wages, so the big companies want to bring them over from 3rd world countries.

178 I'll be writing Rick Santorum on my ballot in the general.  Anyone else currently in the race need not apply.

I refuse to compromise with Mittsy's compromises, and I was very hopeful for Perry at one time, but the amnesty thing is just too much.  Newt had me looking his way very intently because of who he used to be (or at least appear to be) during the 1994 Revolution.  But all I see now is him lounging on a couch with GranNan while 4 illegals fan them with eco-friendly feather fans. 

Let's face it, Newt and Mittsy both think government is the answer, as long as they are running it.  I'm not down with that viewpoint.


There will be blood.

179 @178 I'm just saying Romney, in the debates, comes across like a true hardliner on the illegal immigration issue. I guess he figures he's already got enough base-problems as it is, and he's not going to add another during the campaign.

180 I was very hopeful for Perry at one time, but the amnesty thing is just too much.

What Amnesty thing?  All Perry has supported is the Texas Dream Act, which is explicitly NOT Amnesty.

And if you're for Santorum, you're against Federalism.  You may be okay with that, but I just thought I should get it out there for the record.

181 ECURE THE BORDER. Use a fence, dogs, T-1000's, National Guard, Border Patrol whatever.

And Moats loaded with gators

182

Here's a question - can we all agree that America's immigration policy, in dealing with both illegal and legal immigrants, should have the interests of the United States of America in mind, first and foremost?

183 Posted by: Dave at November 23, 2011 11:05 AM (Xm1aB)

True.  And many (if not most) of his supporters know that he's absolutely unacceptable to the base, and so latch on to any positive he does have (even if it's only rhetorical and his past proves he won't actually govern that way) like a drowning man to a piece of flotsam.

184 I see no reason why some blue eyed, blonde who's last name happens to be "Hernandez" should therefore have some overriding desire to see the country flooded with illegals Mayans and Incas. For that matter, I don't see why some swarthy American of Mayan or Inca descent should want to see the country flooded with illegal Mayans or Incas. If nothing else, it makes it that much harder for them to get work, just like the rest of us.

Posted by: CoolCzech at November 23, 2011 10:57 AM (niZvt)

This is where it gets dicey. A few years ago, Gallup showed a majority of Mexicans saying that southwest U.S. rightfully belongs to Mexico. Then there was the Seagrams ad, in Mexico, showing the Mexico border stretching north to include southwest U.S.

Whenever a conservative is accused of basing his immigration stance on "racism" I respond with an exercise:

What if the problem was millions of French-speaking, white Canadians pouring illegally over our northern border, would La Raza still defend illegal immigration? Would its members care if the illegals didn't look like them? Dicey.

185 Any chance at all Palin and DeMint announce as a 3rd party duo?  Yes, it would likely give the presidency to Obama and may take down the R party.  But, let's be honest, couldn't the R's do with some major reconstruction?  What is the party doing for conservatives? 

I'll vote for Santorum, but I just can't pull the trigger for any of these other candidates. 

186 Drew: "I want Perry's tougher border stance, Mitt's (for now) employer sanctions and shutting down other "magnets". Once we have a couple of years of that to demonstrate that we have a reasonable handle on the border...then can we talk about what to do with long time, otherwise law abiding people."

Newt: "So I think you've got to deal with this as a comprehensive approach that starts with controlling the border, as the governor said. I believe ultimately you have to find some system -- once you've put every piece in place, which includes the guest worker program,..."

I'm not sure I see a lot of daylight between these positions here.

187 Here's a question - can we all agree that America's immigration policy, in dealing with both illegal and legal immigrants, should have the interests of the United States of America in mind, first and foremost? Yes that would be a new and exciting policy! The Dems want to replace the electorate; the Reps want cheap construction workers for their "small biz" buds. They are neither on the US citizen's side, but at least it's possible the Rs will move there. The Dems never will.

188 And Moats loaded with gators

With lasers on their heads.

can we all agree that America's immigration policy, in dealing with both illegal and legal immigrants, should have the interests of the United States of America in mind, first and foremost?

Sure.  Which "interests" of the USA did you have in mind?  The "interests" that say we need a cheap labor pool to keep prices down?  Or the "interests" that say we need a secure border for national security?

189

@ 118 For the simple reason that we do NOT graduate enough native-born Americans with "hard" degrees like in math or science. Don't worry, if your kids have good grades with those skills, they will still be in high demand.

Which itself is sort of blowback from the cheap and easy H1 visa program.

Why bothered to get an engineering degree when some dude from India on an H1 will go for half the starting salary rate?

Ding, ding, ding.  Though India is drying up as a source of such labor as its economy improves.

The biggest cheerleaders for immigration are those whose fields have being a native English speaker as a general barrier to entry -- journalism, law, etc.  We do get skilled and talented people (at a low price) but our own such workforce atrophies.

It's akin to the Roman Empire in which Roman citizens found better things to do than serve in the legions.

190
The people that believe Perry will somehow be tough on illegal immigration are dreaming.  He will keep that totally off the table if he becomes president.

191 This article is very interesting. Thank you very much for sharing . dvd to iMovie | video to iMovie \ download hulu || hulu to iPad ! video to Flash converter

192 I don't think Newt was using Einstein to confuse us about legal/illegal immigration. He was using him to defend the GOP from the charge that we're racist/anti-immigrant/nativist. This is NOT an amnesty plan. Amnesty plans give blanket clearance to all (or almost all) illegals, and allow them to become citizens. Newt's plan gives relief to a much smaller subset of illegals, and explicitly denies them access to citizenship and other benefits. There are many crimes which are subject to a statute of limitations. I don't see why this shouldn't also apply to illegal immigration, especially when the illegal must also demonstrate that he has obeyed the law, paid his taxes, and has adult children here. (Newt explicitly said "paid their taxes". That by itself will disqualify many illegals). Ending birth-right citizenship will prevent people from having anchor babies in the future, but it does nothing to address the problem of people who have already established families here,and whose children and grandchildren are citizens. Newt's plan would primarily apply to people who are middle-aged or elderly, and have been law-abiding since they crossed the border. Think of what the other side would be able to do with stories of how Republicans deported 75 year old Grandma, a sweet old lady who babysat for her grandchildren so the parents could earn enough to stay off welfare.

193 Posted by: T^2 at November 23, 2011 11:01 AM (TLCvL)

I think it shows what he really cares about and is interested in.

Remember when Perry was attacking Social Security as a Ponzi scheme (seems so long ago)? He'd rail about how awful it was for a few minutes and drop in some perfunctory line about not messing around with it for current recipients.

I think Newt showed where his real interest and passion is. He gave a one line mention of enforcement and spent a good 3 or 4 minutes talking about his plan for compassionate amnesty.

194 I don't think this will really hurt him.  I also think this will take way second fiddle if he gets Sarah Palin's endorsement.

195 The people that believe Perry will somehow be tough on illegal immigration are dreaming.

Yep.  Because he hasn't sent Texas Rangers, and the Texas Guard to help the Boarder Patrol and National Guard attempt to secure the Texas Border.  And he hasn't supported legislation that would prevent any city declaring itself to be a "sanctuary city" from receiving State funds.  And he didn't support a program whereby local law enforcement would receive the ICE training that would allow them to assist in finding illegals and getting them deported.

Oh.  Wait.  No, sorry.  That was Bizzaro Rick Perry.  Real Rick Perry did all of those things.

196 What exactly was Romney's stand on "immigration" while governor of Massachusetts, and before, when he was running for the office?  My uneasiness about Romney is that his strategy is "run to the right, govern to the left"  a la GHW Bush  ("aw, come on fellas, you know we didn't really mean all the right wing crap we were spouting about taxes and balanced budgets, and as for those neanderthal social conservatives...").

197 182...I haven't heard any of Santorum's positions that I disagree with.  There may be some and I certainly would consider myself a state's right's advocate, but right now he's the only one who hasn't made it clear to me I can't vote for him.  One thing I'm not for is for states doing big government things, like Romneycare, and then shrouding them in the state's rights blanket like that makes them good ideas. 
Statism/socialism is socialism, regardless of the level of government implementing it.

Perry clearly is ok with providing benefits to those here illegally and though he talks tough on border enforcement, his other statements lead me to question his passion about this issue.

198 @ 192  It's akin to the Roman Empire in which Roman citizens found better things to do than serve in the legions.

Exactly, Amisicus Dudius.  Let's have the Indoi and Seresoi build our bridges for us!

199 He was using him to defend the GOP from the charge that we're racist/anti-immigrant/nativist.

A "Charge" from which we need to be "defend[ed]" only if you accept the confusion between legal and illegal immigration in the first place.  Newt has been the master of "don't accept the premise," and yet, here, he unwittingly falls into the leftist premise trap?  No.  He knew what he was doing, and he chose to do it.

200 Had to stop by this morning just to see if the Perry supporters were still plucking the chicken, propping it up on the table, bending it over and slipping it the Boehner.

Guess so. Happy Thanksgiving trade that chicken for a Turkey tomorrow!

201 The biggest cheerleaders for immigration are those whose fields have being a native English speaker as a general barrier to entry -- journalism, law, etc. We do get skilled and talented people (at a low price) but our own such workforce atrophies. I think the best argument for immigration - LEGAL immigration - is that America should bulk up its population to offset China and India's numbers. Another is, We're just not having enough of our own kids anymore. An aging population with hardly any reproduction going on is a recipe for demographic and economic disaster, as Europe and Japan are discovering. If we don't breed 'em, we should at least import 'em.

202

It all depends on what "comprehensive immigration reform means." McCain et al. gave it a bad name by meaning amnesty BEFORE the border was secured, which would only increase the flood of illegal immigration, but that was a dishonest reading of "comprehensive."

In contrast, Newt's statement is specific that comprehensive actually means comprehensive: "So I think youÂ’ve got to deal with this as a comprehensive approach that starts with controlling the border, as the governor said."

I just think it is stupid to use the tainted "comprehensive" term. Since the border needs to be controlled first, specify that as a separate iniative. Only after border security is accomplished can we go on and talk about who of those illegals that are already here should be allowed to stay here.

In short, a comprehensive approach would NOT be accomplished with a single comprehensive law. It is necessarily a 2-step process. Newt's control-the-border-first statement shows he at least kinda-sorta understands that, but he needs to clarify it in his own mind, and he needs to actually say "two step process," or indeed he should not be trusted on this issue.

203 Anyone notice that there's a pretty trust-worthy, normal conservative running named Rick Santorum?

204 As a fast aside, since I brought up the declining birth rate... isn't it odd that the incredible profusion of internet porn has coincided with a declining birth rate? Cum in your wives, guys... not in your hands!

205 I think Newt showed where his real interest and passion is. He gave a one line mention of enforcement and spent a good 3 or 4 minutes talking about his plan for compassionate amnesty.

Posted by: DrewM. at November 23, 2011 11:12 AM (dw7rB)

No, he seemed to show that he listened to the question, Drew. The question (this part) was specifically about what to do with illegals already here, not enforcing the border:

Some called it amnesty then; they still call it amnesty now. What would you do if you were President of the United States, with these millions of illegal immigrants, many of whom have been in this country for a long time?

He addressed the question, and went out of his way to add security, and gave it priority at least in mentioning it first.

206 A test of ability to read and write English would go a long way toward determining whether someone has "deep roots" here or not.

207 Burke you are correct. As I said, Newt is playing to win the election not win just the nomination. Perry and Romney and all the others are in a nomination campaign. Newt has moved on to the general election. My guess is his numbers will grow because he knows immigration isn't the focus of this election; its the economy stupid. He will happily steal Clinton's campaign and run with it. I'm sure Romney will say me too.  

208 One thing I'm not for is for states doing big government things, like Romneycare, and then shrouding them in the state's rights blanket like that makes them good ideas.

I'm for States having the right to implement socialist things- just like I'm for States having the right to do all kinds of things with which I disagree.  It is then up to the voters in each state to look at given ideas on their merits and accept or reject them accordingly.

becoming taxpayers, and, likely very proud & patriotic American Citizens that currently are not, right?

Yes.  They're so likely to become "proud and patriotic American Citizens" that they applied for Citizenship on their own.  Wait, you mean they didn't?  Wouldn't that mean they have no particular interest in assimilation, or becoming "proud and patriotic American Citizens?"

209 207 Anyone notice that there's a pretty trust-worthy, normal conservative running named Rick Santorum?   I noticed him once. He seems a bit retarded. Just sayin.

210

@ 205 Another is, We're just not having enough of our own kids anymore. An aging population with hardly any reproduction going on is a recipe for demographic and economic disaster, as Europe and Japan are discovering. If we don't breed 'em, we should at least import 'em.

Yes and no.  Certain segments of the US population are reproducing themselves, and in fact have positive growth rates.  But they're the wrong segments, in the eyes of the leftists/elitists.  All those evangelicals and fundamentalist Christians and traditionalist Catholics and orthodox Jews and whatnot.  While the wine-and-cheese crowd on the coasts don't even bother to marry or have kids, the middle class "Bible thumpers" in suburban centres all across Middle America are having three, four, five, or more kids.  The leftists look at people like the Duggars in Arkansas (conservative evangelicals, now in the process of having #20) with absolute horror.  If this goes on, in a generation, there won't be a viable Democrat Party outside of Left Coast and the Northeast.

Which is why they want to bring in, amnesty, and turn into voters millions of left-leaning, Democrat supporting folks from across the third world.  Poor folks who can be convinced that rich Americans are responsible for all the faults of the world, and owe them something. 

211 210 A test of ability to read and write English would go a long way toward determining whether someone has "deep roots" here or not.

Posted by: The Chap in the Deerstalker Cap at November 23, 2011 11:19 AM (qndXR)

Not with our public schools.

212 A test of ability to read and write English would go a long way toward determining whether someone has "deep roots" here or not. Posted by: The Chap in the Deerstalker Cap at November 23, 2011 11:19 AM (qndXR) Just don't add "speak English" to that list, or George W., Rick Perry, and Herman Cain will have some serious ICE problems...

213 So glad Obama is back home and on the stump! Whenever he travels the country in campaign mode his poll numbers drop like a rock!

214 As a fast aside, since I brought up the declining birth rate... isn't it odd that the incredible profusion of internet porn has coincided with a declining birth rate?

The birth rate started plummeting long before there was an internet. The decline coincides with: 1) prosperity, 2) secularism, and 3) feminism. Not necessarily in that order.

215 This is vintage Newt--he loves him some clever ideas to deal with problems, but seems a little unclear about philosophical underpinnings or unintended consequences.  This was bound to happen eventually.

Frankly, our 'best candidate' would be a patchwork of bits of the ones we have.  Paging Dr. Frankenstein...

216
Romney bounced on that answer saying it was amnesty that would reward law breakers and serve as a magnet for more illegal immigration.




*cough* anchor baby *cough*

217 Anyone notice that there's a pretty trust-worthy, normal conservative running named Rick Santorum?

Posted by: NotALibertarian at November 23, 2011 11:18 AM (psns

Your definition of normal conservative differs from mine - I don't include statists in my definition.  The only difference between Santorum and Huckabee is their tone of voice.

218 I sort of agree with Newt on Illegal Immigration. But, if he actually tried to implement a sane and reasonable "OK, if you have a family and ties to the community, you can stay, but you can't vote or collect welfare" policy; the insane and unreasonable segment of the population (liberals) would immediately sue, saying that it's unfair to discriminate against the childless and the illegals should get to to vote and have welfare. Some idiot progressive judge would agree, and that would be the end of sanity and reason.

219 I don't think he hurt himself.  He clearly stated that you don't even consider to normalize the status of long-term illegal immigrants (and by that he stated illegal immigrants who have American born children and grandchildren) until you FIRST secure the border.  Even then, the illegals would not be allowed to become citizens, just legalized aliens.  This position probably helps him among hispanic voters and independents - further undercutting Barack Obama. 

220 The birth rate started plummeting long before there was an internet. The decline coincides with: 1) prosperity, 2) secularism, and 3) feminism. Not necessarily in that order. Posted by: somebody else, not me at November 23, 2011 11:24 AM (7EV/g) That is so, and it gives the lie to so-called "futurists" like Malthus and their endless prophecies of long-term doom. Still, one would think that eve more graphic porn would result in more real-life sex, leading to more kids... I suspect the only additional sexual activity internet porn has brought on is a whole lot of monkey slapping. Save The Monkey!!

221 A test of ability to read and write English would go a long way toward determining whether someone has "deep roots" here or not.

Posted by: The Chap in the Deerstalker Cap at November 23, 2011 11:19 AM

 I agree.  How about we also start this by eliminating all the Spanish translations on products and public transportation, etc.  As long as we cater to this it will continue.  I imagine most people would agree with that.

222 "I don't include statists in my definition." How is Santorum a statist?

223 If you check the video in the post above it sure sounds like Mitt "immigration hardliner" Romney had the same view as Newt on Illegals.  Except Romney wanted them to be able to get citizenship and not just become legal residents.

224 I'm sick and tired of these damn Mexican loving, amnesty pimping RINOs raining on my purity parade. Turns out the Newt is just as bad as that RINO wimp Perry and that Reagan turncoat. Only over your dead body will I allow amnesty for some wetback who jumped the fence 30 years ago and who's been working and paying taxes since then, raising a family, going to church, and obeying the law. O contrair, chumps, that'd be the first dude I'd deport. To send a message. I'd deport that chump, I'd deport his kids, I'd deport his grandkids, I'd deport his wife, even if she was a U.S. citizen. Hell, I'd deport his neighbors for aiding and abetting a felon. It's like I tell my Mexican housekeeper and occasional mistress: Amnesty is a magnet, honey. You grant amnesty and that'll open the floodgates. Hell, when Paco is swimming across the Nile river to get to Texas the only thing he's thinking about is amnesty. If he did that 30 years ago and you give him amnesty now it's like glossing over a crime. Now way in hell will I allow my government to gloss over a crime. Unless of course we're talking about filing false tax returns or mortgage fraud, since I've been doing that for decades; but look it here, chumps, unlike the fence jumpers I'm a proud and true white American. All I ask out of my presidential nominee is the following: (1) make a pledge to round up and deport each and every illegal immigrant in this country, wherever you find them; (2) build a wall along the entire Canadian border to prevent once and for all any illegal immigrant from ever entering the country; (3) spend less of my taxpayer dollars; (4) reduce the size of the federal government. Step to it, chumps.

225

"230 I'm sick and tired of these damn Mexican loving, amnesty pimping RINOs raining on my purity parade.

Posted by: Totally Irrational Political Malcontent at November 23, 2011 11:33 AM (rJVPU) "

 

Dammit McCain, just sign your real name when you post on blogs and stop being such a coward!  Wow, enforcing the law is irrational, makes you a malcontent and racist.  

226 Sure, that's what the argument here sounds like.

Try again troll.

227 The only totally irrational political movement that I know of is Progressivism.

A utopian wonderland of ideas and energy which once put in place turns out to be distopian and a sinkhole of money and talent.

Liberals/Progressives don't understand reality. They don't deal with it and they have little knowledge of the underlying roots of the human condition.

228

Gingrich thinks I'm inhumane, Perry thinks I'm heartless, and Romney thinks I'm stupid.

 

Great slate of candidates y'all have put together, GOP.

229 Not another 8 years of a Republican President trying to push through Amnesty! No way in hell! I'm sticking to Raising Cain!

230

About Mitt,

Would you rather have a jug-eared communistt again?

231

Aren't there any other choices for the GOP?  Please, please, PLEASE?  Dear God, it's awful out there. 

In a year where a true articulate conservative would walk away with this election, we're stuck with this crew? 

Where is Colonel Allen West when you need him?

 

232 "We'll turn up the freezer units on 'em...they'll start to drop off before the hostages.  Everyone knows your Latin types go into hypothermia first."

-Lt. Howard Hunter - "Hill Street Blues"

The thing about H1B visas that neither Conservatives nor Liberals understand is that the program has already become too large, and that we really shouldn't suck this much high-level talent from the rest of the world. It sure doesn't make the world a better place, or the rest of humanity more able to help themselves.

Then again, few of you would trade the REAL diversity I grew up with in NY back in the 70's and 80's for anything. I began to shower every day in high school, lest I reek of "diversity".

Happy Thanksgiving, Morons!

233 You're a bunch of herd animals for the most part, or fish. MSM is playing you all. "It's Romney, you wildebeests, we'll do the herd culling." I'll bet they can't believe how easy it is to control you.
Obama, 4 more years. Sad, really.

234 Drew, unless I'm really confused, Gingrich addressed dealing with illegals here first because that's how the question was framed:

"Blitzer: What would you do if you were President of the United States, with these millions of illegal immigrants, many of whom have been in this country for a long time?"

Gingrich first responded to his vote in favor of Simpson-Mazzoli and why he and Ronald Reagan supported it. But once past that, he said:

"So I think you've got to deal with this as a comprehensive approach that starts with controlling the border, as the governor [Perry] said."

So, Gingrich is fundamentally in agreement with Perry and the others: that illegal immigration is two questions, one of which is how to deal with the illegals who are here, and the other being how we regain control of the border. These questions must be addressed separately, and we can address the issue of illegals here only after the border is secured.

And yes, I agree with him: border first, then we'll talk about illegals. And no, we're not going to just deport them all: that isn't going to happen, so we'll have to come up with some way of triaging them, to separate the keepers from the ones we toss back.

235 Talkers always get in trouble eventually.   It was only a matter of time until Gingrich made a mistake. This is why Romney gives vague answers.  It's also why Perry will rise in the polls. Perry doesn't do long-winded explanations or nuance.

I happen to think we should secure the border with a massive combination of fences, barriers, drones, and boots on the ground.  This is a national security issue,  as we don't know how many jihadists posing as Mexicans have already entered through that border.  This would be Perry's approach.

I would then give a non-resident alien card for every non-citizen here in the US.  You would need that card or proof of citizenship to get a job.  Non-resident aliens would be required to pay taxes just like the rest of us. That would keep employers from using them as a cheap labor source and dodging taxes on them. Non-resident aliens would not qualify for welfare.

Anyone found in this country without a visa, card or citizenship after the border was secure would be automatically deported. Period.

And anyone committing a felony would be automatically be deported upon conviction.

236 One other thing:  We would have been much better off if we had passed Bush's immigration reform plan.  Instead,  we allowed the talk radio hosts and the xenophobic among us accuse Bush of "pandering to Hispanics" and "giving amnesty."

Well,  here we are 6 years later,  and nothing has gotten any better.  We now have a president who will probably grant full citizenship to these people next summer, so that he can be the big hero and win all those votes.

I will be back here to point out how the perfectionists caused that to happen.  This is why I am pessimistic about this election.

237  I agree.  How about we also start this by eliminating all the Spanish translations on products and public transportation, etc.  As long as we cater to this it will continue.  I imagine most people would agree with that.

Are you sure you want the state to tell the private sector which segments of the population they can, and can't market to? 

238 Miss Marple--I'm not sure why you think Gingrich got himself into trouble, when his plan sounds more restrictive than what you are proposing.  He agreed with Perry that first you have to secure the borders.  Then, instead of handing out cards to all the remaining illegals, as you propose, Gingrich would screen them, deport some, and give those who remain a separate red card , which would mark them as legal residents who were barred from becoming full citizens.  That would make it necessary for them to pay taxes, etc. 

239 I'm prepared to say that anyone who thinks the country would deport 15 million people is retarded.

I've always like Newt immigration plan because the way it works is through self-selection and attrition. The people that really want to become Americans have to jump through several bureaucratic and financial hoops. Those who don't will avoid the the program and eventually get squeezed out by getting caught or being unable to find work.

At the same time we do need a worker program for agriculture that also serves as a screening program for possible entry.

Obviously all of this is contingent on securing the border and implementing an employer enforcement system which will force people who are using fake documents to drop them or get caught.

240 The next big question, did Cain finally knock himself out?

241 Agreed. 

Speaking of Cain, did I catch this right?  Did Cain say that Syria was a large oil exporter?  IIRC, Syrian oil production constitutes about 0.5 to 1% of all global oil production. 

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at November 23, 2011 10:17 AM (9hSKh)

Yes, you did...apparently not even the Syrians know this.

Did you catch the thing on Cain in the Transom in the past couple of days? The "help conservatives" fund he had going a few years back gave almost zero out of the 10's of thousands of dollars it raised (I want to say in the neighborhood of $250K, but I don't have the blurb I saw handy) to actual conservative candidates/causes? Lots of expenses for Cain hot-rodding and jet-setting around the country paid out of it, though. Yes, I know I'm kicking a candidate when he's down (and hopefully soon to lower down), but this sorry excuse for one deserves it. Freakin' book tour.

242

Let's compromise - let Romney, Gingrich, and Perry stay, and get rid of the other deadwood.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at November 23, 2011 10:26 AM (9Uxl0)

This. Mutt would not like that configuration even one little bit.

243

@ 230 Totally Irrational Political Malcontent

Congrats, dude, you just took a hithertofore moderately amusing snark-vehicle and jumped the shark with it.

244 No I don't think that answer will hurt Newt, but it might help Perry because that's closer to what he has in mind, too. And the more people get used to that idea, the better Perry looks.

245 This is the strangest set of primaries that I have seen since they started after 1968. 

Posted by: Vic at November 23, 2011 10:48 AM (YdQQY)

This year has almost - almost, but not quite - enough to make me long for the days of picking nominees in smoke-filled hotel rooms near where the convention is being held. Almost.

246 What's Romney's solution to immigration? ...because that's what we're getting if we don't at least tolerate Newt's.

247

Had to stop by this afternoon just to see if the Perry supporters were still plucking the chicken, propping it up on the table, bending it over and slipping it the Boehner.

Guess so. Happy Thanksgiving trade that chicken for a Turkey tomorrow!

Oh and how many countries banks are we gonna sanction now and is the no fly your kite zone still a go in Syria? Cause Syria has a direct effect on something or other and we like to fly planes around and stuff.

248

This was a good move by Gingrich:

1) It exposes Mitt Romney more to his flip-flopping nature, Mitt feels the nomination slipping so he recklessly and foolishly doubled down on his weakness.

2) Newt's stature in American Politics (rather than just libertarian conservative bases) is that of being someone so far right on the deep end that INDEPENDENTS and MODERATES view him as part of the right wing conspiracy. 

3)  This gives pause to the media in attacking him, now CNN, and the MSM have a little thing in the back of their heads that says, hey, this one individual GOP candidate has more sense than all the rest combine.  You must remember that the MSM only appears to care about the economy, taxation, etc. what really controls them are the few social issues such as abortion and immigration.  He has bought himself goodwill from the media for at least the next six months.

4)  Now, he is in position to clean up the moderates in the GOP who are supporting Romney out of necessity (the necessity that all the other candidates are too far right) if it appears that Romney can't close the deal.

Dude played it well. 

 

249 Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a miserable failure.

250 Newt is a tool of big corporation. They like illegals.  I still have not forgiven Newt for Nafta and Gatt.

251 You realize that Gingrich has a Hispanic web site "The Americano" and a separate Twitter account in Spanish.

252 Yeah, Couch "Warming" Potato Newt hurt himself last night. He can't be that smart: he fails to get what Congressman Sonny Bono pointed out so plainly years ago. Obviously, illegal immigration is illegal. Period. After we secure our borders and sea approaches, Illegal migrants, from whatever country, should be deported ASAP, with all their family-members, and their assets (if any) should be liquidated to pay our costs. If these assets are insufficient to cover our costs, their home countries should be billed. (Those visitors with valid visas should be required to report at decreasing intervals their whereabouts.) We may be the most lax First World country in the whole world in this regard. Many of you readers visit Tijuana regularly. What would Mexico's authorities do to you if you overstayed?

253
I am not clear if I totally understand the full thought pattern behind this.

254 I love what you guys are frequently up too. Such clever work and reporting! Keep up the terrific works guys IÂ’ve added you guys to my blogroll.

255 Thank you for the good writeup. It in fact was a amusement account it. Look advanced to more added agreeable from you! However, how could we communicate?

256 Yep! I was agreed, I'll keep in touch to your blog.