Chris Christie on immigration: We need a path to citizenship; Update: Was Christie talking about illegals?

posted at 5:41 pm on June 30, 2010 by Allahpundit

Some righties, Ace among them, are shrugging this off, which I kind of understand. For one thing, conservative rock star though he be, Christie’s still a Republican leading a deep-blue state. We may want to believe he’s Reagan reincarnated but there’s probably a little of Rudy Giuliani in that political DNA. For another thing, he’s wisely chosen not to be too specific about this issue so the quotes end up being ambiguous. What kind of path to citizenship, precisely, does he have in mind? No idea, which is just how he likes it, I’m sure. And of course, he gets the “true conservative” benefit of the doubt that grassroots righties always extend to GOP icons until they say or do something irretrievably RINO-ish. Palin used to be the paradigm example: If she said something sketchy, like, er, about supporting a path to citizenship for illegals, excuses would immediately be offered that she was misquoted or the media was out to get her or (more credibly) that she was only saying that under duress from the McCain campaign, etc. Ever since she endorsed Maverick in Arizona and Fiorina in California, my sense is that people are a bit (but only a bit) stingier towards her in that regard. Christie is still in the full flush of his “the next Reagan?!” buzz, though, he gets the full complement, which means this shouldn’t make too many waves. I think.

On the hot-button topic of immigration reform, he said he has long declined to “demagogue” the issue as a former U.S. Attorney, because “I come from law enforcement and it’s not an easy issue.”

But he did intimate that he thinks stringent state-by-state laws – such as in Arizona – are the wrong approach, and added, “I think President Obama doesn’t do this at his own risk because it’s affecting the economy in the country…to me, I think the president’s really gotta show the leadership on this.”

“This is a federal problem, it’s gotta have a federal fix,” he said. “I’m not really comfortable with state law enforcement having a big role.”

He said that without border security, enforcement of existing laws and a “clear” path to legalization for immigrants, there would never be a fix.

I posted that in Headlines this morning and some readers immediately objected that the description was unclear, that that damned Politico was trying to make trouble, that it was telling how they refused to quote him directly — the “true conservative” benefit of the doubt, in other words. So I asked Ben Smith to provide a direct quote. And voila:

“What I support is making sure that the federal government [plays] each and every one of its roles: Securing the border, enforcing immigration laws, and having an orderly process — whatever that process is — for people to gain citizenship.”

He added: “It’s a very easy issue to demagogue and I’m just not going to participate in that.”

Christie said more resources — specifically, “money” — were needed to support federal law enforcement and border security, along with “having a clear understandable law that people can follow.”

Ace describes that as being “a lot more GOP-friendly” than the description in the first blockquote, but I’m not sure why. The second quote clarifies that he’s talking about full-fledged citizenship for illegals, not mere “legalization” as might be had in a guest-worker program. “Whatever that process is” leaves some wiggle room but I’m sure it’s the standard amnesty caveats: Pay back taxes, learn English, go to the back of the line, blah blah blah. As for the part about securing the border, that’s a universal talking point for Democrats too; I’d bet dollars to donuts that it’s the first policy plank Obama mentions in his big amnesty shpiel tomorrow. The national debate, after all, isn’t between enforcement or amnesty, it’s between enforcement with amnesty or enforcement without. Says Philip Klein, “In practice, his preferred policy on immigration, which involves a path to citizenship, would likely put him to the left of where the primary electorate is.” A tough spot for the Next Reagan to be in — although in fairness, Reagan was a big ol’ amnesty shill too. Maybe that’ll be CC’s campaign slogan: “Amnesty — good enough for the Gipper, good enough for me!”

He’ll be on “Hannity” tonight so maybe we’ll get some further clarification. As for my reaction to his quote, here’s documentary footage of how I responded after reading the Politico piece this morning.

Update: One of the objections below is that Christie never specifies that he’s talking about illegals who are already here when he refers to an “orderly process … for people to gain citizenship.” Could be he simply means that we need a way for people in Mexico and elsewhere to come here legally and become citizens if they want to. Which is fine, except that virtually no one this side of Tom Tancredo disputes that. Of course there should be channels for foreigners to apply for citizenship; to acknowledge that when it’s not seriously being debated would be meaningless, which is why I assume that he was, in fact, talking about illegals who are already here. But like I say, maybe we’ll find out more on “Hannity.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Controversy schmontroversy. Call me when he sponsors an amnesty bill with McVain.

fiatboomer on June 30, 2010 at 5:44 PM

Uh Chris I hate to tell you this but there is already a path. The people who chose not to take it is the issue.

vinceautmorire on June 30, 2010 at 5:45 PM

I thought we solved this in the earlier thread.

pseudonominus on June 30, 2010 at 5:45 PM

But first, lets put a stop to the ‘path to citizenship (and for drugs and human trafficking)’ which leads up through the Arizona desert.

If it’s true, as they always say, that illegals do the jobs Americans won’t do, won’t we need another ten million plus illegals to do their jobs the day after we make them Americans?

Beagle on June 30, 2010 at 5:46 PM

Man-crush over, huh guys?

ThePrez on June 30, 2010 at 5:47 PM

As for the part about securing the border, that’s a universal talking point for Democrats too; I’d bet dollars to donuts that it’s the first policy plank Obama mentions in his big amnesty shpiel tomorrow.

Grrrrooooooaaaaannnn

Not another Obama speech. I can’t do it again. I refuse.

pseudonominus on June 30, 2010 at 5:47 PM

His dissing of the Arizona law bothered me, but the rest didn’t. We do need an immigration policy and some way to work on LEGAL citizenship . Orderly being go home and apply like the legal immigrants do.He clearly says secure the border so it is alright by me.

sandee on June 30, 2010 at 5:47 PM

The ultimate heart-ache.

And in the same week Megan Fox passes up AP for uber-beta Beverly Hills alum Brian Austin Green.

Disturb the Universe on June 30, 2010 at 5:47 PM

My impression, and why I lean to Ace’s interpretation, is that it is a generic general sort of answer to the question. Which means it’s not something he has either thought a long time about or he doesn’t have a position that he is pushing (making him flexible to the base’s desires).

Really don’t see that it matters though, since he is not running for P.

Spirit of 1776 on June 30, 2010 at 5:47 PM

Good clip. The birth of Obama and his maker, George Soros.

Electrongod on June 30, 2010 at 5:48 PM

“This is a federal problem, it’s gotta have a federal fix,” he said. “I’m not really comfortable with state law enforcement having a big role.”

He said that without border security, enforcement of existing laws and a “clear” path to legalization for immigrants, there would never be a fix.

There is nothing wrong with those two statements.
It is a federal problem, and AZ shouldn’t be involved, but they have to because the feds are ignoring the problem.
And we do need a clear path, a clear program for immigrants to be here legally…he isn’t saying all those here should be given a “path”, but that there should be some vehicle to allow it to happen, along with border security, and enforcement of laws.
Exactly what most everyone wants…security, enforcement, management…

right2bright on June 30, 2010 at 5:48 PM

Man-crush over, huh guys?

ThePrez on June 30, 2010 at 5:47 PM

Bear Hunters everywhere are heartbroken.

pseudonominus on June 30, 2010 at 5:48 PM

What they should do is to have some sort of application process where would-be immigrants can apply legally or something…
Crazy idea, I know, but it just might work.

redzap on June 30, 2010 at 5:48 PM

Yeah, kind of heart-achey.

Though I wonder how much is the result of him trying to keep the allies he has right now in order to push taxes, etc. He doesn’t need to be painted as a racist and the rest b/c of a stance on immigration. His answer was kind of bland.

We shall see as time goes on.

amerpundit on June 30, 2010 at 5:48 PM

A Nixon in China moment. This coming from Christie makes sense.

RobCon on June 30, 2010 at 5:49 PM

Securing the border, enforcing immigration laws, and having an orderly process — whatever that process is — for people to gain citizenship.”

Why citizenship ?
Why not ‘Employment authorization’ ?
Why not ‘Permanent residency’ ?
Why direct straight ‘citizenship’ ?
Citizenship is final , which can’t be undone .
Again, why citizenship ?

macncheez on June 30, 2010 at 5:49 PM

The second quote clarifies that he’s talking about full-fledged citizenship for illegals

Where does he say that, Allah? I see the word “people”. That makes his statement nonspecific. He could very well be referring to legal immigrants, and the process by which they become citizens.

MadisonConservative on June 30, 2010 at 5:49 PM

calm down…

touchy touchy touchy

mjbrooks3 on June 30, 2010 at 5:49 PM

RINO?

mjbrooks3 on June 30, 2010 at 5:50 PM

Why does Allahpundit, the David Brooks conservative of Hot Air consider this to be the ultimate heartache? This is just an underhanded attack on Chris Christie by Allahpundit, the David Brooks conservative. His feigned outrage doesn’t fool me. And probably doesn’t fool anyone in this forum. He just hopes that conservatives turn away from Christie.

Dave From Canada on June 30, 2010 at 5:50 PM

Looks like Beck is going to have to retire his Chris Christie “common sense porn” bits and theme song.

Kataklysmic on June 30, 2010 at 5:50 PM

I look at the border problem like the Oil spill problem.

Soaking up the oil on the beach is reacting to the problem. Plugging the damned whole is the only solution.

Rounding up illegals is only reacting to the problem.
Plugging the damned Border is the only solution.

Once that border is secure, than sort out who goes and who stays. Until than you got nothing.

portlandon on June 30, 2010 at 5:51 PM

You people are such a bunch of crybabies. We’re not going to deport millions of people, and we’re not going to militarize the border. We don’t have the money. The cheapest way to solve immigration is changing the law to make it easier to immigrate legally, and that includes amnesty for those already here. Any other solution is not feasible with a $10 trillion debt.

But hey, if you want to end both wars to pay for conservatives’ ludicrously expensive illegal immigration fixes, well, maybe we can find a “third way.”

But if your definition of “amnesty” is “anything short of deportation and militarizing the border,” you are not a serious person. You are a crybaby. Stop being a crybaby.

Enrique on June 30, 2010 at 5:51 PM

AP, really over simplistic. I, too, am OK with a path to citizenship…provided you can demonstrate that you’ve never been arrested, nor have your children. Next step, 5 year waiting period with the same requirements while holding regular employment (this does not mean stead employment, btw). If you can successfully clear those hurdles, I’m fine with you becoming a citizen.

AP, did you ever even cross your mind what his requirements were for a path to citizenship?

Anyway, I don’t know what his are…but those are mine. I’m sure this wins me no liberal friends.

bloghooligan on June 30, 2010 at 5:52 PM

Enrique on June 30, 2010 at 5:51 PM

Self-deportation.

pseudonominus on June 30, 2010 at 5:53 PM

This is just an underhanded attack on Chris Christie by Allahpundit, the David Brooks conservative.

Christie “true conservative” benefit of the doubt for the win!

Allahpundit on June 30, 2010 at 5:53 PM

Lets see

Securing the border Absolutely necessary. I agree.
enforcing immigration laws Yes! I agree.

and having an orderly process — whatever that process is — for people to gain citizenship.”
Oh Yes! As long as they are legal they are welcome!
What part of this should we not agree with?

canditaylor68 on June 30, 2010 at 5:53 PM

Dave From Canada on June 30, 2010 at 5:50 PM

I like Christie. But this is heart-achey material, especially if he’s being honest and not just trying to calm things down for other issues.

But then my ideology doesn’t change based on my candidate of choice reveals about himself. Nor do I put my fingers in my ears and pretend I didn’t hear it.

amerpundit on June 30, 2010 at 5:54 PM

Ace describes that as being “a lot more GOP-friendly” than the description in the first blockquote, but I’m not sure why

Really? That whole, “whatever that process is,” doesn’t help? I’m not saying that if pushed he wouldn’t reach the level of an AllahPundit, “Oh my,” but the full quote just doesn’t get there…yet.

Weight of Glory on June 30, 2010 at 5:55 PM

Secure the border first…

… prove it for two years, then we can discuss what to do with the illegal aliens who broke into this country.

Seven Percent Solution on June 30, 2010 at 5:55 PM

Has common sense taken a holiday, even with Gov Christie?

Reorganize and expand the Border Patrol; devise and complete the most secure backyard fence ever built. Then — and only then — should we begin to talk about any “path.”

Edouard on June 30, 2010 at 5:55 PM

Oh Yes! As long as they are legal they are welcome!
What part of this should we not agree with?

canditaylor68 on June 30, 2010 at 5:53 PM

You know what he’s talking about. It’s the same line every other candidate who supports amnesty uses.

And the statement came right after he said local law enforcement shouldn’t have a role in the issue. He’s saying he disapproves of the Arizona law.

Let’s not play dumb, folks.

amerpundit on June 30, 2010 at 5:56 PM

You are a crybaby. Stop being a crybaby.

Enrique on June 30, 2010 at 5:51 PM

I believe you are the one whining about it…everyone else seems to understand what Christie was saying, we need a logical way of dealing with the immigration and border issue. But keep whining, sometimes it gets too quite in here when you are not whining about something.

right2bright on June 30, 2010 at 5:56 PM

comparing the gov of NJ comments to the comments of a VP candidate talking on the compaign trial is not the same. one is done form one’s free will the other is down at the command of the head of the ticket. But nice try there Allah.

try comparing the comments of Palin and christie without the McCain camp telling her what to say. they are worlds apart and Palin beats christie on this issue like a red headed step child.

unseen on June 30, 2010 at 5:56 PM

Christie “true conservative” benefit of the doubt for the win!

Allahpundit on June 30, 2010 at 5:53 PM

You have center square envy. There is no shame being in the bottom square with Jim J Bullock.

portlandon on June 30, 2010 at 5:57 PM

There are legal terms for non-citizens within the United States. Among them, an “immigrant” must have entered the country legally and remains legally present. One who has entered the country illegally or remains in the country after the expiration of their legal stay is an “illegal alien.” I hope he meant what he said, literally by law.

AmericanDad on June 30, 2010 at 5:57 PM

Enrique on June 30, 2010 at 5:51 PM

Stop giving welfare, food stamps, WIC, free medical, free school, free housing, free public defenders, free incarceration, free anything to illegals and their anchor-babies.
Make stealing SS# a federal crime. Make stealing DL a state crime. And Punish those crimes.
Problem solved.

macncheez on June 30, 2010 at 5:58 PM

A tough spot for the Next Reagan to be in

AP, as a matter of fact, that is exactly what the “original” Reagan proposed and pushed through.
The problem isn’t the program…it’s that the democrats have no honor and will pretend they are for it (to garner votes) then rip apart.
They lied when Reagan did it…they will lie again.
Dems can’t help it, they have to lie to get elected, get their people confirmed, pass their bills…knowing that in a busy society, people expect honor and they don’t vote out incumbent liars.

right2bright on June 30, 2010 at 5:59 PM

How on earth does that translate to “We need a path to citizenship?” He’s talking about enforcing the laws we have now.

Ronnie on June 30, 2010 at 6:00 PM

Maybe he just hasn’t read the Arizona law yet. Somebody send him a copy.

iurockhead on June 30, 2010 at 6:00 PM

BZZZZZT! Ew, advocating rewards for illegal activity is NOT good, especially at the expense of national security! Whaaaaa Whaaaa Whaaaaaaaaaa….

And the next contestant IS….

FloatingRock on June 30, 2010 at 6:00 PM

ThePrez on June 30, 2010 at 5:47 PM

Never was taken in by him.

He’s said some good things, but the jury is still out as to his conservative credentials. I know that there are those in NJ who don’t buy it … let’s keep watch, we may find out real soon.

ORrighty on June 30, 2010 at 6:01 PM

Stop giving welfare, food stamps, WIC, free medical, free school, free housing, free public defenders, free incarceration, free anything to illegals and their anchor-babies.
Make stealing SS# a federal crime. Make stealing DL a state crime. And Punish those crimes.
Problem solved.

macncheez on June 30, 2010 at 5:58 PM

Yep. Make it clear that those here illegally will NEVER get citizenship. Deportation by Attrition.

It’s not rocket science.

Norwegian on June 30, 2010 at 6:01 PM

He is 35% conservative and 65% liberal. Or 30% libertarian, 5% conservative, and 65% liberal.

jdun on June 30, 2010 at 6:02 PM

try comparing the comments of Palin and christie without the McCain camp telling her what to say.

I acknowledged that that’s a credible point in the post.

Allahpundit on June 30, 2010 at 6:02 PM

I don’t give a good damn what state he’s governor of, pink, or not. You don’t reward these criminals with American citizenship, plain-and-simple. He needs to follow Jan Brewer’s example and run those people out of town, now throw them a party. I agree with Zo; you won’t find perfection in a politician. However, this is a viewpoint that’s blatantly defective and wrong. I have substantially cooled on Christie. He’s still good on fiscal policies, and maybe he’s a Social Conservative, but he’s definitely not a political one. I’m just hoping we don’t have another Scott Brown on our hands.

Virus-X on June 30, 2010 at 6:03 PM

Christie is getting alot of attention by balancing the state budget in New Jersey. Since the unions have owned the state for years, that is a remarkable feat. Comprehensive reform is needed in immigration, but the path should be elongated with requirements to be stepping stones to getting citizenship. Of course the liberals are caring about the votes and the power that it brings without any consideration of the negatives that could adversely effect us for decades. Christie is a voice of reason in a atmosphere of greed and corruption that will destroy our nation if someone does not evolve to lead.

volsense on June 30, 2010 at 6:04 PM

We may want to believe he’s Reagan reincarnated but there’s probably a little of Rudy Giuliani in that political DNA.

Works for me!

Jim-Rose on June 30, 2010 at 6:05 PM

Actually the Reagan comparison is apt. He too was for a path to “legalization” (regardless of how Rush or Glenn try to massage that reality.)

AYNBLAND on June 30, 2010 at 6:06 PM

Never was taken in by him.

He’s said some good things, but the jury is still out as to his conservative credentials. I know that there are those in NJ who don’t buy it … let’s keep watch, we may find out real soon.

ORrighty on June 30, 2010 at 6:01 PM

Me neither. This and his stand on the 2nd Amendment was enough for me to question his conservative credentials.

That being said, I think he is fantastic as the Governor of NJ, but I would not necessarily want him as my POTUS candidate. Of course, we could do a lot worse (Mittens, Huck or Mitch Daniels come to mind) so I wouldn’t rule it out.

Norwegian on June 30, 2010 at 6:06 PM

Gun grabbing amnesty giving northerner, I’m shocked!

wheelgun on June 30, 2010 at 6:06 PM

we HAVE a path to citizenship Jabba. if you mean we need a path to a Guest Worker Program, I’m with ya. but you’re Path sounds a lot like amnesty.

fuggetaboutit.

please don’t eat me

DrW on June 30, 2010 at 6:07 PM

The biggest issue with Gov. Christie’s stance with illegal aliens is that he apparently thinks his opinion should guide what the vast majority is already adamantly telling every level of government in this country and its not pathway to citizenship.

Its a matter of who decides. So far its been whoever can get across the border without being caught.

The Gov. needs to understand, Mexico declare war on the US a long time ago and their American collaborators are achieving what no enemy ever has. Victory.

Speakup on June 30, 2010 at 6:07 PM

Speakup on June 30, 2010 at 6:07 PM

Victory by infiltration.

ORrighty on June 30, 2010 at 6:10 PM

You people are such a bunch of crybabies. We’re not going to deport millions of people, and we’re not going to militarize the border. We don’t have the money. The cheapest way to solve immigration is changing the law to make it easier to immigrate legally, and that includes amnesty for those already here. Any other solution is not feasible with a $10 trillion debt.

Enrique on June 30, 2010 at 5:51 PM

More people already immigrate legally than at any time in history. The infrastructure cannot cope. Skip the first minute, watch, and learn.

MadisonConservative on June 30, 2010 at 6:11 PM

Awaiting the Allahpundit Heart-ache/Oh My Dale Peterson is an atheist,gun grabbing, pro-abortion, tax and spend RINO post.

portlandon on June 30, 2010 at 6:13 PM

I don’t know what you people are debating. The quote doesn’t say what Politico and Allahpundit are pretending it says. It says the feds should mange their three responsibilities regarding immigration, and they should. If they do those three things, there will be no reason to give amnesty to anyone – they’ll be gone.

Ronnie on June 30, 2010 at 6:14 PM

What’s the problem? He’s been touted on this site as very Reaganesque, this is just keeping in line with that.

And Christie is right, BTW.

Vyce on June 30, 2010 at 6:14 PM

I don’t see this as a conservative controversy. Clear path to citizenship?

1.Go back home.
2.Fill out the appropriate paperwork.
3.Follow the laws of the land.

Welcome- glad to have you. Please do your best to be a productive member of our society.

BKeyser on June 30, 2010 at 6:15 PM

portlandon on June 30, 2010 at 5:51 PM

+1

d1carter on June 30, 2010 at 6:15 PM

Which is fine, except that virtually no one this side of Tom Tancredo disputes that.

Does anyone this side of Tom Tancredo dispute his other two points? Then why treat them differently?

Ronnie on June 30, 2010 at 6:15 PM

The problem is his use of the word “demagogue”. You got to assume that he doesn’t want to appeal to what he considers an ugly “popular prejudice” of most people wanting their immigration laws enforced. That is the word he won’t be able to explain away.

Buddahpundit on June 30, 2010 at 6:15 PM

Was Christie discussing a path to citizenship for illegal aliens, or was he actually, finally, bringing up the point that the system for LEGAL immigration needs a radical makeover? Nothing I saw showed him discussing a path specifically for ILLEGAL immigrants. Time will tell…

Mr Michael on June 30, 2010 at 6:15 PM

portlandon on June 30, 2010 at 6:13 PM

O/T … is that OR … if so, Gresham here

ORrighty on June 30, 2010 at 6:16 PM

We may want to believe he’s Reagan reincarnated but there’s probably a little of Rudy Giuliani in that political DNA.

Reagan did amnesty…hello!

Nothing wrong with a path to citizenship. Legal immigrants first. Then handle the illegal immigrants that want to be here legally.

Narutoboy on June 30, 2010 at 6:19 PM

Government offices around here only have bilingual speakers hired for customer service jobs. All the english only speakers only cannot get a low level job.

PrezHussein on June 30, 2010 at 6:21 PM

The people who condemn American colonialism are the same folks who condone America being colonized by others.

canditaylor68 on June 30, 2010 at 6:26 PM

O/T … is that OR … if so, Gresham here

ORrighty on June 30, 2010 at 6:16 PM

SE Portland here. Nice weather eh? Suppose to be 90 by Monday!

portlandon on June 30, 2010 at 6:27 PM

I sorry, I no good pay attention. Me thinks the conservative position was “enforcement first”…. meaning a kind of amnesty after enforcement, no?

Aquateen Hungerforce on June 30, 2010 at 6:28 PM

Whatever path someone comes up with, the mechanism to get on that path will be demagogues in the same way, by the same people, that Arizona’s law is.
There’s no way to put anyone on a path to citizenship, make them pay a fine, and separate those who haven’t done so, without checking “papers”.

MayBee on June 30, 2010 at 6:28 PM

Noooooo! you cannot give imported lawn care workers Amnesty because they will always be a net drain on all the social entitlement. you can give the a work visa and make them defacto contractors like I was for many years. I came, I worked (for Compaq), and I left. Compaq owed me nothing once I walked out the door, just as we should owe those nothing that come here to pick lettuce, cotton, or trim the lawns. What you “give them citizenship” nuggets don’t seem to get is that WE CANNOT AFFORD MORE MINIMUM WAGE CITIZENS, NONE, NADA! You don’t grow you way out of a depression by adding more low income workers that net more welfare than income because it is a NET loss to the country and to those having to make up the difference out of our paychecks.

rgranger on June 30, 2010 at 6:29 PM

As I said earlier, absolutely Christie was talking about a “path to citizenship” for illegals. He gets it. And as I’ve also been stating for years, we don’t know what form this PtC will take. What a sort of “amnesty” will encompass.

We already have an “orderly process” for foreigners to apply for and gain citizenship. Therefore he could only be speaking of our Southern border illegals.

JetBoy on June 30, 2010 at 6:30 PM

portlandon on June 30, 2010 at 6:27 PM

Pleased to meet you … enjoy the weather while we can. Our seasons have gone from winter to summer, no spring this year, just liquid sunshine.

ORrighty on June 30, 2010 at 6:32 PM

“What I support is making sure that the federal government [plays] each and every one of its roles: Securing the border, enforcing immigration laws, and having an orderly process — whatever that process is — for people to gain citizenship.”
—————–

It would of been better if a video was present,to see how Christie really expressed himself,and it looks like to me,
a whole lotta not much a goin on!

The orderly process-whatever that process is—-
===============================================

Now if Christie could clarify that further, what he precisely means,then,I think will have sumpin futher
to work with,

jus sayin!!!!

canopfor on June 30, 2010 at 6:33 PM

Christie is not the only one with McCain for amnesty.

Disturbing.

maverick muse on June 30, 2010 at 6:33 PM

Give it up, AP.

You are going to lose on this one.

logis on June 30, 2010 at 6:41 PM

I don’t read his statement as calling for a “path” for illegals – just a clear path for those who want to immigrate legally. But maybe he was talking more generally, in which case BKeyser’s path fits everyone .

LASue on June 30, 2010 at 6:50 PM

Reagan did amnesty…hello!

Narutoboy on June 30, 2010 at 6:19 PM

Reagan did not do amnesty…hello!
It was the lying dems that created amnesty out of his path to citizenship…but thanks for reminding us of one of the darkest events in political history, the dems broken oath that they gave the American people and Reagan.

right2bright on June 30, 2010 at 7:07 PM

We already have an “orderly process” for foreigners to apply for and gain citizenship. Therefore he could only be speaking of our Southern border illegals.

JetBoy on June 30, 2010 at 6:30 PM

Your logic is nonsense. We also already have “immigration laws” to enforce, so what was the secret code embedded in that one?

Ronnie on June 30, 2010 at 7:14 PM

I’m seeing a lot of “What a RINO! Chistie wants amnesty!” Well, no. As other posters here have more eliquently stated, a path to citizenship is mucho-differentte than saying “Give illegals amnesty.”

I hear Christie loud and clear on the question of the AZ law.
I AM totally supportive of it BTW (meaning the AZ law), but the arguement should be about the fact that it was/is necessary in the first place.
To me, it’s kinda like (If that city would evah wake up and do such a thing,)Chicago passing a law that says it’s a punishable crime to shoot peeps in the streets. Um, that’s a crime already!
The fact that Arizona had to pass a law-reiterating-a-law because it wasn’t being enforced is the real crime.
I see no inconsistencies in Christie’s comments.
The AZ law is a cry for help, and a line in the sand that says, “If you (US Gubment)won’t do it, we will.”
This is why the American people support it. It ain’t rocket surgery, gang!”

Chewy the Lab on June 30, 2010 at 7:15 PM

BTW, quite possibly the worst scene from Episode III.

shawk on June 30, 2010 at 7:23 PM

It would be nice if just every now and then we could come up with a promising Republican politician that certain people on the right did not feel the need to undermine or whine about or destroy or whatever. Just every now and then. It seems like there are people out there that would knock half a dozen Democrats out of the way to be first in line to stab another conservative in the back..because he was not just exactly what they wanted.

Christie is not a closet liberal or any of the kind. I am sure he is staking out a policy here that he thinks is reasonable and pragmatic as well as conservative.

New Jersey is not Arizona. That does not mean that Christie is somehow falling short here or something.

Terrye on June 30, 2010 at 7:24 PM

Gov. Christie knows about the illegal alien problem that Morristown, NJ has (since he lives in neighboring Mendham twnship).

In 2007, Morristown Mayor Donald Cresitello made national headlines with an anti-illegal immigration rally at town hall which Hot Air posted the interview he did with MSNBC.

RedRobin145 on June 30, 2010 at 7:27 PM

Well I hope he’s talking about a more efficient legal immigration policy, but that seems…odd. We have an immigration policy.

But if he’s talking about a Bush-McCain-GOP RINOs-type path to citizenship for illegal aliens let’s face it — lots of people on the right want this. I am only holding out for meaningful border security before giving up on that issue…and by border security I mean reform of VISA enforcement and getting rid of the anchor-baby provision in addition stopping the border invasion.

Jaibones on June 30, 2010 at 7:36 PM

Maybe he meant a nice, wide and clear one way street that leads back to the countries where they are legal citizens. I still want him to do the budget here in Jersey, but will pay attention to this for future reference.

RalphyBoy on June 30, 2010 at 7:38 PM

here’s documentary footage of how I responded after reading the Politico piece this morning.

Aren’t you the one ever tut-tutting about litmus tests? Interesting reaction then.

Smiles on June 30, 2010 at 7:42 PM

The next president who refuses to implement border security should be impeached. The one we have probably will not be impeached, because he is the “first black President”. How sick is that, a racist cause for not treating him the same as a couple other white presidents who may have lied under oath or otherwise shirked their legal obligations.

exdeadhead on June 30, 2010 at 8:01 PM

I acknowledged that that’s a credible point in the post.

Allahpundit on June 30, 2010 at 6:02 PM

then why even bring it up. One was done by orders of someone else. the only reason you brought it up is to try to negate what christie said. I see you failed to mention Palin’s more recent statements on immigration and illegal immigration and you wonder why people accuse you of being anti-palin.

unseen on June 30, 2010 at 8:32 PM

U6 (the true measure of unemployment when account for people who are underemployed, part time, etc) is at 16.6% right now. That translates to about 24 million people. There are 20 million illegals here.

Obama and Christie either can’t do simple math or don’t care about the 24 million Americans.

Either way it is shameful

angryed on June 30, 2010 at 8:42 PM

What about Hussain threatening to declare amnesty in a speech tomorrow ?
Did you all hear about it ? I heard it over a spanish language radio station here
maybe 20 min ago..

macncheez on June 30, 2010 at 8:58 PM

“What I support is making sure that the federal government [plays] each and every one of its roles: Securing the border, enforcing immigration laws, and having an orderly process — whatever that process is — for people to gain citizenship.”

Ace describes that as being “a lot more GOP-friendly” than the description in the first blockquote, but I’m not sure why. The second quote clarifies that he’s talking about full-fledged citizenship for illegals, not mere “legalization” as might be had in a guest-worker program.

It’s clear he’s talking about citizenship, but I’m not sure he’s necessarily talking about illegals specifically. And to the extent that he is, that “process” could easily require that they go back and get in line.

A lot of people have complaints about the legal immigration process and how its virtually impossible to go through all the bureaucratic hoops. And I’ve heard that used by some as a justification for illegal immigration. While that’s no excuse, it is important that the legal immigration process, like everything else the federal government does, be done efficiency (yeah, I know, fat chance).

I’m not saying that Chris Christie specifically meant that the process should be “get in line”, but more that he was speaking very broadly about how there should be some system, whatever that system is. So it’s much more neautral than a “pro-amnesty” statement, though it isn’t and “anti-amnesty” statement either.

That’s how I read it, anyway.

RINO in Name Only on June 30, 2010 at 9:02 PM

RINO in Name Only on June 30, 2010 at 9:02 PM

Update: One of the objections below is that Christie never specifies that he’s talking about illegals who are already here when he refers to an “orderly process … for people to gain citizenship.” Could be he simply means that we need a way for people in Mexico and elsewhere to come here legally and become citizens if they want to. Which is fine, except that virtually no one this side of Tom Tancredo disputes that. Of course there should be channels for foreigners to apply for citizenship; to acknowledge that when it’s not seriously being debated would be meaningless, which is why I assume that he was, in fact, talking about illegals who are already here. But like I say, maybe we’ll find out more on “Hannity.”

Damn, I either can’t read, or need to refresh my browser more often.

Yes, it would be meaningless to acknowledge it as part of a debate, but I think Christie is making it pretty clear that he isn’t that interested in the debate.

My impression of Christie is that if he wants to come out and take a position on this, you’ll know it, I’ll know it, and everyone else who is not living in a cave in Afghanistan will know it. There won’t be any need to speculate on what he means in the comments of a blog.

RINO in Name Only on June 30, 2010 at 9:07 PM

The next president who refuses to implement border security should be impeached. The one we have probably will not be impeached, because he is the “first black President”. How sick is that, a racist cause for not treating him the same as a couple other white presidents who may have lied under oath or otherwise shirked their legal obligations.

exdeadhead on June 30, 2010 at 8:01 PM

Meh, I seem to recall that Clinton was the “first black president,” and was impeached.

More seriously, no president is going to be impeached over this. Obama is, on this issue, being treated no differently than a white president. Bush was not impeached for not enforcing immigration law.

RINO in Name Only on June 30, 2010 at 9:14 PM

Gov. Christie just clarified his stance on Hannity.

Back of the bus, Juan! He doesn’t support amnesty for illegals.

madmonkphotog on June 30, 2010 at 9:20 PM

The path-to-citizenship is not the problem.

It’s the refusing-to-secure-the-border that’s the problem.

Purple Fury on June 30, 2010 at 9:35 PM

Maybe he was talking about a path to citizenship for the 10 spies?

I do draw the line at printing driver tests and ballots in Russian.

J.E. Dyer on June 30, 2010 at 9:44 PM

Gov. Christie just clarified his stance on Hannity.

Back of the bus, Juan! He doesn’t support amnesty for illegals.

madmonkphotog on June 30, 2010 at 9:20 PM

Give Allah a minute. He’s spelunking for doubtfulness.
Let the undermining of the Gov’s position begin! proceed!

Stephen M on June 30, 2010 at 9:56 PM

I don’t read his statement as calling for a “path” for illegals – just a clear path for those who want to immigrate legally. But maybe he was talking more generally, in which case BKeyser’s path fits everyone .

LASue on June 30, 2010 at 6:50 PM

I have a tendency to go this direction.

The actual quote seemed quite clear to me and I totally agree with it.

What we need is a clear path to citizenship. Not what we have now. What we have now is sneak across the border and live here illegally. If you stay here long enough eventually some stupid congress will make you legal. If you have kid’s the idiotic USA will make them citizens and give you benefits. This needs to end.

It seems clear to me he wants is a law to be made that would clarify this all once and forever. What ever that law is. The current situation is untenable. The border must be made secure. It will never be secure if laws are not actually enforced by the federal government as is the case now. Enforcing a new very clear law would make laws like Arizona’s unnecessary.

Steveangell on June 30, 2010 at 9:58 PM

Gov. Christie just clarified his stance on Hannity.

Back of the bus, Juan! He doesn’t support amnesty for illegals.

madmonkphotog on June 30, 2010 at 9:20 PM

Somewhere in an alternate universe, a bearded Allahpundit is gloating over being right once again.

Ronnie on June 30, 2010 at 10:08 PM

What about Hussain threatening to declare amnesty in a speech tomorrow ?
Did you all hear about it ? I heard it over a spanish language radio station here
maybe 20 min ago..

macncheez on June 30, 2010 at 8:58 PM

macncheez:)
=================================================

Obama to Push for Amnesty Starting Tomorrow

http://bejohngalt.com/
===========================
A link to/ Freedoms Lighthouse

Obama to Speak on Immigration Tomorrow; Will Say We “Cannot Have” Laws Passed “by Each State” – Video

http://freedomslighthouse.net/2010/06/30/obama-to-speak-on-immigration-tomorrow-will-say-we-cannot-have-laws-passed-by-each-state-video/

canopfor on June 30, 2010 at 10:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2