Gingrich: Let’s face it, we shouldn’t be deporting illegals who have been here for 25 years; Update: Romney camp rips Gingrich for supporting “amnesty”

posted at 11:07 pm on November 22, 2011 by Allahpundit

Via Breitbart TV, the most buzzworthy answer of the night. Some people on Twitter thought it was a breakthrough on immigration for a Republican debate, others thought it would blow a hole in his candidacy the same way Perry’s answer on in-state tuition did to his in September. What you’re seeing here, in fact, is really just a rewrite of the latter’s infamous point about heartlessness by a guy who’s much slicker at debating. Neither one is endorsing citizenship for illegals, just greater integration of those who have been here long enough that uprooting them would cause great personal disruption. Gingrich’s position is arguably more defensible than Perry’s since he’s not calling for any taxpayer subsidies; Perry’s is arguably more defensible than Gingrich’s since he’s focused on kids who were brought here by their parents, not people who crossed the border illegally of their own volition. I think Newt’s going to get away with this partly because of the difference in tone — his answer seems even milder than it is thanks to the standard set by Perry’s “heartless” remark — and partly because, as we get closer to the general, the base will tolerate a bit more centrism on immigration in the name of wooing Hispanics in the general. We nominated McCain, didn’t we?

How we’re going to decide who’s been here “long enough,” I don’t know, just as I don’t know how sustainable it would be to have a two-tiered system of citizens and illegals made quasi-legal but presumably not allowed to vote under Gingrich’s system. The pressure to amnestize the latter would be enormous. We’ll hear more as Newt is inevitably grilled on this. But lest you think this will kill him among the base, here’s a tantalizing tidbit breaking late this evening from RCP. Is Newt about to land the Palin endorsement? Quote:

While Palin has characteristically kept her cards close to her chest, advisers suggest that the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee is likely to endorse before someone emerges as the inevitable nominee — and that Newt Gingrich appears to be best-positioned to secure her support.

“They speak very favorably of Newt and what they see as his credentials as compared to Perry and Romney,” one member of Palin’s inner circle said of the former Alaska governor and her husband, Todd, who has long served as her unofficial chief adviser.

Two clips here, one from the debate and the other, via Greg Hengler, shortly afterwards as he elaborates on the immigration answer.

Update: Since we’re on the subject of potentially game-changing endorsements, are you ready for this? From C-SPAN’s Steve Scully: “Sources indicate Mike Huckabee is set to endorse Mitt Romney, adding another key element to Romney’s Iowa strategy. Stay tuned”. How can Huck endorse Mitt before he hosts that candidate forum on Fox on December 3?

Update: Huckabee vehemently, and I do mean vehemently, denies that he’ll endorse anyone in the primary. Yikes.

Update: Philip Klein was in the spin room after the debate. Here we go:

“Newt Gingrich supported the 1986 amnesty act, and even though he conceded that was a mistake, he said that he was willing to repeat that mistake, by extending amnesty to immigrants who are illegally in the country today,” Romney adviser and spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom said in the spin room following the AEI/Heritage Foundation debate in Washington, DC. “Mitt Romney is against amnesty, and Newt Gingrich made it very clear he was for amnesty.”…

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.”

Not even a uniform national standard, then? Huh.

Follow the link and read the full exchange between Klein and Romney spokesman Fehrnstrom, who tried to duck his question about what Mitt would do with longtime illegals no fewer than six times.

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 6 7 8 9

I’m not saying that 80 year-olds should be deported, but are we really sinking to the leftist thinking of using emotion to decide issues and set policy? Is feel goodism the new conservative?

Monkeytoe on November 23, 2011 at 8:19 AM

Except I know this person. Newt’s right, there ought to be a way she can stay with her family legally. She doesn’t have to be given citizenship or voting rights, just a legal way to stay with her family.

Besides, If people who have been here 25+ yrs by Jan 1st 2012 are given a legal way to stay, not including citizenship or voting rights, it
will phase out that segment of society. And if we shut the border down and deny benefits and employment to the rest of the illegals, we come out ahead.

tinkerthinker on November 23, 2011 at 9:05 AM

Sorry, but yeah, it is a little crazy
:)

The fallout on this will be a percentage of Newt’s votes will be going to Romney & Cain (mostly). And Newt can’t afford to give up even 1-2 points.

whatcat on November 23, 2011 at 8:59 AM

No way man, do not let the MSM tell us who to vote for! I am still totally behind Newt. In fact, I think this will gain him 137% in the polls. They are still allowing the dead and people in Lebanon to vote, right?

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:05 AM

TheRightMan on November 23, 2011 at 8:51 AM

Perry’s stuff does suck. Gingrich on this issue does suck. Cain is just plain old ignorant and he likes to remain that way. Bachmann is not getting the support she deserves, and the only thing they got against her is her statement on Gardasil, seriously!?! Life just is not fair.
As for this dust up. If it was Perry, Cain, Romney, Paul, Huntsman that said this, I would be up in arms over it, for Cain I would call it disqualifying. But since it was my guy Newt, I got to say, it is the single most profound argument on the subject we have seen for 20 years if not longer.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 8:57 AM

I agree with that…but what Gingrich is now doing is the equivalent of twisting supporters’ arms up behind their/our backs and pushing us toward a door of his determination.

It’s a ghastly statement from Gingrich but as Rove well surmised a while ago, there’s no place else for Conservatives to go. I’m having revised considerations about supporting Bachmann this morning, just sayin’.

I’ve always favored Santorum on issues but I am guessing he’s mostly like Gingrich on this bogus complaint about the GOP being the bad guys and how we somehow disrespect “the fahhhmahhhhleeees”….

I’m so weary of hearing this. You want to live in and use the United States of America? First prove you’re qualified to do so and mind the requirements: obey our laws, that’s all most of us have ever asked of anyone else, and ourselves, just obey the laws and for those who refuse to, get out or we’ll be happy to show you a bus/train/plane/car to help you find the door.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:06 AM

I’m aware that supporting Romney is anathema to some here and on other sites, but, Romney actually has the most accurate perception on this issue of “selective prosecution” of some illegal aliens versus others, per what Gingrich is now advocating.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:08 AM

tinkerthinker on November 23, 2011 at 9:05 AM

Sounds much better than the death sentence argument. I agree, special extreme situations should have the ability to be exempted. I just will not tolerate the heartstrings arguments.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:08 AM

I hate to say it, but he is right. As much tough talk as there is about illegals, it would be very difficult to toss someone out who has been living an honest life.

bloggless on November 22, 2011 at 11:11 PM

Aaaiiiiiieeeee….

They’re not “living an honest life” IF they’re here illegally.

Stop this madness of word-twisting.

Illegal aliens are NOT some new found class of gerbils or kittens ready for adoption because they can hide well inside the nation’s covers.

Gingrich is really, really wrong on this issue and he’s sounding now like he’s jumped the rails of both common sense and academic accuracy.

It’s a wrong idea by Gingrich, it’s some sort of awful tasting wine he’s brewed that is not aimed at being palatable or make good gastric sense, it’s more like a poison he’s now challenging voters to drink just because he’s saying we ought to or else we’re “bad people”.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:12 AM

I’m aware that supporting Romney is anathema to some here and on other sites, but, Romney actually has the most accurate perception on this issue of “selective prosecution” of some illegal aliens versus others, per what Gingrich is now advocating.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:08 AM

If your supporting Romney for the right reasons, I personally do not think anyone should slam you on it. You are looking for a representative for you, so the only thing people should be doing is trying to inform you if your reasoning is incorrect. Same goes for any of the candidates or non-candidates if that is who a person supports.

Me personally, Romney just feels fake in every instance I have ever seen the man and listened to him. If he told me that he had a $5,000 check he would give me if I met him somewhere close by, I am not sure I would even bother to leave the house to go get it. I just would not beleive it.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:14 AM

I just will not tolerate the heartstrings arguments.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:08 AM

Not heartstrings… but reality…in her case.

tinkerthinker on November 23, 2011 at 9:15 AM

Bradky on November 23, 2011 at 8:41 AM

You’ve gone a bit off the beaten path to chastise folks. It doesn’t just apply to illegal immigration but you can’t discount the number of potential votes. They register dead people.

Cindy Munford on November 23, 2011 at 9:16 AM

tinkerthinker on November 23, 2011 at 9:05 AM

Sounds much better than the death sentence argument. I agree, special extreme situations should have the ability to be exempted. I just will not tolerate the heartstrings arguments.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:08 AM

HELLLOOOO, GOP? HELLOOOO?

What about requiring the nations of the respective “special extreme cases” of illegal aliens to pay for their upkeep and maintenance in the U.S.?

We could be sending an invoice every quarter to Mexico, Brazil, Guatemala, China, Colombia, Iran, Iraq, France, Russia…the list is endless of all the nations of origin of illegal aliens that should be held financially responsible for the expenses created by their citizens who are in the U.S. illegally.

For those “special extreme cases” such as the illegal alien who is paralyzed while in the U.S. illegally and now requires 25/7 medical, educational support just to survive and the “80 year old lady” who is sick and dependent yet has no one “back home” to “care for her”…

…send an invoice to their own governments and demand payment for their upkeep in and by the U.S.

Let some GOP candidate make that pledge to do so to the American voters and they’ll be in like Flint.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:17 AM

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:17 AM

Tx has already been there, done that…

tinkerthinker on November 23, 2011 at 9:21 AM

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:08 AM

If your supporting Romney for the right reasons, I personally do not think anyone should slam you on it. You are looking for a representative for you, so the only thing people should be doing is trying to inform you if your reasoning is incorrect. Same goes for any of the candidates or non-candidates if that is who a person supports.

Me personally, Romney just feels fake in every instance I have ever seen the man and listened to him. If he told me that he had a $5,000 check he would give me if I met him somewhere close by, I am not sure I would even bother to leave the house to go get it. I just would not beleive it.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:14 AM

Perhaps you haven’t read Hot Air comments for the past two years and more as to anyone who so much as suggests anything supportable about Romney? I exaggerate but just a tad here…

I have maintained a LACK of concerted support for any one GOP candidate because they’re all flawed, and yet, people attack anyone (here and on other sites) who they “suspect” just might be what they call “a Romney troll” or whatever…

I don’t support, in any dedicated fashion over others, Mitt Romney but I’m saying here that his take on this issue that Gingrich has proposed (and attempted to use to shame GOP voters) is more astute than Gingrich’s, and that Gingrich’s sounds weirdly non-astute in contradiction to his reputation of being above-average in insight. This time, he isn’t, he’s sounding more emotionally bent on some issue that defies his good standing otherwise.

But Romney has made a more academically astute statement about this issue as Gingrich has sounded far less capable than expected — Gingrich is actually saying that “some people” who are identified as being in violation of our law/s ought to receive a special pass from prosecution “just because” and if they don’t get that then us the voters are bad, wrong, unacceptable, whatever. It’s very weird emotional-shaming behavior by Gingrich and I don’t like it, nor respect it.

Romney’s approaching issues more academically, is what I’m saying, by comparison.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:24 AM

No matter what happens in 2012, the next president will be a liberal.

Crusty on November 23, 2011 at 9:25 AM

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:17 AM

Tx has already been there, done that…

tinkerthinker on November 23, 2011 at 9:21

AM

The nation needs to do that, is what I’m saying. It needs to be federal policy and process to hold other nations financially responsible for the costs in the U.S. for their citizens who are here illegally. ALL the costs, everything.

Either deport all of them (illegal aliens) or as to those selected out or special presents by Newt Gingrich and others like him, send an invoice to their own country’s governments for everything the U.S. is spending on the upkeep and maintenance of their citizens here illegally (for those who are deemed unable to be deported as in the case of that “80 year old lady” or those Gingrich thinks are somehow now OK because they’ve managed to remain here illegally for a long time).

This approach by Gingrich is really a bastardization of our Constitution. I’m shocked at his hubris and presumption here, just shocked by it…IF he backtracks on last night’s declaration as he made it there and then, I (honestly) cannot see ever deeming him completely trustworthy again. I can’t stand these “hidden agenda” shame campaign methods by some politicians, I just can’t stand them or their methods.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:30 AM

I didn’t think he would shoot himself in the foot this quickly, so people breaking the law for 25 years are better than those breaking it for 2??? How have those people breaking it for so long avoided detection??? Have they stolen identities of United States citizens, are they in prison??? He will take a beating on this and rightfully so!

Brilliant guy, but he has no principles. God help us all!

Africanus on November 23, 2011 at 9:31 AM

I’d still be shocked if Palin endorses in the primary, but if she endorses Newt, Romney’s toast.

davek70 on November 22, 2011 at 11:13 PM

Palin on the couch with Newt and El Diablo…

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:33 AM

I’d still be shocked if Palin endorses in the primary, but if she endorses Newt, Romney’s toast.

davek70 on November 22, 2011 at 11:13 PM

Palin on the couch with Newt and El Diablo…

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:35 AM

Immigration is the tip of the Newt iceberg.

Next comes cap and trade. Then comes insurance mandates.

But the real clincher is the ethics vioaltions. If the “Tea Party” realy thinks putting up the ultimate political beltway insider, lobbyist, retread, and a shamed former speaker who was drummed out of his speakership after a series of ethic violations and a $300,000 fine, the “Tea Party” has jumped the shark and really has no business in retail political

swamp_yankee on November 22, 2011 at 11:24 PM

O.K., I’m beginning to lose my enthusiasm for Gingrich.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:36 AM

The anchor baby magnet needs to go. As long as anyone with a uterus can cross the border and squirt a kid out of her crotch, jump on the gravy train, and then boo-hoo about breaking up families, this problem is only going to get worse…much worse.

I’m going to agree with the Dems on this one: We should be more like Europe. Just don’t tell the libs that they don’t hand out citizenship to anyone who happens to be born inside their borders.

Laura in Maryland on November 23, 2011 at 9:36 AM

I can see we’re still fretting about the theoretical effects of deportation on a few hypothetical grandmas. I suspect I’ll hear a different tune after you’ve stewed a few more years.

DFCtomm on November 23, 2011 at 9:37 AM

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:14 AM

I would like a detail description of the differences in Gov. Romney’s and Newt’s immigration policies.

Cindy Munford on November 23, 2011 at 9:40 AM

Michelle Bachmann voted for in-state tuition in 2005. Hypocrisy.

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/polinaut/archive/2011/09/in-state_tuitio.shtml

Also, in response to Gingrich’s local, community review boards deciding is ludicrous. No general standard? Also, there are many “friendly” local communities they can go to and get acceptance.

TriciaNC on November 23, 2011 at 9:44 AM

I would like a detail description of the differences in Gov. Romney’s and Newt’s immigration policies.

Cindy Munford on November 23, 2011 at 9:40 AM

Love to give it to you. But I do not pay one iota if attention to Romney. I do not trust him at all on any subject. At this point in time, there is nothing anyone could say to convince me that the man is honest, except for himself.

If he ever gave a true heartfelt speech where he clarified precisely what his changes in position have been and the underlying reasoning behind making those changes, I would give him a look.

As for Newt, my support is based on the teachings of the Cain supporters. It does not matter what he says, what others accuse him of, or how the planets align, my support is rock solid permanantly and the harder you try to make me not support him, the more insanely deep my support will become for him.

At least until I find someone I like more. Or Bachmann stages a comeback rally, I never give up on supporting her over all of them, unless Palin changes her mind and enters the race. But my support for Gingrich is eternal.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:47 AM

This discussion is ridiculous. When in the past 40 years have we ever had a policy of deporting ppl who have been here 25 years….NEVER. ….When Mitt Romney was gov of Mass did he ever do mass deportations??? NO… Please, anyone with a brain knows we will never round up over 5 million people and deport them…the discussion is idiotic

georgealbert on November 23, 2011 at 9:48 AM

Immigration is the tip of the Newt iceberg.

swamp_yankee on November 22, 2011 at 11:24 PM

Look … we know you’re a Romney guy – how do resolve Romney’s support for the Bush amnesty plan with his flip-flopping now on immigration and attacking Newt for having an even more CONSERVATIVE opininon on immigration than your boy did during the Bush years?

You Mittbots are funny as hell – seriously.

HondaV65 on November 23, 2011 at 9:49 AM

Tragic, how did you end up with one Rino and one Cino as final two?

NORUK on November 23, 2011 at 9:51 AM

Cindy Munford on November 23, 2011 at 9:40 AM

I’m going out on a limb here but listening to last night’s debate there was not a lot of difference..Bot wanted to seal the border and then sit down and discuss those already here..:)

Dire Straits on November 23, 2011 at 9:51 AM

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:47 AM

LOL! Very honest. Your problem with Romney, (trust), is mine also. As Ed stated he and his people went out of their way not to commit to the issue while complaining about other’s stances. Trust is an issue with me also and this has been a really good example.

Cindy Munford on November 23, 2011 at 9:51 AM

Please, anyone with a brain knows we will never round up over 5 million people and deport them…the discussion is idiotic

georgealbert on November 23, 2011 at 9:48 AM

Actually – it’s probably over 20 million.

HondaV65 on November 23, 2011 at 9:52 AM

As much as I dislike illegals and believe me it is an everyday aspect of life for me, I think Newt has something there. If we were to start enforcing the laws that are already on the books and maybe start using the E-verify system then a lot of this would take care of itself. Look at what has been going on in Alabama. Take away the opportunity to be on the public dole and vote and even gain employment then a good portion of them would be heading back across the border. Just put a one way swinging gate down there to let them back into their own country. I know this is a touchy subject with just about everyone but we have to try to do something and even with Newt’s views on this I still think he is the best person to lead us at this point in time.

jistincase on November 23, 2011 at 9:54 AM

NO… Please, anyone with a brain knows we will never round up over 5 million people and deport them…the discussion is idiotic

georgealbert on November 23, 2011 at 9:48 AM

I agree..Plus isn’t it IRONIC that we are having this discussion on Thanksgiving Holiday that was first celebrated by Anglo Saxon’s trespassing on the Indian’s land ..:)

PS..I might not have used great grammar herebut my point is good..:)

Dire Straits on November 23, 2011 at 9:57 AM

I don’t have time this morning to read all the posts, so I will just state my thoughts on illegals.
1) I don’t see 12 million+ illegals in an enforced march towards the border. Not practical….or humane.

Already been brought up and dismissed in it’s various strawman forms (jackbooted thugs dragging 120 year old Grannies to boxcars and such).

2) This country’s government and citizens have shown complaisence in allowing this to go on for decades pretty much unchallenged.

Been brought up. If you forget to lock a window and some thief uses it to enter and burglarize your place, your valuables do not become his.

Therefore, there needs to be a path to citizenship for those that have exhibited ties to their communities with jobs, schools, churches, etc.
Amjean on November 23, 2011 at 8:05 AM

Also been brought up; there has always been a “path to citizenship”, only the criminally-minded think it doesn’t apply to them.

whatcat on November 23, 2011 at 8:16 AM

You obviously do not know many citizen hispanics and/or illegals in our society. Also, you obviously have never been an employer.
Therefore, you know little. A little hint….very few things in
life are black and white; most a varying shades of grey.

The fact that anything I stated was “already brought up” seems
to annoy you because you had the need to comment about it. Therefore, I have two words for you and they aren’t “let’s dance”.

Amjean on November 23, 2011 at 9:57 AM

As for Newt, my support is based on the teachings of the Cain supporters. It does not matter what he says, what others accuse him of, or how the planets align, my support is rock solid permanantly and the harder you try to make me not support him, the more insanely deep my support will become for him.

At least until I find someone I like more. Or Bachmann stages a comeback rally, I never give up on supporting her over all of them, unless Palin changes her mind and enters the race. But my support for Gingrich is eternal.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:47 AM

That isn’t rational.

And some people actually are shocked when others among us assert a cult-movement exists regarding certain public figures.

If you refuse all adaptations based upon changing conditions and discovery of previously un-disclosed positions, affiliations, incentives, etc., well, that’s not an indication of a rational, reasonable state of mind from any voter as to any political (or other public) figure.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:57 AM

Look … we know you’re a Romney guy – how do resolve Romney’s support for the Bush amnesty plan with his flip-flopping now on immigration and attacking Newt for having an even more CONSERVATIVE opininon on immigration than your boy did during the Bush years?

You Mittbots are funny as hell – seriously.

HondaV65 on November 23, 2011 at 9:49 AM

What to do what to do? If you can’t find a good man, and I think it’s safe to say none of these guys, even Bachmann is the kind of guy we’re looking for, then it’s time to take the best politician. I think that in some ways a politician is the most representative of the voters. A good man is going to follow his moral imperatives, but a good politician is going to do just what you(polls) tell him to do, and I think it’s time to look for the guy that is going to be the easiest to influence.

DFCtomm on November 23, 2011 at 9:58 AM

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:47 AM

Substitute “Obama” in there and you’d be the average Obama voter.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:59 AM

Maybe Newt is on to something with the local government thing-something disturbing. Last year I lived in a neighborhood full of illegal aliens. They were all on welfare, living in section 8 housing. Their kids were in gangs, nobody even tried to speak English, the cops were always being called, their yards were full of trash and one was constantly having this ongoing yard sale that drove everyone else crazy. They had scary dogs. What is my point? I came with no pre-conceived notions of illegals and left with bad ones- they were not good citizens or neighbors. I am more than willing to say that this was my experience in a not so great part of town, and it could be different elsewhere. But if these people can then go to a local government and get legal status, what is going to motivate them to become good citizens? I see it as a way to have legal barrios in every town.

Kristamatic on November 23, 2011 at 10:00 AM

…I think it’s time to look for the guy that is going to be the easiest to influence.

DFCtomm on November 23, 2011 at 9:58 AM

Hmmm…

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 10:00 AM

I don’t really care who most of these people endorse. If Palin was to endorse Cain, Perry, or Bachmann I might vote that way since those tend to be my top three right now.

Romney is getting endorsements because of establishment republicans are making it worthwhile for people.

jeffn21 on November 23, 2011 at 10:01 AM

Mitt Romney on immigration …

Here

Here

and, let’s not forget … “I’m running for office!”

and a juicy Democratic attack ad on Romney’s immigration position here …

Looks like Newt’s position makes him the more “electable” candidate for the General Election.

HondaV65 on November 23, 2011 at 10:02 AM

Dire Straits on November 23, 2011 at 9:57 AM

Amjean on November 23, 2011 at 9:57 AM

Why introduce and attempt to assert issues of race and ethnicity here?

It’s about behavior. By human beings. Good behavior and bad behavior and what our nation should do to apply or not apply existing laws to address those good and bad behaviors.

Illegal immigration is about behavior. It’s not about ethnicity. It’s not about race. It’s about behavior.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 10:04 AM

That isn’t rational.

And some people actually are shocked when others among us assert a cult-movement exists regarding certain public figures.

If you refuse all adaptations based upon changing conditions and discovery of previously un-disclosed positions, affiliations, incentives, etc., well, that’s not an indication of a rational, reasonable state of mind from any voter as to any political (or other public) figure.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:57 AM

Substitute “Obama” in there and you’d be the average Obama voter.

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 9:59 AM

LOL. It is not my true view. It is why I wear it on my sleave. As a badge of badgering against those who do hold that view with newt, Cain, Perry, Romney or anyone. As the facts change, I change my views, and many times my supported candidate. Bachmann has even been getting some negative points recently. In fact every candidate that is in positive teritory have been.

I was imagining last night about that 1.2B missing at that one company, how much of that is going into escrow accounts to be handed to GOP candidates who fall on their sword helping Obama get reelected. It could easily include every last one of them, except maybe Romney, he is already too rich to be bribed, right? Maybe Paul is immune as well, the insane usually are.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 10:07 AM

Here is a question for everyone who agrees with Newt.

How do you know how long an illegal has been in the US? Do we take his word?

They can show job records, but those job records will be a made up SSN or someone who is dead or just had their identity stolen.

Do we ask friends and neighbors? As if their friends won’t lie for them.

There is no way for someone who came here illegally to prove that they have been here for 25 years. But if we remove any possibility for work for illegals and increase the number of legal Mexicans and other nations south of the border to become citizens, then the problem is solved. There will still be illegals who build fences for people for cash, etc. But these little jobs won’t be enough o allow them to feed their families. They will be forced to return home.

jeffn21 on November 23, 2011 at 10:08 AM

Maybe Newt is on to something with the local government thing-something disturbing. Last year I lived in a neighborhood full of illegal aliens. They were all on welfare, living in section 8 housing. Their kids were in gangs, nobody even tried to speak English, the cops were always being called, their yards were full of trash and one was constantly having this ongoing yard sale that drove everyone else crazy. They had scary dogs. What is my point? I came with no pre-conceived notions of illegals and left with bad ones- they were not good citizens or neighbors. I am more than willing to say that this was my experience in a not so great part of town, and it could be different elsewhere. But if these people can then go to a local government and get legal status, what is going to motivate them to become good citizens? I see it as a way to have legal barrios in every town.

Kristamatic on November 23, 2011 at 10:00 AM

I am having a similar experience in my pretty much certain to be all legal citizens neighborhood. Bought a house there, figured they would leave me alone. I guess that was a pipe dream. Anyways, it is not just illegals.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 10:11 AM

Last year I lived in a neighborhood full of illegal aliens. They were all on welfare, living in section 8 housing. Their kids were in gangs, nobody even tried to speak English, the cops were always being called, their yards were full of trash and one was constantly having this ongoing yard sale that drove everyone else crazy. T

Kristamatic on November 23, 2011 at 10:00 AM

Those were citizens, not illegals.

Hiya Ciska on November 23, 2011 at 10:14 AM

We have to be honest, there’s only one real part of this debate that is cut and dry and that’s the border. We can’t clean up the mess in the basement if we still have a busted pipe we haven’t stopped yet.

Everything else after that is harder to do. If you’ve had someone who’s been in the country illegally, established a life for themselves, did not sponge off the rest of us as actually contributed something to benefit the rest of us (like paying taxes, or something, I’m spitballing here.) Is it really nessecary to just throw someone who’s actually been productive and someone we could use away like that?

Does that person deserve to get off scot-free? That’s the one question I can answer, no.

If everyone here believes that people do deserve second chances to make things right, how are you going to do that by tearing them away from the lives they established and sending them back to places where they have nothing. This is where liberals own the argument saying that we conservatives are heartless.

I would think a god idea in cases like that would be to give temporary conditional stays so they can file papers for legal residency and incur a penalty to pay as some pennance for their illegal status, and if they don’t do it by the time the stay expires, then deport them. If you’re for second chances, what would be wrong with that?

Pcoop on November 23, 2011 at 10:15 AM

We are not going to deport 12 million people. That may be desirable for many, but it is never going to happen. Just the images of sweeping through cities with vans and busses and armed SWAT teams would be impossible for most Americans to live with. Newt’s idea is one I’ve stated here many times. No citizenship for the illegal,ever.This closes the door to the real and valid GOP fear, that amnesty will be used to garner 10 million new and perennial Dem voters.Illegal immigration is the pressure release land mine the GOP has stepped on. Newt’s idea is the only way of getting off the mine without being blown away.

xkaydet65 on November 23, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Lourdes on November 23, 2011 at 10:04 AM

I see your point and agree..I was NOT trying to invoke race..I was just pointing out we are having a discussion on illegal immigration on Thanksgivig Holidays when our forefathers were “trepassing”..:)

Dire Straits on November 23, 2011 at 10:23 AM

Sorry folks, but amnesty is not the solution and will not earn my vote. I don’t care how long you have lived in the United States, if you’re here illegally, the only path to citizenship is to leave (voluntarily or forcibly) and to get in line.

Any candidate who supports amnesty will not get my vote.

jackal40 on November 23, 2011 at 10:35 AM

Here’s another question to ponder, does the illegal immigrant deserve 100% of the blame if they are merely taking advantage of a system that allowed them to stay here for 25 years? Who else is responsible for that? It does take two to tango?

If someone dangled a carrot like that in front of your face then looked away when you did grab it, you’re not free from guilt but you certainly don’t deserve all the blame.

Pcoop on November 23, 2011 at 10:37 AM

Here’s another question to ponder, does the illegal immigrant deserve 100% of the blame if they are merely taking advantage of a system that allowed them to stay here for 25 years? Who else is responsible for that? It does take two to tango?

If someone dangled a carrot like that in front of your face then looked away when you did grab it, you’re not free from guilt but you certainly don’t deserve all the blame.

Pcoop on November 23, 2011 at 10:37 AM

Does the rapist who targets women who walk down dark alleys deserve 100% of the blame?

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 10:40 AM

Sorry folks, but amnesty is not the solution and will not earn my vote. I don’t care how long you have lived in the United States, if you’re here illegally, the only path to citizenship is to leave (voluntarily or forcibly) and to get in line.

Any candidate who supports amnesty will not get my vote.

jackal40 on November 23, 2011 at 10:35 AM

If we have to kick you out, I say no hope for you.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 10:41 AM

We are not going to deport 12 million people. That may be desirable for many, but it is never going to happen. Just the images of sweeping through cities with vans and busses and armed SWAT teams would be impossible for most Americans to live with.

xkaydet65 on November 23, 2011 at 10:18 AM

Straw-man.

Nobody ever argues for such things. We argue for making the border more secure and making it more difficult for illegals to stay here illegally.

Nobody argues for swat teams sweeping through cities rounding up millions of people.

I don’t know why the silly straw-men arguments are so central to the pro-illegal-immigration crowd.

Monkeytoe on November 23, 2011 at 10:42 AM

I see your point and agree..I was NOT trying to invoke race..I was just pointing out we are having a discussion on illegal immigration on Thanksgivig Holidays when our forefathers were “trepassing”..:)

Dire Straits on November 23, 2011 at 10:23 AM

Crappy argument, they lost, we won. Mexico lost we won. People have been invading each other since the human race began. I’m not apologizing for it, wasn’t there. We can go round and round about this. These emotional arguments are tiring and what keep getting us into these messes. Move on, it’s history nothing we can do can to it. BTW there are always two sides to the story.

gator70 on November 23, 2011 at 10:44 AM

Here’s another question to ponder, does the illegal immigrant deserve 100% of the blame if they are merely taking advantage of a system that allowed them to stay here for 25 years? Who else is responsible for that? It does take two to tango?

If someone dangled a carrot like that in front of your face then looked away when you did grab it, you’re not free from guilt but you certainly don’t deserve all the blame.

Pcoop on November 23, 2011 at 10:37 AM

I agree.

tinkerthinker on November 23, 2011 at 10:47 AM

gator70 on November 23, 2011 at 10:44 AM

You have a point..I’m not complaining they lost..I’m glad we won..:)

Dire Straits on November 23, 2011 at 10:48 AM

As for Newt, my support is based on the teachings of the Cain supporters. It does not matter what he says, what others accuse him of, or how the planets align, my support is rock solid permanantly and the harder you try to make me not support him, the more insanely deep my support will become for him.

At least until I find someone I like more. Or Bachmann stages a comeback rally, I never give up on supporting her over all of them, unless Palin changes her mind and enters the race. But my support for Gingrich is eternal.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:47 AM

‘My support for Gingrich is eternal’? Wow. So tell me, where does this cultlike adoration come from, exactly? Is there something I’m missing in the whole Newt experience? I don’t know about anyone else, but whenever I see Newt I see a grandiose, porcine windbag whose shrill, whiny voice goes up two octaves whenever he’s peeved or slighted.

Seriously, though, does Newt know about your feelings? Do you write him long, deeply personal letters? And are you aware he is entitled to Secret Service protection if he wins the nomination?

troyriser_gopftw on November 23, 2011 at 11:01 AM

Its for reason I dont like newt. They broke the law and he wants to reward them by letting illegals stay.

ColdWarrior57 on November 23, 2011 at 11:04 AM

Dire Straits on November 23, 2011 at 10:48 AM

I apologize if I came off harsh, like everyone else immigration issues make my blood boil.

gator70 on November 23, 2011 at 11:08 AM

As for Newt, my support is based on the teachings of the Cain supporters. It does not matter what he says, what others accuse him of, or how the planets align, my support is rock solid permanantly and the harder you try to make me not support him, the more insanely deep my support will become for him.

At least until I find someone I like more. Or Bachmann stages a comeback rally, I never give up on supporting her over all of them, unless Palin changes her mind and enters the race. But my support for Gingrich is eternal.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 9:47 AM

‘My support for Gingrich is eternal’? Wow. So tell me, where does this cultlike adoration come from, exactly? Is there something I’m missing in the whole Newt experience? I don’t know about anyone else, but whenever I see Newt I see a grandiose, porcine windbag whose shrill, whiny voice goes up two octaves whenever he’s peeved or slighted.

Seriously, though, does Newt know about your feelings? Do you write him long, deeply personal letters? And are you aware he is entitled to Secret Service protection if he wins the nomination?

troyriser_gopftw on November 23, 2011 at 11:01 AM

Yeah, nothing like making troyriser_gopftw look like an utter fool to make a person’s day. Is reading comprehension a weak aspect of your education? English is a tertiary language at best for you? I know it is hard to understand that someone can say something that is not true with the intention of making fun, but seriously, somewhere in your life someone must have pointed this form of communication out to you, no?

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Those were citizens, not illegals.

Hiya Ciska on November 23, 2011 at 10:14 AM

Not necessarily. There are many illegal aliens receiving taxpayer-funded benefits to which they are not entitled under the law. They obtain them using phony ID documents, or they simply falsely claim U.S. citizenship when filling out the forms. They know there is no verification.

AZCoyote on November 23, 2011 at 11:13 AM

Those were citizens, not illegals.

Hiya Ciska on November 23, 2011 at 10:14 AM

No, they were pretty open about being here illegally. The town I was living in is an openly “sanctuary” town. We ended up homeschooling because the local elementary school was so full of Spanish speaking illegal kids that they had to spend most of their time teaching the kids English, and they neglected other subjects. I get it that this could happen in any neighborhood, citizens or no- but they were all on welfare, and it’s just not right. I know anecdotes don’t mean much, I just wonder how many other people in this bad economy are having the same experience that we did. It did not make me feel warm toward Newt.

Kristamatic on November 23, 2011 at 11:17 AM

Not necessarily. There are many illegal aliens receiving taxpayer-funded benefits to which they are not entitled under the law. They obtain them using phony ID documents, or they simply falsely claim U.S. citizenship when filling out the forms. They know there is no verification.

AZCoyote on November 23, 2011 at 11:13 AM

What benefits are you talking about?

Seroiusly – I hear this all the time, they’re stealing benefits but … what benefits are they stealing? In-State Tuition in Texas? That’s not “stealing” – that’s Texas law.

Food Stamps? Maybe the answer is to abolish that program? Or – at the very least, put restrictions on it and a stricter requirement for verification?

People take advantage of their advantages – this is human nature – you will not change it.

But you can take away the “advantage”.

HondaV65 on November 23, 2011 at 11:21 AM

gator70 on November 23, 2011 at 11:08 AM

No problem..This issue has become a “swamp”..I should have avoided it..:)

Dire Straits on November 23, 2011 at 11:22 AM

No, they were pretty open about being here illegally. The town I was living in is an openly “sanctuary” town. We ended up homeschooling because the local elementary school was so full of Spanish speaking illegal kids that they had to spend most of their time teaching the kids English, and they neglected other subjects. I get it that this could happen in any neighborhood, citizens or no- but they were all on welfare, and it’s just not right. I know anecdotes don’t mean much, I just wonder how many other people in this bad economy are having the same experience that we did. It did not make me feel warm toward Newt.

Kristamatic on November 23, 2011 at 11:17 AM

How are the illegals responsible for your town’s lousy “sanctuary” policy?

How are the illegals resposible for the government’s failure to properly ID welfare recipients? Why not end welfare altogether? Problem solved. I don’t like a US Citizen sitting on his couch all day and collecting welfare either.

Kill two birds with one stone.

HondaV65 on November 23, 2011 at 11:25 AM

Romney loves amnesty:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjo6GXSqIN8

Ouch.

Punchenko on November 23, 2011 at 11:28 AM

No humanity exists in amnesty towards illegals, whether given to recent or old entrants. If one wishes to consider it heartless to do mass deportations (and/or otherwise denying amnesty), then one must be willing to witness human trafficking across those same borders. Justifying amnesty for this batch of illegals only encourages the next batch.

The only path to legality is through deportation, a more secure border, and the enforcement of existing laws – not amnesty. Even if it means that the US finds a way to deport them all or to induce self-deportation, it would be a path that denies amnesty.

I’d like to have humanity, but the existing evidence at the border says no every time.

sethstorm on November 23, 2011 at 11:29 AM

What benefits are you talking about?

Seroiusly – I hear this all the time, they’re stealing benefits but … what benefits are they stealing? In-State Tuition in Texas? That’s not “stealing” – that’s Texas law.

Food Stamps? Maybe the answer is to abolish that program? Or – at the very least, put restrictions on it and a stricter requirement for verification?

People take advantage of their advantages – this is human nature – you will not change it.

But you can take away the “advantage”.

HondaV65 on November 23, 2011 at 11:21 AM

All the benefits. The people who are given the task to distribute the benefits have one incentive, and that is to not rock the boat. If a person is denied benefits that should get benefits, and complains, that is rocking the boat and making trouble for the bureacrat, but if they give someone who does not deserve benefits, who is going to tell? This goes from rent assistance, utility assistance, food stamps, WIC or what ever it is today and the list goes on I am sure.

My wife is filipina, and she has some friends who are not yet citizens, when you come to the country like that, you sign an affidavit saying you will not be on any welfare benefits. But these people lie about thier citizenship and their income and get those welfare payments. When you go to tell someone about this at the office, they assure you something will be done, and yet 6 months later that person is still collecting.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 11:30 AM

See … this is where Conservatives totally miss the bus on immigration.

Put up a fence (if you’re Herman Cain – you want an electric fence that kills people – LOL) … put up a fence though … and quarter military troops on the southern border … and you’ll solve the immigration problem.

Uhm … NO.

Now, I’m not AGAINST some kind of a fence – though a fence isn’t going to be practical for the entire stretch of the US / Mexican border. But a fence with technology behind it – and some beefed up manpower on the border is cool with me. It’s cool with Rick Perry too – and it’s probably also cool with Newt. We know it’s cool with Rick Santorum because he authored a bill as a Senator doing exactly this.

But that still won’t stop illegal immigration.

If you’re going to stop illegal aliens – you’re going to have to address the reasons they’re coming here. They come here for work – so a guest worker program is probably a good thing. Some say they come here for “benefits” … get rid of the benefits.

What you’re left with is WORK and the promise of a BETTER LIFE here in the US. I think a lot of the immigration at this point in time is simply a refugee flight from the unsafe areas of Mexico due to drug cartels. Get rid of the prohibition on drugs and you’ll kill those cartels. The war on drugs has been a bigger failure than the war on alcohol was during prohibition. Heh – and yeah, predictably we had violent “alcohol cartels” during the prohibition era which totally evaporated when we legalized alcohol again. Go figure.

Same will happen if you legalize, or decriminalize drugs.

Reagan – in a debate against George H.W. Bush sided with Bush on educating the kids of illegals – Reagan also elaborated on the point that – we’re going to have to do something to make conditions better in Mexico if we want to stem the tide of illegal immigration. We have no problem with Canadian illegals – because life in Canada is good.

People who think the solution to the problem is fences and manpower are sorely wrong.

HondaV65 on November 23, 2011 at 11:37 AM

Newt for amnesty criticized from the Rahmney camp? what arrogance from MItt and obcviously panic. He will regret this one.

He’s losing it. Go back and read Romney’s saying you can’t deport 11 million people when he was for amnesty. He is just a inept deceiver (unlike Clinton and Obama who take lying to the professional level) and Ramnny will get taken apart on this silly attack (whereupon he’ll claim an undisciplined staff member said it without his knowledge.) They are such transparent clowns. Tis sad that deception is the main mode in running for office. That’s why Sarah was so refreshing, and why they dumped her quick -can’t have an honest person exposing their games can we?

Don L on November 23, 2011 at 11:38 AM

Newt for amnesty criticized from the Rahmney camp? what arrogance from MItt and obcviously panic. He will regret this one.
Don L on November 23, 2011 at 11:38 AM

Exactly.

rrpjr on November 23, 2011 at 11:41 AM

Newt for amnesty criticized from the Rahmney camp? what arrogance from MItt and obcviously panic. He will regret this one.
Don L on November 23, 2011 at 11:38 AM

Exactly.

rrpjr on November 23, 2011 at 11:41 AM

A pandering Mitt is better than a truth-telling Newt. Newt is finished, over, done.

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 11:43 AM

All the benefits. The people who are given the task to distribute the benefits have one incentive, and that is to not rock the boat. If a person is denied benefits that should get benefits, and complains, that is rocking the boat and making trouble for the bureacrat, but if they give someone who does not deserve benefits, who is going to tell? This goes from rent assistance, utility assistance, food stamps, WIC or what ever it is today and the list goes on I am sure.

My wife is filipina, and she has some friends who are not yet citizens, when you come to the country like that, you sign an affidavit saying you will not be on any welfare benefits. But these people lie about thier citizenship and their income and get those welfare payments. When you go to tell someone about this at the office, they assure you something will be done, and yet 6 months later that person is still collecting.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 11:30 AM

Well, you are complaining about a problem with politicians who “don’t want to rock the boat” … I’m assuming these people who don’t want to rock the boat are CITIZENS? Usually someone WE ELECT?

Mississippi just put in place voter ID. You can’t get a driver’s licence here in Louisiana without a social security card and a few other means of identification. This is all to prevent illegals from getting Driver’s Lincenses – because a DL is pretty much a gateway to all the free and lovely things in American that citizens enjoy.

So again – exactly how is this an illegal problem?

If I have ants coming into my house to eat food off the floor – who should I be mad at? The ants? Or maybe the people in my house dropping food on the floor?

HondaV65 on November 23, 2011 at 11:44 AM

LOL! I just love the hardliners here. I truly think they’d love to shoot illegals as they cross the border.
They compare the misdemeanor of being an illegal who has lived here for 2 decades to murderers, rapists, spies and whatnot. They won’t tolerate the “heartstrings” argument! I’ve got news, clowns, it ain’t heartstrings it’s reality. Hispanics are by far the fastest growing demographic in the country. We’re talking American citizens of which many have illegal parents or grandparents. Culturally, they are conservative, but vote Democrat to protect their family and perceived anti-Latino bias from Republicans. But keep stamping your feet and shouting,“DEPORT’EM ALL!!” at the top of your lungs and soon you’ll be luck if you can elect a conservative dog catcher.
The very first thing, before we can even decide what to do about the illegals in country is as Rick Perry said,”Secure the border first!”.

cartooner on November 23, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Newt is the kind of guy that will arrogantly explain to you that not only is it raining, we need the rain, rain is good for you and you must support rain while he is p***ing on your shoes.

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 11:46 AM

LOL! I just love the hardliners here. I truly think they’d love to shoot illegals as they cross the border.
They compare the misdemeanor of being an illegal who has lived here for 2 decades to murderers, rapists, spies and whatnot. They won’t tolerate the “heartstrings” argument! I’ve got news, clowns, it ain’t heartstrings it’s reality. Hispanics are by far the fastest growing demographic in the country. We’re talking American citizens of which many have illegal parents or grandparents. Culturally, they are conservative, but vote Democrat to protect their family and perceived anti-Latino bias from Republicans. But keep stamping your feet and shouting,“DEPORT’EM ALL!!” at the top of your lungs and soon you’ll be luck if you can elect a conservative dog catcher.
The very first thing, before we can even decide what to do about the illegals in country is as Rick Perry said,”Secure the border first!”.

cartooner on November 23, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Illegals are more dangerous to the country as a whole than murderers and rapists. It’s unlikely that these two groups will destroy the country as a whole, mu the illegals will. Their evil presence has already changed the politics of the country in the liberal direction. It’s now require to pander in many counties and states to get elected. The illegal-supporting Mafia is in charge and you dare not cross it. They will recall one of the most powerful politicians in Arizona for daring to enforce the law. This is a plague and it needs to be stopped. NOW!

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Does the rapist who targets women who walk down dark alleys deserve 100% of the blame?

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 10:40 AM

Apples and oranges.

You’re comparing someone taking advantage of a broken system to the violent assault on an individual. While both are illegal activites, they’re not the same type of illegal activities.

My point is while many of us are going after the person who here illegally, who’s going after the person who lets it happen? If you go after those people, you might cut down on the ones who will take advantage of that situation.

Pcoop on November 23, 2011 at 11:51 AM

Yeah, nothing like making troyriser_gopftw look like an utter fool to make a person’s day. Is reading comprehension a weak aspect of your education? English is a tertiary language at best for you? I know it is hard to understand that someone can say something that is not true with the intention of making fun, but seriously, somewhere in your life someone must have pointed this form of communication out to you, no?

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 11:10 AM

Sorry, I’m part German and Native American, two peoples not known for their rollicking sense of humor (unless you count invading France as funny), so I missed the snark. Been reading too many Ron Paul supporter postings, lately. Now that’s cultlike adoration.

troyriser_gopftw on November 23, 2011 at 11:51 AM

Krieble Foundation Red Card Plan here:

krieble.org

Interesting read with some great ideas. Nothing is perfect, though.

the_stoics on November 23, 2011 at 11:52 AM

My point is while many of us are going after the person who here illegally, who’s going after the person who lets it happen? If you go after those people, you might cut down on the ones who will take advantage of that situation.

Pcoop on November 23, 2011 at 11:51 AM

Go after Newt. He is the person who will let more of this happen. This is your chance to stop it from happening. Elect a conservative, not a progressive pretender.

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 11:54 AM

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 11:49 AM

I’m against illegal immigration and I don’t favor amnesty. I do favor being able to refuse them services that the courts have mandated we give them. However I do believe you are a loon.

cartooner on November 23, 2011 at 11:55 AM

And who is the real conservative in this, Igor? I guarantee whoever you’re backing has some anti-conservative baggage that they’re carrying around.

the_stoics on November 23, 2011 at 11:57 AM

I say, let them stay as “registered workers”.

If they stay & choose to be “registered workers”, they give up any chance of ever being a citizen of the U.S. and they never have voting rights.

Employers who hire them should have to provide healthcare insurance and education for the children.

That should solve the illegal alien problem.

stenwin77 on November 23, 2011 at 12:02 PM

Those of you Romney supporters (including Romney himself) who were ripping on Newt last night for his answer. Well, please watch this and shut up.

The only difference between Newt and your guy on immigration is that Newt had the guts to state his plan.

Doesn’t it ever make you feel guilty for supporting such a weasel? I mean, someone who would stand there and call out Newt for stating what, essentially, is his own plan?

29Victor on November 23, 2011 at 12:05 PM

I’m against illegal immigration and I don’t favor amnesty. I do favor being able to refuse them services that the courts have mandated we give them. However I do believe you are a loon.

cartooner on November 23, 2011 at 11:55 AM

Excellent reasoned argument dealing with my points, to prove that I’m a loon. I’d like you point out the effect of the murder/rape lobby on the American politics compared to the ever-increasing La Razization.

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 12:07 PM

Sorry, I’m part German and Native American, two peoples not known for their rollicking sense of humor (unless you count invading France as funny), so I missed the snark. Been reading too many Ron Paul supporter postings, lately. Now that’s cultlike adoration.

troyriser_gopftw on November 23, 2011 at 11:51 AM

Sorry about that. I get some attacks on myself and let it get personal sometimes. Maybe often even.

I was trying to make a joke about those people that you are talking about. nothing will change their minds.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Newt is the kind of guy that will arrogantly explain to you that not only is it raining, we need the rain, rain is good for you and you must support rain while he is p***ing on your shoes.

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Yeah. But he’d sound pretty awesome while he was explaining it. Probably discuss the time Millard Fillmore pee’d on Zachary Taylor’s shoes while negotiating statehood for California.

29Victor on November 23, 2011 at 12:09 PM

And who is the real conservative in this, Igor? I guarantee whoever you’re backing has some anti-conservative baggage that they’re carrying around.

the_stoics on November 23, 2011 at 11:57 AM

I’m backing Cain, but would be happy with Bachmann because she is more conservative. I know every detail of Cain’s non-conservative baggage, but I believe his core and instincts are conservative.

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 12:09 PM

HondaV65 on November 23, 2011 at 11:44 AM

I am talking about the permanant government here, not the voted into office one. These people are the ones you see when you get a driver’s license, have to pay a late bill to the city, need to talk to to get your birth certificate and so forth. Their incentives are to always give the benefit out, as then no one complains, and they do not risk anything, because who ever gets in trouble when it is found out about mass government program fraud? No one does. But deny a rightful benefit to someone because they made an error on their paperwork and you could be in trouble.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Yeah. But he’d sound pretty awesome while he was explaining it. Probably discuss the time Millard Fillmore pee’d on Zachary Taylor’s shoes while negotiating statehood for California.

29Victor on November 23, 2011 at 12:09 PM

Yes, he is so quick on his feet, and so INTELLIGENT, guaranteed to beat Obama in any debate. It doesn’t really matter what he is arguing for, he is just TOTALLY convincing while doing it. I mean he convinced Freddie Mac that they needed to pay 1.5 million for his historical perspective.

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 12:12 PM

I am talking about the permanant government here, not the voted into office one. These people are the ones you see when you get a driver’s license, have to pay a late bill to the city, need to talk to to get your birth certificate and so forth. Their incentives are to always give the benefit out, as then no one complains, and they do not risk anything, because who ever gets in trouble when it is found out about mass government program fraud? No one does. But deny a rightful benefit to someone because they made an error on their paperwork and you could be in trouble.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 12:11 PM

This is a structural problem with democracies: any particular benefit is more important to the group fighting for it that the cost is important to the society as a whole. This is how we always wind up being on the edge of bankruptcy.

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Igor, you’re aware of Cain’s baggage and I’m certainly well aware of Newt’s. We’ve both chosen a horse and I’m sticking with that until he wins or loses the nomination. If he loses, I will enthusiastically and wholeheartedly back whoever the nominee is. The question is, will you and others that have chosen somebody other than Newt do the same?

the_stoics on November 23, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Gingrich is right.

unclesmrgol on November 23, 2011 at 12:15 PM

I have a contractor who works for me from time to time who is illegal but has been applying for green card/ citizenship for over 13 years. (Now, I don’t know the ins and outs of the immigration logistics, so perhaps he’s just not that good at it.) He is more honorable, decent, hard working, and just plain skilled than any other contractor I’ve ever worked with.

Are these the people we are supposed to hate? Can’t we be for sensible immigration laws rather than being branded the party that hates everybody?

Personally, I don’t think we should allow any illegals in the country. We must aspire to be a nation of laws. We are a nation of immigrants. Let’s take all the idiot bureaucrats working on god-knows-what and retask them to open the spigots and create legal immigration channels.

Being angry at my contractor, who provides real value, and trying to deport him and his family may not be a sensible approach.

Pablo Snooze on November 23, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Gingrich is right.

unclesmrgol on November 23, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Illegal aliens totally agree with you.

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Excellent reasoned argument dealing with my points, to prove that I’m a loon. I’d like you point out the effect of the murder/rape lobby on the American politics compared to the ever-increasing La Razization.

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 12:07 PM

Your one to cry about not dealing with points. Did you even comprehend what I posted at 11:45 AM? None of your so-called “points” took any of those facts into account. Your comparison of illegal immigrants to rapists and murderers is a non sequitur at best, but looney just the same.

cartooner on November 23, 2011 at 12:17 PM

I have a contractor who works for me from time to time who is illegal but has been applying for green card/ citizenship for over 13 years. (Now, I don’t know the ins and outs of the immigration logistics, so perhaps he’s just not that good at it.) He is more honorable, decent, hard working, and just plain skilled than any other contractor I’ve ever worked with.

Are these the people we are supposed to hate? Can’t we be for sensible immigration laws rather than being branded the party that hates everybody?

Personally, I don’t think we should allow any illegals in the country. We must aspire to be a nation of laws. We are a nation of immigrants. Let’s take all the idiot bureaucrats working on god-knows-what and retask them to open the spigots and create legal immigration channels.

Being angry at my contractor, who provides real value, and trying to deport him and his family may not be a sensible approach.

Pablo Snooze on November 23, 2011 at 12:15 PM

It’s obvious that many illegal aliens provide real value. There are whole industries that employ nothing but illegal aliens. The situation is killing the country though, so you have to decide what to do.

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 12:18 PM

Your one to cry about not dealing with points. Did you even comprehend what I posted at 11:45 AM? None of your so-called “points” took any of those facts into account. Your comparison of illegal immigrants to rapists and murderers is a non sequitur at best, but looney just the same.

cartooner on November 23, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Yeah, speaking of rape, I truly understood your point. “We’ve already been overrun, so just relax and enjoy it. Fighting will only make you suffer more.”

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 12:21 PM

This is a structural problem with democracies: any particular benefit is more important to the group fighting for it that the cost is important to the society as a whole. This is how we always wind up being on the edge of bankruptcy.

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 12:14 PM

But it makes allowing illegal aliens less tenable than otherwise. Not that I think there should be any room for allowing illegal aliens to remain in the country. But when the argument comes to whether illegals are getting benefits they are not intended to, yes they are, and in large numbers. The system is incentivised to make certain of it.

astonerii on November 23, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Yeah, speaking of rape, I truly understood your point. “We’ve already been overrun, so just relax and enjoy it. Fighting will only make you suffer more.”

Igor R. on November 23, 2011 at 12:21 PM

You really aren’t proficient at reading comprehension, are you? That’s not even close to what I wrote or believe. Yet that’s what you saw…BTW, are you the same Igor that works at the Frankenstein Castle?

cartooner on November 23, 2011 at 12:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 6 7 8 9