Gingrich: Romney lacks concern for the “humanity” of illegal immigrants

posted at 12:45 pm on January 25, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Today, at a GOP candidate forum hosted by the Spanish-language television network Univision, Newt Gingrich reiterated his plan to create a path to residency for illegal immigrants who have lived in the country for at least 20 years. He also criticized his competitor, Mitt Romney, who recently suggested illegal immigrants would self-deport for their own benefit. Gingrich painted the suggestion as absurd and claimed Romney lacks concern for the “humanity” of those who’ve lived in the United States. Washington Wire reports the money quote, which also cleverly links Romney to the out-of-touch Barack Obama:

“You have to live to in a world of Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island accounts and automatic $20 million a year income for no work to have a fantasy this far from reality,” Mr. Gingrich said. “This is an Obama-level fantasy… He certainly shows no concern for the humanity of people who are already here.”

Oh, how the presidential race has changed in just a few short months! Remember when conservative pundits and the public skewered Rick Perry for his positions on immigration and, above all, for his remark that those who oppose in-state tuition for illegal immigrants are “heartless“?  Later, Newt Gingrich began to highlight the specifics of his plans to tackle the illegal immigration problem … and, lo and behold, the principles upon which those plans were based weren’t that different than the principles that had guided Rick Perry’s thinking.

In other words, when it comes to illegal immigration, Gingrich, like Perry, starts with respect for the personhood of immigrants, whether they entered the country legally or illegally, and seeks to implement policies that respect reality. In Perry, those positions were regarded as some kind of squishy conservative weakness. In Gingrich, they’re viewed as pragmatic and even palatable.

The question of what to do about the millions of immigrants who live in the country illegally is a thorny one. “Solutions” that absolutely respect the rule of law — like mass deportation — are impractical and largely unenforceable, while “solutions” that seek to integrate illegal immigrants into society for the mutual benefit of the immigrants and society inevitably weaken the rule of law one way or another. After all, every “solution” that accepts as a foundation that immigrants can enter the country illegally and remain here – regardless of whether they’re eventually allowed to become citizens — weakens the rule of law.

That’s why the candidates have understandably emphasized the need to secure the borders. That is unquestionably the first step to mitigate the problem of illegal immigration in the future. The process to immigrate here legally also desperately needs to be reformed.

Meantime, it’s interesting to observe the way the emphases of the candidates change according to their audiences. Gingrich definitely wants the vote of Miami’s large Cuban population, don’t you think?


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

Newt will have to make a better show of hating brown people who speak Spanish if he doesn’t want to lose the voters who turned on Perry for his “heartless” comment.

DRayRaven on January 25, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Next from Newt: “Hey, I deserve some of Romney’s money to pay off my student loans”

Swerve22 on January 25, 2012 at 1:17 PM

I love how illegals humanely break our laws.

SouthernGent on January 25, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Lol. I love how it’s humane to let them do it.

Slainte on January 25, 2012 at 1:18 PM

More importantly, all the items in here.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Upholding our immigration laws is hardly the realm of fanatics or extremists unless one also wishes to consider any Romans who wondered what eventually would happen because the Goths kept flooding in “extremists” or “fanatics.”

viking01 on January 25, 2012 at 1:18 PM

How long until Newt appears with a few illegal immigrants and weeps gently while telling their sad tale?

JosephP on January 25, 2012 at 1:07 PM

I think he’ll do the crying himself :-)…although he’s better at yelling and impersonates better the ‘angry old man’, for his adorimg read meat crowds :-)

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 1:19 PM

No Republican will be winning the Hispanic vote come November I don’t know why you guys are fighting over it

liberal4life on January 25, 2012 at 1:20 PM

No that’s not the only solution. Secure the border and turn off the incentives, jobs and benefits, and then wait. Do nothing, don’t spend a dime. See how many self deport, and once the self deportation dies down we’ll discuss how to deal with those that are left.

DFCtomm on January 25, 2012 at 1:07 PM

That is an unrealistic option, but until conservatives have a super majority in the House and Senate, as well as controlling all local, and state governments, it is not going to happen. Hell will freeze over first.

they lie on January 25, 2012 at 1:20 PM

I can’t believe the idiots who have gotten behind Gingrich.

ninjapirate on January 25, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Hmmmm, I wonder . . . if Romney is so strict on illegal immigration, why does HotAir have polls where he is way ahead of Gringrich with Hispanics? Did Romney give a speech with Univision recently? I’d like to know what he said. Did he tell them that they have to go back to their home country and get in line? I can’t imagine that he would be leading in the polls with Hispanics with that stance.

Something is fishy here.

KickandSwimMom on January 25, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Newsflash to panderers: NOT ALL HISPANICS, CERTAINLY NOT CUBANS, ARE IN FAVOR OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

haner on January 25, 2012 at 1:20 PM

portlandon on January 25, 2012 at 1:06 PM

Sen. Marco Rubio scolded Newt Gingrich’s presidential campaign over a Spanish-language radio ad that accuses rival Mitt Romney of being “anti-immigrant”

“This kind of language is more than just unfortunate. It’s inaccurate, inflammatory, and doesn’t belong in this campaign,” Rubio told The Miami Herald when asked about the ad.

Read more here: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/01/rubio-scolds-gingrich-camp-says-ad-bashing-anti-immigrant-romney-is-inaccurate-inflammatory.html#storylink=cpy

dmann on January 25, 2012 at 1:21 PM

I am so close to going to Santorum when I go to the Colorado caucus on Feb 7.

KBird on January 25, 2012 at 1:02 PM

With Perry and Bachmann out of the race, Santorum now has a firm lock on the socons. If he plays it smart and starts avoiding discussing his socon positions (except his opposition to illegal immigration, which is really a centrist position), turning any questions along those lines back into discussing economic issues instead, he might still be able to surprise everyone.

All of the early primaries (before March 6) cost the States who chose to do them half of their delegates (this includes SC and FL, of course), so we are still very, very early in the race for the nomination.

fadetogray on January 25, 2012 at 1:21 PM

More importantly, all the items in here.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2012 at 1:18 PM

AP might be saving that gem for himself. I’m with you Shade, none of these guys are worth a damn.

Kataklysmic on January 25, 2012 at 1:21 PM

No Republican will be winning the Hispanic vote come November I don’t know why you guys are fighting over it

liberal4life on January 25, 2012 at 1:20 PM

I know you’re a liberal but you’re right… fighting over the Hispanic vote is completely pointless.

The GOP is filled with idiotic political consultants that want party and national suicide.

ninjapirate on January 25, 2012 at 1:22 PM

The question of what to do about the millions of immigrants who live in the country illegally is a thorny one.

Santorum had it right in the debate. Illegal aliens aren’t just here illegally. They break numerous laws on an on-going basis, as part of the package of disrespect for the rule of law in general. Fake documents, stolen social security numbers, paid under the table, no car insurance. Mitt says, the solution is simple — build a fence, and then prevent employers from hiring illegals. Then, when they have no jobs available to them, they have to go back to their home country. And Mitt will do it.

It’s time for an adult in the White House. For the last 20 years we’ve had Presidents at varying levels of maturity. How about someone solid for a change.

Paul-Cincy on January 25, 2012 at 1:22 PM

Gingrich is an absolutely unacceptable candidate… period.

ninjapirate on January 25, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Yeah… it was SO humanitarian of Gingrich to actually divorce his first wife while she was IN THE HOSPITAL FOR CANCER TREATMENT…. and the next wife a few months after SHE WAS DIAGNOSED WITH MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS… and on both occasions, the reason he used to justify divorcing his stricken wife was that he had been engaged in an AFFAIR WITH ANOTHER WOMAN.

It is reprehensible for Gingrich to adopt the language and tactics of the open borders/pro amnesty groups and race and ethnic specific special interest group and attack Romney because Romney wants to uphold the rule of law and ENFORCE EXISTING FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAW as well as institute mandatory nationwide E-VERIFY which, taken together, would actually force illegal aliens to ‘self deport’ and return to their nation of origin OF THEIR OWN ACCORD…the same way that they came to this nation.

Romney is PRO LEGAL IMMIGRATION, which is to say that the 4.5 million potential LEGAL IMMIGRANTS who are waiting in line around the world, sometimes for years, waiting for the opportunity to come to this nation legally, and have thus demonstrated their regard and respect for the rule of law, should have priority over those who choose to willfully shatter federal immigration law and come to this nation illegally.

Legal immigrants submit to physical examinations, extensive background checks, learn our language, familiarize themselves with out laws and customs, as well as meeting several other criteria. Legal immigrants are happy to assimilate into our culture and contribute to our society and nation.

Illegal aliens choose to willfully shatter federal immigration law, thus demonstrating complete disregard for the rule of law and a clear disdain for the rights of the legal immigrants and citizens of this nation. Yet, of the over 1 MILLION legal immigrants that this nation accepts every year, currently, between 250,000 and 300,000 are actually illegal aliens recycling their illegal status for legal residency, AFTER having willfully shattered our laws.

As to those illegal aliens whom Gingrich likes to bring up who’ve been here for ’25 years’ I’d remind you that in 1986 Reagan signed into law a general Amnesty for illegal aliens. Of the 5 million who applied, 2.8 million were accepted and the other over 2 million were scheduled for deportation, however, much as the border was never secured as promised, those over 2 million UNQUALIFIED illegal aliens were never deported. So many of those who’ve ‘been here for 25 years’ are those who were supposed to have been deported having failed to qualify for amnesty. Apparently, Gingrich wants to reward those who just ignore the rule of law and do as they please, taking what they wish from this nation regardless of the rights of the legal immigrants and citizens of this nation.

thatsafactjack on January 25, 2012 at 1:24 PM

If the swamp gas ignites he’ll take off like a rocket. But Callista will be standing by with a fire extinguisher.

novaculus on January 25, 2012 at 1:05 PM

I think she will be more concerned with her ‘helmet’, oups, hair-style, or whatever that thing on her head qualifies for :-)

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Putting your own money at risk by investing it, or having it invested for you, in businesses that create jobs (or retain jobs, per President Obama) should not be disparaged at all. Gingrich seemingly can only feed at the government-related trough, and that’s okay – it’s his area of expertise but it limits what he can earn, as the risk is far, far less. Romney is rich, and as Deng Xiaoping said, “Poverty is not socialism. To be rich is glorious.”

Sheerq on January 25, 2012 at 1:25 PM

It might be worthwhile reminding the Hispanic community which administration has been actively attacking the Roman Catholic church.

viking01 on January 25, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Newtron just combined “politics of envy” with… “heartless“?!

wtf?

kunegetikos on January 25, 2012 at 1:26 PM

That is an unrealistic option, but until conservatives have a super majority in the House and Senate, as well as controlling all local, and state governments, it is not going to happen. Hell will freeze over first.

they lie on January 25, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Did you mean realistic? The context seems to indicate a typo.

DFCtomm on January 25, 2012 at 1:26 PM

Interest is taxed as ordinary income, at up to 39.6%. In California, where I am, you add another 10.8%, maximum. Added together, that’s a total tax rate of 50.4%.

Romney was taxed at the capital gains/dividend rate, of only 15%.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 1:11 PM

Oh good Lord, you obviously didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, did you!

JPeterman on January 25, 2012 at 1:29 PM

Kataklysmic on January 25, 2012 at 12:52 PM

It’s not about defending it, it’s about understanding what Newt was saying in context. The thread is about immigration, not finances.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:30 PM

And the money he placed for investment to earn that 15% . . did he earn it first at which time he would have paid taxes on it under the top rate?

Oh, I see what you did there. Romney very well could have earned it in the mid-80s at a low 20% top capital gains rate, well below the ordinary income tax rate, or at 28% (as of 1987).

I’m not saying capital gains tax should be exactly the same rate as the top rate for ordinary income. There is nothing magical about having them both the same.

But when the capital gains rate is too low, it encourages asset inflation–in other words, speculation and bubbles. Residential real estate got a capital-gains tax exemption if you held your principal residence for two years and then sold it later. Zero percent is a very low capital gains rate. So, what happened? We got the most ridiculous real estate bubble since Florida in the 1920s.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Obviously, Newt, you are not properly gun-trained: one should not point a loaded gun at one’s foot. Just point the effin’ thing at your head already and get it over with! I’m sorta looking forward for a drinking binge I’ll engage in prior to voting for Romney.

Archivarix on January 25, 2012 at 1:30 PM

They have pulled some ads here in Fl after Sen Rubio came out and questioned what was stated by the Gingrich campaign…much is also being made about the term self deport and yet in a blurb in most of the articles about the humane comments made by Gingrich is the gem below……

Gingrich’s campaign has spoken of the self-deportation policy he ridiculed Wednesday.
Past comments by Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond, who said that only a small percent of illegal immigrants would likely be allowed to stay in the U.S. under Gingrich’s plan. Hammond went on to say that the vast majority of them would likely “self-deport.”

Karla1953 on January 25, 2012 at 1:30 PM

This is no different from the heartless comment from Perry. At all.

changer1701 on January 25, 2012 at 1:33 PM

Newt’s comment is exactly why I can’t believe conservatives think he would be a good nominee. How can he get away with bashing conservative principles and hard work-in the private sector, not a GSE-and everyone thinks he’s wonderful.

BTW-Newt is the definition of establishment, he’s been in and around Washington since the 70s!

When has he won an election that wasn’t based from his base and populism? I thought we were better than this. I thought we learned our lesson in 2008, but here we go again, another sound-bite candidate. I truly am scared for this country.

ajbell on January 25, 2012 at 1:33 PM

It’s not about defending it, it’s about understanding what Newt was saying in context. The thread is about immigration, not finances.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:30 PM

I’m commenting on something Tina included in her post. The fact that Newt made the comment while ostensibly discussing immigration shouldn’t preclude it from being cause for disdain.

But I’ll play. Put that comment in context for me where it doesn’t sound like something being repeated by a human megaphone at Zuccoti Park.

Kataklysmic on January 25, 2012 at 1:33 PM

Newtron just combined “politics of envy” with… “heartless“?!

wtf?

kunegetikos on January 25, 2012 at 1:26 PM

he went full OWS :-)…but then it’s just Gingrich being Gingrich… the man cannot make two statements without the second contradicting or refuting the first…on the upside, he’s an awesome (master) debator :-) (pun intended) and he can yell at the media…what else one wants in a presidential candidate?

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 1:30 PM

So in order to meet with your approval, should Romney voluntarily be paying a higher capital gains rate than what is required by law?

Kataklysmic on January 25, 2012 at 1:35 PM

So in order to meet with your approval, should Romney voluntarily be paying a higher capital gains rate than what is required by law?

Kataklysmic on January 25, 2012 at 1:35 PM

yes, like Buffet :-)

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Basically Newt is accusing Mitt of being a moderate and a progressive, out of one side of his mouth, and then yammering to the left of Mitt, out of the other.

Politics is peculiar, isn’t it?

kunegetikos on January 25, 2012 at 1:36 PM

Newt wants to remind everyone that Mitt is “out of touch” because of his wealth, but somehow manages to forget that he’s out of touch with conservatives on immigration.

Slainte on January 25, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Newt is pulling the ad already after being told it was not true by Rubio.

ConservativePartyNow on January 25, 2012 at 12:55 PM

What ad? I didn’t think an ad was mentioned in this thread.
Today, at a GOP candidate forum hosted by the Spanish-language television network Univision, Newt Gingrich reiterated his plan to create a path to residency for illegal immigrants who have lived in the country for at least 20 years.

This is the topic of this thread, not Rubio.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Newt is going to find a way to set his own ass on fire yet.

novaculus on January 25, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Neutron Newt is going to have a meltdown any day.

csdeven on January 25, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Interest is taxed as ordinary income, at up to 39.6%. In California, where I am, you add another 10.8%, maximum. Added together, that’s a total tax rate of 50.4%.

Romney was taxed at the capital gains/dividend rate, of only 15%.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 1:11 PM

And California and Massachusetts has no tax on capital gain/dividend? Are you just weak in math or is it deliberate manipulation of figures?

Why look at raising ANY tax? Why not cut sounding and lower income tax?

galtani on January 25, 2012 at 1:39 PM

“You have to live to in a world of Swiss bank accounts and Cayman Island accounts and automatic $20 million a year income for no work to have a fantasy this far from reality,” Mr. Gingrich said. “This is an Obama-level fantasy… He certainly shows no concern for the humanity of people who are already here.”

Hahahahaha A “true” conservative? The stupid party shall rise again! Suckers…

rhombus on January 25, 2012 at 1:40 PM

ninjapirate on January 25, 2012 at 1:23 PM

To you, and that’s fine.

Cindy Munford on January 25, 2012 at 1:40 PM

Newt is pulling the ad already after being told it was not true by Rubio.

ConservativePartyNow on January 25, 2012 at 12:55 PM

If this is about Rubio, put your link and comment in the Headline thread where it belongs. You are off topic here.

Then you have something negative to say about Newt? At least he stays on topic.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Newt wants to remind everyone that Mitt is “out of touch” because of his wealth, but somehow manages to forget that he’s out of touch with conservatives on immigration.

Slainte on January 25, 2012 at 1:37 PM

but if he repents and ask forgiveness for his God, they’ll forgive him, right?…as for the whole wealth, Gingrich is not precisely 99% himself, is he? he is still making way more than the average folks, so how does he make the argument that he connects with the average Joe, and Mitt, a few millions higher in his bracket, doesn’t :-)..this is just plain Gingrich ‘logic’, oups nonsense…

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 1:42 PM

Newt should lay off the personal attacks…except for the ones aimed at Obama.
Time to start acting like he is a winner, and focus on the prize.
Getting involved with this “I am more humanitarian” than you is a loser, especially against Mitt. One thing he has shown is a soft side and a conciliatory side.
What Newt said was too harsh for someone in the lead…leave those kind of comments for Mitt.

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 1:43 PM

In contrast, Romney doesn’t seem to have thought this through and just seems to through red meat to GOP crowds because he thinks that’s what he’s supposed to say. In truth, I DON’T TRUST A WORD out of Romney’s mouth on immigration.

BuckeyeSam on January 25, 2012 at 12:57 PM

I’m hoping the Spanish people of Florida remember Romney’s & Bachmann’s attacks against Gov. Perry on immigration.

Newt has the best solution with dealing with those illegally here. Gov. Perry has the best solution on securing the border in my opinion.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:46 PM

So in order to meet with your approval, should Romney voluntarily be paying a higher capital gains rate than what is required by law?

My point is that a potential GOP Presidential nominee earning over $20 million a year for the last two years, as Romney did, just for sitting on his butt, is an unseemly spectacle that would produce a Democratic landslide. And that result would come about even if Willard had paid 50% tax instead of 15%.

Emperor Norton on January 25, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Gingrich is an absolutely unacceptable candidate… period.

ninjapirate on January 25, 2012 at 1:23 PM

You got that right. He doesn’t toe the republican line on immigration. Neither does McCain, Graham, Bush, Rubio, most of the senate.
Neither does your fellow commenter, Wrry Trvllr, who says he doesn’t give a rat’s a$$ about illegal immigration, mexicans, his words.
The pigs are out of the pen and causing chaos.

BedBug on January 25, 2012 at 1:48 PM

thatsafactjack on January 25, 2012 at 1:24 PM

Do you know what works, what you haven’t tried…honest facts…you should try reading Newt’s immigration policy, all of it and you will see that the gossip you are quoting is wrong.
Also the gossip on his marriages are wrong…you should write for a weekly magazine…

right2bright on January 25, 2012 at 1:48 PM

If this is about Rubio, put your link and comment in the Headline thread where it belongs. You are off topic here.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Are you the Hotair police now?

JPeterman on January 25, 2012 at 1:49 PM

Swerve22 on January 25, 2012 at 12:58 PM

This Headline thread is what you’d want:

http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2012/01/25/rubio-rips-gingrich-for-ad-calling-romney-anti-immigrant/comment-page-1/#comments

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:52 PM

Gingrich is not precisely 99% himself, is he? he is still making way more than the average folks, so how does he make the argument that he connects with the average Joe, and Mitt, a few millions higher in his bracket, doesn’t :-)..this is just plain Gingrich ‘logic’, oups nonsense…

jimver on January 25, 2012 at 1:42 PM

With a conservative estimate of net worth at around 7 million, Newt is no pauper.

Slainte on January 25, 2012 at 1:53 PM

We can discuss any of a wide range of “amnesty”-type proposals, but with one proviso: first we establish and enforce a strict immigration policy including immediate deportation of every person caught crossing the border illegally. Without that we would simply be relaunching another round of immigration lawlessness leading to another series of DREAM Acts and whatnot ten years down the line.

UnrepentantCurmudgeon on January 25, 2012 at 1:53 PM

If this is about Rubio, put your link and comment in the Headline thread where it belongs. You are off topic here.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:41 PM
Are you the Hotair police now?

JPeterman on January 25, 2012 at 1:49 PM

No, but hi-jacking a thread and commenting from other threads/headline threads make it very difficult to stay on topic. Sifting thru comments that belong on other threads are time consuming.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:53 PM

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Are you the Hotair police now?

JPeterman on January 25, 2012 at 1:49 PM

Providing the comment isn’t a glowing endorsement of his/her preferred candidate, s/he is the HA police.

Slainte on January 25, 2012 at 1:56 PM

If this is about Rubio, put your link and comment in the Headline thread where it belongs. You are off topic here.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:41 PM
Are you the Hotair police now?

JPeterman on January 25, 2012 at 1:49 PM

No, but hi-jacking a thread and commenting from other threads/headline threads make it very difficult to stay on topic. Sifting thru comments that belong on other threads are time consuming.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:53 PM

Yeah, it’s a lot harder than See Spot Run for him too. Do as he says, the thread police!

BedBug on January 25, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Isn’t it interesting that Rush Limbaugh’s “conservative” champion is running way off to the left of Mitt Romney? Rush is as far out on a limb as the establishment is with Romney.

FloatingRock on January 25, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Newt has the best solution with dealing with those illegally here. Gov. Perry has the best solution on securing the border in my opinion.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Let local community boards decide which illegals stay and which ones go? LOL! Sounds like a perfect pay to play arrangement to me. How do you ensure money won’t be changing hands prior to the decision? Hell, it would even be a perfect way to fund a campaign for elective office….sort of like public union dues?

a capella on January 25, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Newsflash to panderers: NOT ALL HISPANICS, CERTAINLY NOT CUBANS, ARE IN FAVOR OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

haner on January 25, 2012 at 1:20 PM

THANK YOU! As a Hispanic granddaughter of LEGAL immigrants, it infuriates me that people like Newt think Hispanics are such simple people that they all support amnesty because of their heritage. Some of us actually care about, you know… the economy? jobs? national security? (All things which are hurt by amnesty.)

athenanyc on January 25, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Well, I’m really disappointed in this. I would like to hear more of this speech by Gingrich to get the context. I don’t agree with pandering to illegals.

Hmmmm, I wonder . . . if Romney is so strict on illegal immigration, why does HotAir have polls where he is way ahead of Gringrich with Hispanics? Did Romney give a speech with Univision recently? I’d like to know what he said. Did he tell them that they have to go back to their home country and get in line? I can’t imagine that he would be leading in the polls with Hispanics with that stance.

Something is fishy here.

KickandSwimMom on January 25, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Thanks again. Your comment is one of the few sane ones here. Most are the Newt haters with their two-bit sound bites.

I’m sure Romney would not be saying what he said in the debates, LOL He’d be very low in the polls on that, I agree.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Then you have something negative to say about Newt? At least he stays on topic.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:41 PM

Actually, it seems as though every time a topic comes up that he doesn’t want to discuss, he blasts the questioner for asking an unfair question. It’s getting old. He can’t keep it up through November.

talkingpoints on January 25, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Between his comments on Romney’s financial status and now lack of “humanity”, are we sure Newt wasn’t the one giving the SOTU last night?

Tater Salad on January 25, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Now repeat after me, Newtbots:

“Two legs good, four legs better!”

Go RBNY on January 25, 2012 at 2:21 PM

More importantly, all the items in here.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Thanks; reading that helps see the facts.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Newt has the best solution with dealing with those illegally here. Gov. Perry has the best solution on securing the border in my opinion.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 1:46 PM

What part of illegal don’t you understand? I came to this country legally and the thought of trying to sneak in never entered my mind.

Newt’s solution with his community boards is an open invitation to corruption and pay to play. That is not a solution.

JPeterman on January 25, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Newt Gingrich is just like Rick Perry, but without Perry’s likeability!

Corrupt egomaniac Newt Gingrich can’t be trusted on immigration issues or anything else.

Newt Gingrich disgusts me.

bluegill on January 25, 2012 at 2:33 PM

Newt Gingrich is being cheered on by Obama supporters, because Obama knows that Newt Gingrich would be very easy to beat in a general election.

Newt Gingrich is a corrupt liar!

bluegill on January 25, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Aaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhhhh!

New is such an awful candidate! The only thing he has going for him is that he’s better than Romney. It’s like choosing between genital warts and HIV!

*Pulls out hair* *Facepalm*

Is it too late to draft Palin or Walker?

Pattosensei on January 25, 2012 at 2:45 PM

I’m commenting on something Tina included in her post. The fact that Newt made the comment while ostensibly discussing immigration shouldn’t preclude it from being cause for disdain.

But I’ll play. Put that comment in context for me where it doesn’t sound like something being repeated by a human megaphone at Zuccoti Park.

Kataklysmic on January 25, 2012 at 1:33 PM

Since Newt was on a forum talking about illigal immigration I understood him to make that remark as Romney being out of touch when saying self-deport. What action(s) would anyone suggest to accomplish self-deporting?

In other words, Newt used that comment about Romney’s finances as not being able to relate to the illegals circumstances. That is how I understood it. I see by the comments others have a different take.

Our Immigration Laws need fixed and I think it’s going to take more than just one action to fix them. Hopefully, we can work together and find the best solution.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Let local community boards decide which illegals stay and which ones go? LOL! Sounds like a perfect pay to play arrangement to me. How do you ensure money won’t be changing hands prior to the decision? Hell, it would even be a perfect way to fund a campaign for elective office….sort of like public union dues?

a capella on January 25, 2012 at 1:56 PM

Anyone is free to suggest a solution to the Illegal Immigration problem. I haven’t heard any others. If you have one, you can post it also.

Loading buses and deporting 12-15 mil isn’t an answer. The laws have to be changed, but to not suggest any solution isn’t helpful either.

Securing the border must be first anyway, which Newt & others have expressed. Especially Gov. Perry.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 2:57 PM

You know what? I don’t give a damn about the “humanity” of criminals, or their families, or their friends, and I prefer politicians who feel the same way.

Thanks, Newt, for another reason to support Romney.

Greg Q on January 25, 2012 at 3:00 PM

What part of illegal don’t you understand? I came to this country legally and the thought of trying to sneak in never entered my mind.

Newt’s solution with his community boards is an open invitation to corruption and pay to play. That is not a solution.

JPeterman on January 25, 2012 at 2:31 PM

The Community Board was only one of his suggestions.

My comment here:

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 2:57 PM

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Ron Paul doesn’t need to pander. He just champions liberty and the Constitution. This is what we need. Apparently, America is still asleep.

Decoski on January 25, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Mitt says, the solution is simple — build a fence, and then prevent employers from hiring illegals. Then, when they have no jobs available to them, they have to go back to their home country. And Mitt will do it.

It’s time for an adult in the White House. For the last 20 years we’ve had Presidents at varying levels of maturity. How about someone solid for a change.

Paul-Cincy on January 25, 2012 at 1:22 PM

While that is a step in the right direction, it is foolishness to think this is THE solution. What happens when you lock down all the jobs and the border. They won’t go home, they will just find more illicit activities that get them the money they want. They come here and dodge the laws for more than just jobs, healthcare, and education. They come here because we have a better country and more freedoms (for now). In most cases, they are still better off here than in their own countries even when they are in gangs or selling drugs. Sad but true.

Unfortunately the solution is going to have to be more involved. Required ID at voting booths will help remove illegals as a constituent for Dem. Actually enforcing laws on the books combined with deportation of all illegal alien criminals will also begin weeding out the population. Also, there is the problem of anchor babies and what to do with them. Unfortunately, the 14th Amendment does give them some protection (citizenship). I don’t agree with this system, but I also don’t believe there is a feasible way to strip them of citizenship (talk about opening Pandora’s box).

As much as I hate to say it, Gingrich is also right in that we also have to be humane simply from an international relations standpoint. That does not mean amnesty (or Newt’s path to citizenship). It does mean making sure the laws are clear and the punishments are just. It would help to get diplomatic concessions from other nations (especially Mexico) and have them actively involved in the process. This is, unfortunately, unlikely.

Pattosensei on January 25, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Anyone is free to suggest a solution to the Illegal Immigration problem. I haven’t heard any others. If you have one, you can post it also. Loading buses and deporting 12-15 mil isn’t an answer. The laws have to be changed, but to not suggest any solution isn’t helpful either.

Securing the border must be first anyway, which Newt & others have expressed. Especially Gov. Perry.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Mitt has one and it doesn’t involve buses. Non-falsifiable ID cards required for employment. You can’t get one if you aren’t a legal citizen, which now is a lot easier to verify. If you can’t work because you don’t have a card, you will self deport and get in line for legal application. This, of course, assumes our economy ever improves to the point where there are jobs and sanctuary cities don’t continue to enable the illegals. If they can’t work they will leave. If employers hire them without a valid ID card, industrial strength sanctions on the employer. He went through all this in debates.

a capella on January 25, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Anyone is free to suggest a solution to the Illegal Immigration problem. I haven’t heard any others. If you have one, you can post it also.

Loading buses and deporting 12-15 mil isn’t an answer. The laws have to be changed, but to not suggest any solution isn’t helpful either.

Securing the border must be first anyway, which Newt & others have expressed. Especially Gov. Perry.

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 2:57 PM

This is what I’ve thought up…it’s pretty rough draft though:

First solution is to clam up that southern border. Then we must make the immigration process better. It is an absolute mess (I’ve been through it for my wife, trust me). One reason we have so many illegal immigrants is it is actually cheaper and easier to be smuggled here in most cases. My wife and I had to pay $500 so that she could have her height/weight measured and then be finger-printed. Once she was called back, they had her for all of 10 minutes. A ridiculous fee and just one example of many. Also, deportation due to illegal-status should also lead to banishment (with a few exemptions). Combined with an easier legal immigration process, perhaps many illegals will self-deport to try and obtain legal status.

As for the illegals still here. We have to start deporting them as we catch them. I don’t suggest sting operations to round them up (for both political and moral reasons). First, it would appear inhumane and would make relations on the diplomatic front unnecessarily more difficult. Second, the odds of overzealous enforcement officers abusing power would be increased. There are very few of them, but it only takes ONE man in ONE incident to create a major scandal (esp when every lib in the world will be looking for that mistake).

Rather, we must deport them steadily when they are caught breaking the law. There is no reason for them to be put into our prisons. They should be deported ASAP. Unfortunately, this will require some cooperation from our “allies,” esp Mexico (who isn’t so keen on having their citizens back). We may have to take a “human rights” hit here. Seen ahead of time, it can be countered. Good luck finding the POTUS willing to take that hit though.

Voter ID is another major step in reducing the number of illegals. Why? Because it would remove them as a constituent (or make it much, much more difficult). This would cause open Dem support for the illegals to slack off (they aren’t going to benefit from them as much). Forcing businesses to utilize e-verify will also help. Amending the 14th (a near 0% chance that will happen) to language that states that at least one parent must be a legal U.S. citizen and both must be legal permanent residents would help (demanding both be U.S. citizens is too demanding and would alienate people like me who have a legal immigrant wife)

There will always be illegals among us, but the steps above will gradually reduce the population.

Pattosensei on January 25, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Gingrich is a tool. Leave him.

exdeadhead on January 25, 2012 at 3:54 PM

Since Newt was on a forum talking about illigal immigration I understood him to make that remark as Romney being out of touch when saying self-deport. What action(s) would anyone suggest to accomplish self-deporting?

bluefox on January 25, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Nice spin. Here’s the reality: Gingrich is pandering to the Hispanics and his plan for dealing with illegal immigration is de facto amnesty.

V7_Sport on January 25, 2012 at 3:56 PM

People are starving and what does RoboMitt do? He sends Newt a cake instead of giving it to starving children.

SparkPlug on January 25, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Gingrich has long been for amnesty – he is soft on illegal immigration.

Pork-Chop on January 25, 2012 at 4:10 PM

If you backed off of support for Perry based on his comments on this issue, then you can’t logically support Gingrich either.

dczombie on January 25, 2012 at 4:14 PM

My point is that a potential GOP Presidential nominee earning over $20 million a year for the last two years, as Romney did, just for sitting on his butt, is an unseemly spectacle that would produce a Democratic landslide. And that result would come about even if Willard had paid 50% tax instead of 15%.

Emperor Norton

And that’s why you’re a loser. Shouldn’t you be crapping on a cop car somewhere?

xblade on January 25, 2012 at 4:15 PM

THANK YOU! As a Hispanic granddaughter of LEGAL immigrants, it infuriates me that people like Newt think Hispanics are such simple people that they all support amnesty because of their heritage. Some of us actually care about, you know… the economy? jobs? national security? (All things which are hurt by amnesty.)

athenanyc

When you get down to it, people like Newt are basically saying Hispanics have no concept of right and wrong, and don’t support the rule of law.

xblade on January 25, 2012 at 4:15 PM

Nice spin. Here’s the reality: Gingrich is pandering to the Hispanics and his plan for dealing with illegal immigration is de facto amnesty.

V7_Sport

And he probably just lost any chance he had of getting my vote. When you care more about illegals than you do your own family, something is wrong.

xblade on January 25, 2012 at 4:18 PM

Newt’s solution with his community boards is an open invitation to corruption and pay to play. That is not a solution.

JPeterman on January 25, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Which is why he thought of it.

csdeven on January 25, 2012 at 4:32 PM

If Romney keeps this in the forefront he could use it to undermine Gingrich’s campaign.

This is a good example of Gingrich dismissing the will of the people because he thinks he’s smarter than everyone else. Like Obama and health care. Obama and the stimulus, Obama and “green” energy, Gingrich and amnesty.

It has been conventional wisdom on the right that the U.S. needs to fix its border and its immigration system (tracking and otherwise) before we decide what to do with the illegals already here.

This is either Gingrich dismissing conservatives (a sign of things to come if he’s elected?), or Gingrich pandering. Which is it?

jaime on January 25, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Gawd! MAKE. It. STOP!
Bobby Jindal, pick up the bleepin’ red phone…NOW!
*bangs head against desk*

annoyinglittletwerp on January 25, 2012 at 5:00 PM

So we’re supposed to be humane and bend over backwards to reward those who thumb their noses at our laws and citizens by entering illegally and abusing the system? We’re supposed to be humane to those who take jobs, space in schools and hospitals, drive up costs by not paying their bills, and create all kinds of problems for law abiding citizens when they steal our social security numbers to take jobs away from our citizens?

Ummm… how about no? How about we stop rewarding law breakers and trying to be humane to criminals? How about we start enforcing our laws on the books and send a message to the world that the USA will no longer be walked all over, and if you want to come to this country and benefit from her freedoms and opportunities, you are welcome to do so as long as you follow the law and enter through the front door after a proper screening to make sure you aren’t bringing in diseases, that you are able to support yourself and contribute instead of be a drain, and that you truly want to be here for the right reasons?

It is beyond time to deport all illegals and their anchor babies. The kids can come back when they are of age, if they so choose, but their parents need to be black listed from ever getting a visa. Actually, we need to put a stop to anchor babies. Citizenship should not be awarded to those born to those in this country on tourist visas, student visas, short-term work visas, or anyone who has entered illegally.

Sunspots on January 25, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Tina is spot on with her last line:

The process to immigrate here legally also desperately needs to be reformed

Open borders and our insane current legal process need to be corrected as an initial step. Enforcing our laws, e-verify for job seekers, and suing sanctuaries vs states helping the feds enforce current laws are necessary steps. Pattosensei captures much of it well. I’m always amused by the argument about rounding up millions of illegals and sending them home. That’s as likely as rounding up all those who were speeding on their way home and issuing tickets is. We need to make staying here illegally more difficult so they choose to self deport.

I’ve often thought a reformed system would allow illegal immigrants to apply for a green card against their home nation’s allocation by mail and wait–if they are not caught and get accepted, great! But, if they are caught in the mean time they go home–that’s the risk they take.

As for what’s humane, isn’t it more humane for government to champion those who follow/respect our laws, improve our legal system, and deport those taking jobs from Americans and legal immigrants and/or stealing identies to stay under the radar than to reward those breaking our laws with benefits (in-state tuition to get a better job even when it is illegal for you to hold that job in our country, free health care, free education) while those abiding wait in the dark for their turn to immigrate legally?

WhyNot on January 25, 2012 at 5:13 PM

I don’t know what Gingrich is but he sure as heck is no conservative. What’s appalling is that Romney seems unable to respond to these attacks from the left. Santorum is the only alternative making sense.

DaMav on January 25, 2012 at 5:15 PM

Just amazing to me to see the so-called conservative alternative consistently attack Romney from the left, with so-called conservatives defending and agreeing with him. Unbelievable. I don’t even recognize you people anymore. What an embarrassment and disgrace.

jjraines on January 25, 2012 at 6:24 PM

Newt’s two-step plan for America:

1. Reduce the debt, lower the tax rates, improve the economy, increase jobs, improve education, etc., etc….all to make a better America.

and then

2. Give it away to foreign invaders.

Newt lost me when he echoed the tired false dichotomy of the open borders crowd, including La Raza, when he said (in effect), “We can’t deport 12 million illegal aliens, THEREFORE we must make them legal residents.”

Newt is either lying or ignorant. He should know that the most humane, efficient, economical, just, and POLITICALLY POPULAR policy is attrition through enforcement.

Here, Newt: listen to this illegal alien explain how it works.

fred5678 on January 25, 2012 at 11:06 PM

Gingrich is batsh#t crazy. He is the worst of what is left in this miserable group of candidates.

ray on January 25, 2012 at 11:09 PM

I agree.

Somehow the picture of 12 million illegals standing
in line to march back across the border does not hinge on any
reality.

Amjean on January 25, 2012 at 12:48 PM

You fell for Newt’s false dichotomy (or you are intentionally spreading lies). Newt refuses to acknowledge the proven strategy of attrition through enforcement, as several states have implemented so far. If these policies were nationalized, for instance via Lamar Smith’s mandatory and national E-Verify bill, they will self-deport over time.

Newt and many others, including McCain, Bush, Kennedy, et al, are lying when they ignore the most popular and effective strategy.

Note that all three other candidates propose strict law enforcement, with zero amnesty. Newt is the only one who proposes that rewarding the ill-gotten goods (residency in America in this case) to the criminals (illegal aliens in this case) will solve the problem. Duh. Try that strategy with the burglars in your own neighborhood. Hasn’t worked elsewhere!!

fred5678 on January 25, 2012 at 11:14 PM

THANK YOU! As a Hispanic granddaughter of LEGAL immigrants, it infuriates me that people like Newt think Hispanics are such simple people that they all support amnesty because of their heritage. Some of us actually care about, you know… the economy? jobs? national security? (All things which are hurt by amnesty.)

athenanyc on January 25, 2012 at 2:01 PM

I assume you are in the 40% in this poll???? Congratulations!!!

I am of Scandinavian heritage (my grandparents came through the front door) and I would be pissed if Danes were sneaking in via Canada and Newt assumed I wanted them to have amnesty.

fred5678 on January 25, 2012 at 11:20 PM

No Republican will be winning the Hispanic vote come November I don’t know why you guys are fighting over it

liberal4life on January 25, 2012 at 1:20 PM

I’ll be very happy with 40%. The panderers, including Newt, McCain, Obama, Kennedy, ad nauseum can have the 60% who believe in breaking the law.

fred5678 on January 25, 2012 at 11:24 PM

In other words, when it comes to illegal immigration, Gingrich, like Perry, starts with respect for the personhood of immigrants, whether they entered the country legally or illegally, and seeks to implement policies that respect reality.

Tina, Tina, Tina.

Here is reality. Attrition through enforcement is a political winner. And practical. And humane. And efficient.

No need to reward criminal foreign invaders with their ill-gotten goods. Newt is the only remaining candidate who has a specific plan to actually ENCOURAGE future illegal aliens to sneak into our country by creating a giant magnet. Just like Perry’s in-state tuition. And any other form of amnesty, rewards, benefits, etc. for illegal behavior.

New does not respect the “personhood” of American citizens who are unemployed when he wants to give their jobs to illegal aliens.

I would never vote for a candidate who devalues my citizenship so much that he wants to reward foreign invaders with their ill-gotten goods — residency in my country.

fred5678 on January 25, 2012 at 11:33 PM

That’s the only solution that is realistic and workable. Anything else the pols. say is just lies and pandering.

they lie on January 25, 2012 at 1:02 PM

No, attrition through enforcement is the solution.

Just listen to this illegal alien tell you why Georgia’s new laws encouraged him to self-deport.

Now… make it national.

fred5678 on January 25, 2012 at 11:47 PM

So Newt continues his class envy OWS b.s. line of attacks. Now he has his Perry moment. Idiot move Newt. Oh and then the cherry on the sundae is his trashing of Reagan. Don’t let the door hit you on the puffy rear on the way out.

Minnfidel on January 26, 2012 at 12:24 AM

Comment pages: 1 2