Rubio: Democrats not serious about immigration reform

posted at 2:01 pm on May 24, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Marco Rubio picks up the issue of immigration reform today on CNN, as a few media analysts note that Mitt Romney has remained rather quiet on the topic.  Rather than focus on Romney, though, Rubio argues that Democrats proved conclusively in 2009-10 that they don’t take the issue seriously at all.  During that period, Democrats had a large majority in the House and a filibuster-proof majority in the US Senate, along with a few Republicans willing to work on comprehensive immigration reform.  How many proposals on the issue came to the floor?  None, Rubio reminds us, because Democrats only value the issue as an opportunity for demagoguery rather than solutions:

Rubio offered the same position last night with Greta van Susteren on Fox:

Sen. Marco Rubio on Wednesday blamed Washington’s inability to produce a comprehensive immigration policy on Democrats who prefer that the issue remain unresolved so they can continue to leverage it to win the Hispanic vote.

“I think there are some people in the Democratic Party that think that the immigration issue’s more valuable to them unsolved, that it gives them something to talk about, that they can go back to Hispanic communities and make unrealistic promises every two years and win votes,” Rubio (R-Fla.) said in an appearance on “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren.”

He added, “For some Democrats, the issue of immigration is better politically if they just leave it the way it is right now because they can use it against Republicans.”

Rubio stressed in both appearances that the GOP needs to be the party of full-throated support for legal immigration.  Rubio plans to roll out an answer to the Democrats’ DREAM Act in the near future that might test that theory.  While the Democrats’ version creates a path for citizenship, Rubio’s would prevent such an outcome by using a new kind of non-immigrant visa that would specifically require recipients to get back in line when it expires.  It will require much more in terms of documentation than the Obama-favored version, and it intends to close off access to in-state tuition and federal aid.  Rubio hopes that his version will garner a bipartisan coalition that will rob Democrats of the opportunity to demagogue, or if not, to expose that demagoguery for what it is.  These appearances are preparing the debating space for what comes next.


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

Ds and Rs play the games.

Illegal is illegal.

Legal immigration is a disaster.

The bennies for the illegals are better than honey to flies.

Both parties are derelict, for different reasons.

The country needs a huge enema.

Schadenfreude on May 24, 2012 at 2:05 PM

I’ve heard more than enough from Rubio. Advocating on behalf of illegals is a deal-breaker. Period. Hiding behind the intentionally incorrect “immigrants” and “comprehensive immigration reform” is inexcusable and unpardonable. He’s done for me.

Anyone who has no respect for American sovereignty has no business in the American government. It is offensive.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on May 24, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Illegal is illegal.

Legal immigration is a disaster.

The bennies for the illegals are better than honey to flies.

Both parties are derelict, for different reasons.

The country needs a huge enema.

Schadenfreude on May 24, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Can’t help but agree to all of the above.

Romney came out hard against illegals during the primary, how long it will be until he flipflops on it, is unknown. Hopefully conservatives can hold him on the straight and narrow.

Rebar on May 24, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Democrats not serious about immigration reform anything except re-election.

FIFY Ed.

You’re welcome.

ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse on May 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

y’all want to take another look at DanMan’s Manifesto on Illegal Aliens from November 2011? Okay then, here it is!

November 10, 2010

DanMan’s Manifesto on the illegal alien situation.

First a few basic knowns.
1. There are somewhere between 12 to 25 million illegal aliens living in this country. Something like 4% to 8.5% of the US population or so.
2. We have many incentives besides employment opportunities that lure illegal immigrants and extend our social safety net.
3. We are probably the only developed country in the world that rewards illegal aliens having babies within our borders by granting them some sort of status that eventually allows them to bring in their extended families for similar status.

Suppose we reform our approach to illegal immigration enforcement. Let’s set a date certain our new immigration laws are strictly enforced and that would include no allowance for providing a US birth certificate for any baby born to a non legal resident citizen. Not a green card holder’s baby, not a consulate member’s baby, not a sight seeing tourist’s baby, no interpretation at all. On that same date we cut off all social services to any non legal resident. If this seems draconian, just insert whatever tenets we place in our new immigration laws that we can consider “comprehensive”, but it must include enforcement. Of course this date certain will mean we have the ability to enforce our borders. If the borders cannot be certified to be sealed, permanently cut all of congress’ pay by 20% until it can be certified sealed. Cut an additional 10% per week until it is achieved. *UPDATE: The DC politicians have conceded the point regarding citizenship with their DREAM act legislation by attempting to give citizenship to anchor babies. They recognize they are not citizens and we need to gain control of the issue legislatively before the courts step in.*

Now we have a window of 24 years since we last granted amnesty that will have the birthdays of the millions of people who were born here to non legal residents and their relatives. Let’s assume they all want to become citizens and we give them a pathway. They will have to register by a certain date and provide key elements of identification that will be matched biometrically (it’s our country, they are not yet citizens, we get to make the rules).*UPDATE: Perhaps an identification card with GPS capabilities could be a viable option since it is already a requirement to carry ID and it would also allow us to track them.* After this date certain our data base potential should not be growing at all so that at least gives us some time to breathe. The data we collect will determine the potential status to start the process to citizenship. Criteria would include several categories and include command of the language, criminal record, record of paying taxes, record of using social services, etc. The information will be sorted to move those most assimilated towards the top and those that have shown to be a net loss lower in status. For those that have criminal records, evaluate them. Use of social services, evaluate them, allow them to pay our country back to improve the status. Basically allow for the sorting of the people that want to become to citizens and have shown the ability and willingness to improve themselves the opportunity to filter up and the least desirables to filter down with the chance to improve their condition.

All of these people will be in line BEHIND the people that are currently going through our legal process. None of them can achieve citizenship faster than a regular case emigrant that is in line on the date certain. That should not be that much of a hardship since they will basically be allowed to live their lives as they are except for the use of social services, which will not be available. That would also stop the political parties from reaching for/worried about a major imbalance of political power as we just saw in Nevada. It may take 10 years to get the mess sorted out but the beauty is the people that are waiting and working and improving their lives will have a vested interest in obeying the law to keep their status and they will know that they will not be kicked out if they do so. By the time they get citizenship they will be assimilated and have a stake in this country. They will have had time to see how our country works. For those that don’t want to make the sacrifice, ahem…go home.

I do not accept that an illegal alien that has gotten away with living here for a year is invested in our nation or state. I worked the entire time I was in college from delivering the Chronicle to working at UPS at night, waiting tables, working for the school, basically anything I could find. I paid full ride for my kids to attend A&M and UT with no assistance from anybody. It was hard and it did not allow my wife and I an opportunity to put aside anything for the years we paid that tuition.

Take it away Marco Rubio.

DanMan on May 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

What does Hussein want ? Afterall this issue affects his moochanty and drunkel, and God knows how many more relatives which we don’t know about, yet ?

burrata on May 24, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Rubio is smart going on the offensive on this issue.

Well played.

ButterflyDragon on May 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM

ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse

Hows it looking ?

Bmore on May 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Reform what….?
Just enforce the damn laws already on the books.
“Reform” is just code speak for amnesty.

NeoKong on May 24, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Again, if Hispanics voted in the same majority for Republicans as they do for Dems, the Democrats would be driving them across the border in their personal cars and demanding our immigration laws be enforced to the very letter of the law.

Democrats only care about voting blocks they can keep penned up on the liberal dependency plantation.

Speakup on May 24, 2012 at 2:19 PM

moochanty and drunkel

good stuff burrata

DanMan on May 24, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Not serious? On the contrary. The Dems are extremely serious about illegal immigration. They want to legalize the illegals. Seriously. Who benefits? Guess.

spiritof61 on May 24, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Of course they’re not serious. Democrat voters are divided on the subject. They’d have to deal with in-fighting and attacks from their own left.

Murf76 on May 24, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Rubio talks too much. DEMS NOT SERIOUS would have been plenty

rik on May 24, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Ds and Rs play the games.

Illegal is illegal.

Legal immigration is a disaster.

The bennies for the illegals are better than honey to flies.

Both parties are derelict, for different reasons.

The country needs a huge enema.

Schadenfreude on May 24, 2012 at 2:05 PM

Ding Ding Ding! Winner.

search4truth on May 24, 2012 at 2:26 PM

“I think there are some people in the Democratic Party that think that the immigration issue’s more valuable to them unsolved, that it gives them something to talk about, that they can go back to Hispanic communities and make unrealistic promises every two years and win votes,” Rubio (R-Fla.) said…

Perhaps they think that but they are wrong, because any ‘solution’ will only lead to the next demand, until we turn over ten or so states to Mexico and at the same time have open borders.

Negotiating with the radical immigration crowd is much like dealing with the ‘palestinians’.

slickwillie2001 on May 24, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Rubio omits the fact that his ‘non-immigrant’ visa sets the president of putting these ‘kids’ ( some of whom are now 35) in a separate class that could later legally be manipulated since it establishes, right up front, that the holders are ‘non-immigrants’ which begs the question: Then what are they if not ‘immigrants’?

Further, while these ‘kids’ are here on these new ‘non-immigrant’ visas, many will be having children of their own….children born in the US who will be CITIZENS. Does anyone seriously believe that we would deport these new parents who had children who were citizens after YEARS of allowing them to remain in this nation?

The next issue is that Rubio is touting this ‘DREAM Act’ alternative as a means to prevent funding of in state tuition AND FEDERAL AID. The moment that one of the DREAM Act ‘non-immigrant’ visa holders has a child in this country, a US CITIZEN, they become eligible, through that child/citizen, for ALL benefits available to any US citizen including, but not limited to, welfare, subsidized housing, subsidized utilities, food stamps, medicaid, etc.

These child/citizens would also then be able to sponsor their families for citizenship when they reach 21 years of age… and we’re back to chain migration through the ‘family reunification’ arm of immigration. The parents who shattered immigration law in the first place would thus be rewarded for that effort and would have successfully bypassed the legal immigration system. This is unacceptable.

Its very simple. When each of the “kids” who are illegal aliens brought here by their parents turns 18 years of age, they have a duty to go to the nearest embassy or consulate and apply for legal status in their own right. The failure to accept responsibility for themselves under the law, as adults, is a calculated commission of the same crime that their parents committed in willfully shattering federal immigration law. There is no excuse for refusing to apply for legal status in their own right. To do so is to demonstrate a complete disregard for the rule of law, the law of the land, and a clear disdain for the rights of the citizens and legal immigrants of this nation.

If the ‘kid’ really is a minor, and so not responsible for their illegal presence in this nation, they should be returned to their nation of origin along with their parents. children should remain with their parents and even President Obama lived in foreign nations with his parent(s) before returning to his own nation of origin. President Obama has claimed that his time spent in Indonesia benefited him greatly and has credited that time with helping to shape his world view.

Those ‘kids’ who’ve enlisted and are serving honorably in the US military have earned legal status through that service to the nation. Going to school and college at our expense hardly qualifies as ‘service’.

Finally, why would the Hispanic community go for Rubio’s limited DREAM ACT when they can hold out for the full AMNESTY DREAM ACT that Obama and the Democrats keep proffering? With the Democrats plan they get 6 years legal status free… no questions asked… just for APPLYING.

thatsafactjack on May 24, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Rubio is making the box of rocks look smart. No amnesty. Period.

4 billion for illegal tax credits?
Billions in welfare and health care?

Shut down their resources and they will go home.

aniptofar on May 24, 2012 at 2:31 PM

, Rubio’s would prevent such an outcome by using a new kind of non-immigrant visa that would specifically require recipients to get back in line when it expires

Right, after living here for 10-20 years on this new work visa, everyone will just mosey on over to the back of the line.

By the time this legislation becomes law, after myriad compromises with the Ds and open border Rs, it will look nothing like like this first rough draft. And 10 years from now it will be so corrupted with exceptions and poor enforcement that it will be as useless as our current immigration laws. AND ,to top it off, We will have a under classed, brown skinned unrepresented hard labored population; much of what the left now claims about the USA will actually become true.

And don’t forget the massive new bureaucracy put in place to maintain these amnesty(ish) laws.

But hey, lets hurry to pass something so that the Rs can get 3-4% more of the hispanic population. Or , more to the point, so that big multi nationals can get cheap labor on US soil..

BoxHead1 on May 24, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Why can’t these clowns be honest and admit that “comprehensive reform” means amnesty of some sort or other

no need to try to out-pander Dems – it’s a losing battle

check this poll – 40% of Hispanics want law enforcement, and only 54 % want amnesty

If I were running for office as a GOP candidate , I would be ecstatic with 40% of Hispanic vote

why try to pander to the 54% who don’t respect the law???

screw Rubio and his ilk, including Newt, McCain, Kennedy, Bush, ad nauseum

last time I saw Mitt on this issue, on Charlie Rose show a few months ago, Mitt came back three times to Rose’s challenge:

“You mean they (illegals now in our country) have to go home?

Yes.

You mean they really have to go home?

Yes.

They really have to go home?

Yes, Charley.”

Fingers crossed.

fred5678 on May 24, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Democrats Politicians not serious about immigration reform anything except re-election.

FIFY Ed.

You’re welcome.

ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse on May 24, 2012 at 2:10 PM

FIFY

Nathan_OH on May 24, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Finally, why would the Hispanic community go for Rubio’s limited DREAM ACT when they can hold out for the full AMNESTY DREAM ACT that Obama and the Democrats keep proffering? With the Democrats plan they get 6 years legal status free… no questions asked… just for APPLYING.

thatsafactjack on May 24, 2012 at 2:30 PM

As Rubio pointed out, the dems had COMPLETE control of the legislative and executive branch and didn’t touch it. They can’t get their own constituents to agree to amnesty much less ram it down the rest of the country’s collective throat.

Let’s solve it and move forward. We have to resolve this reality:

Ds and Rs play the games.

Illegal is illegal.

Legal immigration is a disaster.

The bennies for the illegals are better than honey to flies.

Both parties are derelict, for different reasons.

The country needs a huge enema.

Schadenfreude on May 24, 2012 at 2:05 PM

my whole concept starts with enforcing laws on the books and protecting our borders, which includes interior enforcement of the laws as well

DanMan on May 24, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Why do we need illegals to do “jobs Americans won’t do” when unemployment is in the double digits?

Here’s an idea – cut off the unemployment bennies for citizens and get them out picking fruit.

Send the illegals packing.

That’s a good policy.

NoDonkey on May 24, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Schadenfreude on May 24, 2012 at 2:05 PM

…more than one D I T T O!

KOOLAID2 on May 24, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Pander pander pander. (both sides)

Since they are all working to turn the USA into a socialist hellhole there is no need to change or enforce immigration laws. We will soon be able to enjoy our misery equally, without regards to race, creed, color, national origin, allegiance or legal status.

LegendHasIt on May 24, 2012 at 2:47 PM

lmao, well I guess they can kiss the hispanic vote goodbye for another cycle. But good for them for creating a new class of work force without rights!

dumb de dumb dumb.
demographics people, we want and need those new people.

Zekecorlain on May 24, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Do you know what I want to hear a Hispanic elected official talk about?

Anything but immigration.

Do you know what I want to hear an openly gay elected official talk about?

Anything but gay marriage.

Do you know what I want to hear a female elected official talk about?

Anything but the glass ceiling and contraception.

Do you know what I want to hear an African American elected official talk about?

Anything but…o.k., you get the idea.

Mr. Arkadin on May 24, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Is this because you don’t like views different then you already carry?

Zekecorlain on May 24, 2012 at 3:04 PM

demographics people, we want and need those new people.

Zekecorlain on May 24, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Yes, by all means, let’s turn into the pander party that pursues idiotic policies b/c it might* win us votes.

*an amnesty will not win the GOP the Hispanic vote, otherwise Reagan’s amnesty would already have Hispanics largely in the GOP column. People from far left societies (most of South America) are not going to suddenly start voting for conservative gov’t. Nor is the fact that most Hispanics are Catholic result in Hispanics voting GOP (otherwise, they already would be). The Catholic vote splits fairly evenly and blacks, who allegedly are very socially conservative, don’t vote with the GOP. So, the idea that giving Hispanic an amnesty will win us those votes is simply not supported by a single fact whatsoever. Indeed, the actual facts tend to support that giving an amnesty will not move Hispanic votes at all.

This absurd idea that granting amnesty will win the GOP Hispanic voters is simply not based in any facts. Argue that it is good policy for the Country if you can, but stop with the nonsense that it is a political winner (which, by the way, shouldn’t matter if it is bad for the Country, which I believe it is).

Monkeytoe on May 24, 2012 at 3:17 PM

I don’t want another panderer to the Latino community, even for the Veep position.

Heck, in that case, I could have voted for Perry instead of Romney…(not that I voted yet, here in Texas).

Weren’t we told Romney was tough on immigration?
So, to get around that, Romney will pick Rubio to give him cover?
-
That’s right, we’re told to swallow the castor oil because it’s ABO. I’ll shut up now.

Typicalwhitewoman on May 24, 2012 at 3:24 PM

NO AMNESTY! The down economy has already shown us that self deportation will work, so there is only one form of comprehensive immigration reform, and that’s to turn off the jobs. Anything else is pandering.

DFCtomm on May 24, 2012 at 3:56 PM

dumb de dumb dumb.
demographics people, we want and need those new people.

Zekecorlain on May 24, 2012 at 2:51 PM

What kind of parties are popular south of the border? How many U.S. style conservative parties are there in Mexico and South America, and how many socialist communist parties are there?

DFCtomm on May 24, 2012 at 3:59 PM

Sen. Marco Rubio on Wednesday blamed Washington’s inability to produce a comprehensive immigration policy on Democrats who prefer that the issue remain unresolved so they can continue to leverage it to win the Hispanic vote.

Perhaps, but the real problem is the Republicans refusal to:

Secure the borders first!

Proving themselves serious by securing the borders for all the world to see for a full year will open the door to immigration reforms.

RJL on May 24, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Proving themselves serious by securing the borders for all the world to see for a full year will open the door to immigration reforms.

RJL on May 24, 2012 at 4:02 PM

That’s retarded and incorrect.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on May 24, 2012 at 4:05 PM

“The Republican Party should be the pro legal immigration party.”

No we shouldn’t. We have an illegal and legal immigration problem. We should be cutting down a good 75% of legal immigrants at this time. Not only is legal immigration adding to our debt problem it’s also reshaping our culture and not in a positive way. We don’t need this kind of Bush/Rubio/McCain type immigration advocacy inside the GOP.

lowandslow on May 24, 2012 at 4:08 PM

That’s retarded and incorrect.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on May 24, 2012 at 4:05 PM

Ah, a Hot Air liberal, no exchange of ideas or facts just attacks and declarations. Your comments reveal much about you.

RJL on May 24, 2012 at 4:14 PM

plan to achieve comprehensive immigration reform:

1. secure the border enough to reduce the flow of illegals by at least 65% (we know we won’t ever be able to stop the flow 100%);

2. get rid of sanctuary cities;

3. require hospitals and schools to report on immigration status of patients/students;

4. require local/state police to report immigration status of all arrestees, suspects, etc.

5. much more strongly enforce laws against employers who employ illegals (more investigation, stiffer fines, institute e-verify for everyone);

6. no more catch-and-release, speed up deportation procedure;

7. crack down on legal immigrants that overstay their visas (i.e. get the computer systems, etc up-to-date);

8. tax remittances to Mexico, etc.

9. after 5 years of the above, pass some form of comprehensive immigration reform that establishes a path to legal residency (not citizenship or voting rights) for remaining illegals who a) have never been convicted of a crime; b) have never used any welfare/assistance programs; c) are gainfully employed with health insurance and don’t require assistance; and d) have been here at least 10 years meeting the requirements of a, b and c above.

Not so hard. It achieves what the amnesty people want and what the border control people want without “rounding up” millions of illegals. Unless the true goal of the amnesty supporters is really just to give amnesty to everyone (regardless of ability to support themselves and/or their criminal history) plus want to invite in millions more illegals?

Monkeytoe on May 24, 2012 at 4:31 PM

Monkeytoe on May 24, 2012 at 4:31 PM

The funny thing to me, is if Bush had pursued my plan, this would already be in place. We would now be in the phase or past the phase of granting legal residency to millions of illegals.

but the pro-amnesty crowd simply does not want to do anything whatsoever to a) reduce the flow of illegals or b) reduce the number of illegals here already.

It is really the pro-amnesty crowd that keeps the (aside from immigration) law-abiding, hard-working illegals “in the shadows” by refusing to compromise and allow reasonable enforcement efforts to precede a path to legality.

By simply crying “racism” and refusing to budge on the idea that we MUST pass an amnesty now, they ensure that nothing gets done. Yet they point the finger at those of us that want to make good/reasonable policy decisions about the issue as being somehow the villains.

I’m sure there are some on my side of the fence who are absolutists and would never want to see any form of “amnesty” ever, but most are like me – they simply want to see real, committed, and prolonged efforts to get both the in-flow under control and reduce the number of illegals already here before creating another incentive for more people to try and enter the U.S. illegally.

Monkeytoe on May 24, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Monkeytoe on May 24, 2012 at 4:31 PM

Even easier approach.

Fine companies $100,000.00 for every illegal they are caught employing, that is per individual employed, not per incident.

Even with GWB enforcement levels, the hiring of illegals suddenly becomes more like Russian Roulette than a sane business plan.

Nathan_OH on May 24, 2012 at 4:42 PM

My reading is that Rubio came out in favor of legal immigration. I agree. I briefly read what he proposed instead of the DREAM Act. Seems reasonable to me.

tngmv on May 24, 2012 at 4:57 PM

We have to eliminate the anchor babies first. That starts the whole mess in action.

Frankly, I would like to eliminate chain migration, too. Most countries in the world only let you go to their country to live and work if you contribute to them in an area of need. The rest of your extended family has to stay home. Why are we different?

And for illegals who use our medical services, make them pay it back, even if it is at the rate of $20 a week. Stop giving them free stuff.

Eliminate sanctuary cities, great start. Eliminate all federal aid to states that allow sanctuary cities to exist. ALL aid, including medicaid. If the states have to pay for all of the medicaid themselves, they would quickly change their thinking about sanctuary cities.

A big problem with the illegal alien situation is the elected officials. We need them to start to make the hard choices required to bring sanity back to the problem.

karenhasfreedom on May 24, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Ah, a Hot Air liberal, no exchange of ideas or facts just attacks and declarations. Your comments reveal much about you.

RJL on May 24, 2012 at 4:14 PM

Liberal? LOL. Wrong, genius.

Amnesty is a deal-breaker. Period. You can’t have amnesty no matter how high a wall you build. This is about interior enforcement, not some idiotic wall. Don’t attempt to speak for conservatives.

My opinion on this topic was clearly stated above, if you can read.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on May 24, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Ed Morrissey: “While the Democrats’ version creates a path for citizenship, Rubio’s would prevent such an outcome…”

Don’t count on it.

David Blue on May 24, 2012 at 5:40 PM

But He Promised To Handle This in His First Year..He didn’t Lie did He?

I think, since we seem to be in perpetual negotiations with them, we should ask the Iranians and some other members of the UN how they treat undocumented visitors.

We are now meeting again in June in what is becoming known as the Great Obama Kick the Nuclear Terror Problem Down the Road till After The Election Negotiations..

He broke his word on illegals.

IlikedAUH2O on May 24, 2012 at 5:46 PM

These appearances are preparing the debating space for what comes next.

LOL! This is how you characterize the great betrayal that you know is coming. Romney was never serious about the pro-American, pro law and order anti-Amnesty positions he took during the primary.

Romney lied about opposing Amnesty. He lied about repealing Obamacare. How long will Conservatives who only reluctantly came around to supporting Romney stay with him when they realized this.

When they realize he’s “lying for the Lord”.

sartana on May 24, 2012 at 6:11 PM

I don’t know why these fools think granting amnesty will bring a flood of new votes to the GOP? McCain did more to get amnesty for the 20 or 30 million Mexicans in this country and the legal and illegal Mexican voters still voted for Obama. By the way, what is this Hispanic crap? These people they try to lump together or not alike. Don’t believe me? Next PR guy you see, call him a Mexican. But make sure it’s someone a lot smaller than you, so you will have a good chance of winning the fight.

Alabama Infidel on May 24, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Rubio: Democrats not serious about immigration reform

Well Senator Rubio, with all due respect neither are the Republicans. Both parties are only interested in amnesty/partial amnesty and as many benefits they can give to the illegals. The only difference between the R’s & the D’s are which party can give the most of the American Taxpayer’s money.

Better to put a stop of allowing and in many cases importing thousands of illegals into our Country.

I’d like to see some consideration for the American Citizen Taxpayer.

bluefox on May 24, 2012 at 7:57 PM

A big problem with the illegal alien situation is the elected officials. We need them to start to make the hard choices required to bring sanity back to the problem.

karenhasfreedom on May 24, 2012 at 5:12 PM

Secure the border first.

Send the home Countries an invoice for all Services rendered for every illegal that is here.

I am so sick of these Congresspeople just giving away everything that the American Taxpayer has. I seriously question each one of their loyalties to our Country. They constantly put the illegals welfare over the Citizens in the U.S.A.

bluefox on May 24, 2012 at 8:21 PM