Tuesday night, Newt Gingrich opened the door to some controversy when he opined that if he were President, some illegal aliens who had been in the country for a long time and had not committed criminal acts, could be allowed to stay.
From the Washington Examiner:
Newt Gingrich did not walk on stage at Tuesday's Republican presidential debate planning to make a bold new statement on immigration. In debate prep, the former House speaker spent a lot of time with national security advisers discussing the issue of religious freedom abroad -- a topic he has tried to showcase recently -- but didn't discuss immigration at all.
Besides, when Gingrich made his now-controversial remarks -- that he would permit some long-time illegal immigrants to stay in the United States permanently -- he wasn't saying anything he hadn't said earlier in the campaign. It's just that back then Gingrich was an also-ran and nobody was listening. Now, Gingrich is leading the polls, and people are paying close attention to his every word.
Here is what Gingrich said Tuesday night when the discussion turned to illegal immigrants: "I do not believe that the people of the United States are going to take people who have been here a quarter century, who have children and grandchildren, who are members of the community, who may have done something 25 years ago, separate them from their families, and expel them."
Gingrich said pretty much the same thing at a campaign event in South Carolina just last month. "There are some folks who have been here 20 or 25 years," he said. "They have paid taxes, they live in the community, they're married, they've got three kids, two grandkids, and they go to your local church. We are not going to deport them."
And at the nationally televised Sept. 7 Republican presidential debate at the Reagan Library in California, Gingrich said, "We should ... find a way to deal with folks who are already here, some of whom, frankly, have been here 25 years, are married with kids, live in our local neighborhood, go to our church. It's got to be done in a much more humane way than thinking to automatically deport millions of people."
When I first heard Gingrich offer his opinion, to say I was not thrilled would be an understatement. I want illegal aliens removed from the country.
However, Gingrich may have made a great preemptory move that would allow for the greatest number of illegals to be removed from the country.
When we have a Republican President and he or she gets serious about removing the illegals from the country, those who are the illegal enablers are going to throw out the most sympathetic cases they can to try and get Americans to support not throwing the illegals out of the country. The most sympathetic would be someone who has been in the country for thirty years, has children and grandchildren and has not been arrested and perhaps even opened a business.
Gingrich’s proposal takes that off of the table. The illegals removed will not be the sympathetic illegals. They will be the most recent arrivals.
After the 2012 election, we must close the border and we must deport as many of the illegals as we can.
That is not negotiable.
Definitely that there will be no mass illegals removed. Gingrich is the best of word smith's, such as, "You can't expect to remove someone that has been here for 25-years, who is an honest worker, etc.," Well he failed to mention their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren. I wanted to yell, Well, what about all those falling below the bar of 25-years?
If Newt were honest he would make it more precise and say: The army will patrol the border, followed by the erection of an inpenetable fence; followed by that all illegals will not receive services unless they have consistently filed a tax return for a minimum of 5-years; followed by that all illegals age 35 and younger will return to their native countries and apply for entry visiting permits lasting no longer than two-years. That all children born of illegals while present will be considered illegal and retroative to year 1986. But Newt won't do that. And that's why we will continue to breed dishonesty as our finest product. Anything to get into office.
Newt made it very clear that securing the border was top priority.
READ THIS ALL OF YOU WHO SUPPORT GINGRICH--*** GINGRICH AMNESTY WOULD NOT GIVE CITIZENSHIP BUT WOULD GIVE U. S. JOBS TO 3.5 MILLION ILLEGAL ALIENS, SAYS THE PEW HISPANIC CENTER!!!
HE IS PROMISING A BIGGER AMNESTY THAN THE GIANT BLANKET AMNESTY OF 1986 THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE THE FIRST AND LAST ONE EVER!! DON'T BE FOOLED BY THIS WORDS!!!
Many of them already have jobs and are not paying taxes.
Some more interesting news on Newt that people might have a interest in:
Study Says Gingrich Amnesty Bigger Than '86 Blanket Amnesty -- Seems to Reject 'Attrition Through Enforcement'
If Gingrich is the answer, Tea Party has failed
It very well may be Gingrich (just like McCain's early failing efforts) he has risen from the ashes just like the gryphon. Once again the boys behing the curtain will have a horse in both races. So, that leaves us to dump every RINO in congress and the Senate that we can (Boehner for starters) and since they will be the commanding bodies they can perhaps keep Gingrich on the conservative path. That is how the Tea Party will not have failed.
I agree. It's imperative we take over congress.
To B Zipper: I totally agree. Newt is NOT THE ANSWER TO OUR IMMIGRATION PROBLEMS---