Posted on November 23rd, 2011 No comments
Published November 23, 2011 Fox News Latino
Gingrich, 68, may be the most familiar of the eight Republican candidates. But he has never been a play-it-safe politician and has a long career of highs and lows to prove it.
During Tuesday night’s debate on CNN, Gingrich went out on a limb with his immigration stance, saying that the nation’s immigration policies shouldn’t separate people who have lived in the country for years from their families.
Gingrich highlighted his break with traditional GOP thinking on immigration Tuesday in a televised debate, stepping into a touchy area that tripped up Perry earlier this year. Gingrich said he favors pathways to legal status for undocumented immigrants who have lived peaceful, law-abiding, tax-paying lives in the United States for many years.
“I don’t see how the party that says it’s the party of the family is going to adopt an immigration policy which destroys families which have been here a quarter-century,” Gingrich said in the forum, televised on CNN. “I’m prepared to take the heat for saying let’s be humane in enforcing the law.”
That spells amnesty to some critics of illegal immigration. Romney, the former Massachusetts governor and the GOP establishment’s favorite, was among those who refused to play along. Any type of pathway to legal status is a magnet for more unlawful crossings from Mexico, Romney said.
Immigration has vexed U.S. politicians for years. Many analysts say Republicans risk angering the fast-growing Hispanic population by showing little sympathy for the millions of undocumented residents already here.
I’m prepared to take the heat for saying let’s be humane in enforcing the law.
- Newt Gingrich
Gingrich, like fellow Republicans John McCain and George W. Bush, has supported more lenient immigration policies in the past. On Tuesday he chose to portray his record as humane and courageous. In coming days, GOP insiders will watch to see if voter reaction mirrors the rebuke that Perry suffered for saying people are heartless if they don’t support his policy of granting in-state college tuition to illegal immigrants.
Pushing new ideas for conservative governance and congressional reform, Gingrich led the 1994 Republican revolution that put his party in control of the House for the first time in 40 years. Four years later, after overreaching in his battles with President Bill Clinton and even some fellow Republicans, Gingrich was dumped from leadership. He soon left Congress.
Since then he has lectured, written books, made documentaries and earned millions of dollars as a consultant to organizations, including Freddie Mac, a backer of thousands of home mortgages.
Eyeballs sometimes roll when Gingrich cites his books, college degrees and big-thinking proclivities. But he’s rarely dull. On Tuesday he detailed why he thinks the United States should follow Chile’s model of making Social Security accounts private for workers.
“It has increased the economy, increased the growth of jobs, increased the amount of wealth, and it dramatically solves Social Security without a payment cut and without having to hurt anybody,” Gingrich said.
Cain, who struggled to break through in Tuesday’s foreign-policy-focused debate, also has hailed the Chilean model, but in less detail than Gingrich.
Reviews from Chileans are more mixed than Gingrich suggests. But any talk of privatizing Social Security runs risks in this country. That’s especially true in general elections, when Democrats and independents vote.
Americans soundly rejected Bush’s bid to partly privatize the government retirement program just after his 2004 reelection as president. Many Republicans have avoided the subject ever since, or at least addressed it more gently than Gingrich.
Gingrich also has criticized abortion with greater emphasis and detail than some of his rivals. He supports a national “personhood amendment,” which would define life as beginning at conception. It would effectively ban all abortions and some forms of birth control. Mississippi voters resoundingly rejected a similar measure in a state referendum this month.
Romney, meanwhile, is sticking with his run-out-the-clock strategy. He’s adhering to GOP orthodoxy on immigration, not making too much noise about Social Security, and focusing his criticisms on Obama.
His strategy has kept him fairly steady in the polls for months while others — notably Rep. Michele Bachmann, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and businessman Herman Cain — have risen and fallen. Now it’s Gingrich, the history-quoting former House speaker, with a chance to prove he’s the Romney alternative who can rally and inspire Republican voters.
Romney once supported legalized abortion but now opposes it. He says a future Supreme Court should overturn the Roe v. Wade ruling that barred states from outlawing abortion.
Romney took few chances in Tuesday’s debate. He is all but ignoring his GOP rivals as he sharpens his attacks on Obama. His campaign drew fire Tuesday for a new TV ad that quotes Obama out of context in a 2008 speech about the economy.
The CNN debate offered significant TV time for Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum. But few veterans of Republican campaigns give them a chance to win the nomination.
Gingrich, for now, seems to have the best chance to derail Romney, but his history of groundbreaking political achievements and stark blunders leaves some GOP insiders unwilling to predict the results.
Republican campaign consultant Matt Mackowiak said Gingrich “made his view on immigration more persuasively than Perry had previously.” But Gingrich will suffer if it “can be construed as amnesty,” he said.
“Gingrich’s mouth got him back into the race,” Mackowiak said. “And it very well might take him right back out.”
Based on reporting by The Associated Press.Illegal Immigrant News cnn, crossings, fellow republicans, fox news, george w bush, highs and lows, hispanic population, illegal immigration, immigration policies, immigration policy, john mccain, lenient immigration, massachusetts governor, mitt romney, newt gingrich, presidential contest, quarter century, republican candidates, touchy area, undocumented immigrants
Posted on March 22nd, 2011 No comments
(The following was sent to the webmaster of this site and has been posted in case someone wishes to answer the question)
- The Catholic Church has its immoral un-Godly pedophilia tolerance and cover-up.
- LDS has its immoral un-Godly illegal alien tolerance and cover-up.
LDS is in my heart; the LDS establishment and elitists politically upper crust actions feel so distant from what I believe is reasonable.
Among other things, turning Utah into a sanctuary city (one that pampers law breakers and those that profit from their exploitation is “discriminatory against people because of other races”. Let me explain from my perspective as a Hispanic immigrant. I am now a naturalized citizen.
Mexican and Central Americans who are the overwhelming majority of illegal aliens are only 8% of the world population but 89% of the illegal aliens in our country.
Proximity to a border that they violate does not give illegal aliens or should not give them PRIORITY over the world’s other racial and ethnic groups whose people would like to legally migrate to the USA. Who sees fairness in that? Can we see a raise of hand for those in favor of granting immigration status to only those who respect our laws and processes?
What is an “immigrant”? An immigrant, as it is in my case and my wife case, who is also foreign-born, is a person that is in full compliance with United States immigration laws and processes.
All other foreigners are either here legally under visa or illegally, but in no case are they immigrants.
The LDS behind the scene and now overtly pushing for preferential treatment for one ethnic group over all others, is morally wrong, especially in light that they are law breakers.
Adding insult to injury the taxpayer is forced to pay for LDS’s effective racial discrimination agenda in immigration policy.
Fifty percent of the people in America do not pay income tax and 43% of the people are on food stamps. Illegal aliens typically have 3 years of schooling and are illiterate in English and in their native language also.
Are illegal aliens working illegally in Utah more or less likely to be among those who pay NO INCOME TAX? You got that right. Illegal aliens have no Social Security numbers (it is against the law for them to apply for one much less posses one) but even if they miraculously reported their income without a Social Security number, their tax load as minimum wage earners would be ZERO. Incidentally, identity and tax fraud are felonies. Every illegal alien in the United States today, by necessity, is committing identity and tax fraud – every day.
Let’s take an illegal alien family with 4 children in school. The parents would pay ZERO INCOME TAX. Families with income under $25,000 pay no income tax – generally. Instead these foreigners would qualify for an income tax credit (money from the taxpayers paid to low income filers who pay no tax). Each of the illegal alien family children cost the taxpayers about $18,000 per school year. A four children family would total about $54,000 annually in cost to the tax payers.
It would be ironic if LDS would reimburse the tax payers for this theft of taxpayers’ money, but wait . . . LDS money also come out of our pockets, just like taxes do.
The LDS establishment elitist crust are disrespecting what is moral, what is legal and disrespecting the hard work and good intentions of its members.
Those who are serving us in the state government and in Congress have taken an OATH to protect and defend the Constitution and to enforce the laws. The LDS establishment has used its muscle and our money to coerce legislators to dishonor their OATH OF OFFICE. Does this live to our expectation of religious leadership?
We deserve an apology from the elitists – one would think.
(name withheld for privacy reasons)
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/51439173-76/bills-burton-church-immigration.html.csp?page=1Citizen Feedback catholic church, elitists, ethnic group, food stamps, foreigners, illegal aliens, immigrant, immigration policy, immigration status, insult to injury, law breakers, native language, naturalized citizen, overwhelming majority, preferential treatment, racial discrimination, united states immigration, united states immigration laws, upper crust, world population