Thread: GOP Hopefuls Temper Anti-Immigrant Talk

Updated version of this article: paragraph added with Thompson talking about chain migration:

Thompson, asked if children born in the United States from illegal immigrants should be separated from their parents, said the greater issues is "chain migration."

"Right now, we have a situation where people can bring in spouses, children, brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers and so forth," he said. "I think that people should be able to serve as a basis for the bringing in of their spouses and of their children, but I do not think there should be endless chain migration. So I think that is the issue to focus on, and not innocent children who are born here not of their own accord and who our courts have said are United States citizens."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071210/ap_ ... ish_debate

I am outraged that they even did this debate. Panders all of them!!!!!

Originally Posted by Dianne

Remember all that the McCain/Kennedy plan supported by Huckabee and Romney is a non-amnesty plan (we know different)... They are expousing "anti amnesty" while professing a path to legalization if you pay a fine which is amnesty !!!

Romney opposed this summer's amnesty bill, and does not support "pathways." Here is Romney's quote from this summer:

[i]“I strongly oppose today’s bill going through the Senate. It is the wrong approach. Any legislation that allows illegal immigrants to stay in the country indefinitely, as the new ‘Z-Visa’ does, is a form of amnesty. That is unfair to the millions of people who have applied to legally immigrate to the U.S.â€

And I don't see what's the point in making concessions to Cuba, which is a TERRORIST STATE.

What the hell are you saying, Paul? that we should do trade with a communist country? ALL communist countries are terorrist states. Trading with China is bad enough as it is.

So is Paul basically saying it'll be okay for the Latinos to enter the country illegally once our nations economical problems are dealt with?

I don't know MW, Paul is not only radical in thinking, but his statements lately are starting to make me wonder..

Duncan Hunter said that undocumented people need to return where they came from...

Well, at least there's a real man in the room.

Thompson is the only major candidate who spoke out vociferously against amnesty-using his stint as a fill-in for Paul Harvey as a bully pulpit. Romney also opposed amnesty, although I don't know how you'd characterize his opposition in terms of potency.

We all know where McCain stands, unfortunately.



People also need to remember that Giuliani only opposed the McCain-Kennedy-Martinez-Hagel amnesty plan. That doesn't mean he opposes amnesty. To the contrary, he supports it, just not the particularly noxious version propounded during this session of Congress or the last.

Shapka wrote:

Thompson is the only major candidate who spoke out vociferously against amnesty-using his stint as a fill-in for Paul Harvey as a bully pulpit. Romney also opposed amnesty, although I don't know how you'd characterize his opposition in terms of potency.

I'd say Hunter made it quite clear that he does not support amnesty either.

Duncan Hunter said that undocumented people need to return where they came from...

Is it safe to assume Hunter received the same treatment in this debate as he has all others (given little time to express his views)?

Quote:
Duncan Hunter said that undocumented people need to return where they came from...

Is it safe to assume Hunter received the same treatment in this debate as he has all others (given little time to express his views)?

Probably not, the MSM is mad at him for the fence and that fence is non-productive in regard to the SSP/NAU plans.