Thread: GOP candidates deserve another look on immigration

GOP candidates deserve another look on immigration
Published 04:15 p.m., Friday, August 12, 2011

The 2012 presidential election likely will be about jobs and the economy — and not about immigration.

Just don't tell that to NumbersUSA, a nativist organization that recently graded 12 committed or prospective presidential contenders, including President Barack Obama, on their immigration-related views, policies and statements. It was not pretty. No grade inflation here.

This outfit wants to reduce the number of immigrants taken in by the United States to what it was before the Immigration Reform Act of 1965 — about 250,000 annually. That figure is about a quarter of what it is now, and one way to get there is to make it virtually impossible for people to legally immigrate if they aren't the child or spouse of a U.S. citizen.

The only good thing about groups like this is that they put the lie to the claim that restrictionists have no problem with those who want to immigrate legally. Sure they don't. Just so long as those people remain in their own country.

What NumbersUSA really has a problem with is the current crop of presidential candidates. The best grade went to Michele Bachmann, but it was only a B-minus. Then came Tim Pawlenty with a C-plus and Herman Cain with a C-minus. Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin both got D's. Newt Gingrich, Jon Huntsman and Rick Perry each got a D-minus. Ron Paul, Gary Johnson and Rick Santorum got F's. The underachiever was Obama, who got an F-minus.

Candidates lost points for opposing efforts to change the 14th Amendment so that U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants are no longer afforded U.S. citizenship, not pushing for limits on legal immigration, and questioning the wisdom of state laws that enlist local police in the enforcement of federal immigration law.

Romney's popularity with this group probably took a hit because he has a soft spot for legal immigrants. Coming from a Mormon family that migrated to Mexico in the late 1800s to escape persecution, he has complained that we make it too difficult for people to come to the United States legally to study or work — and virtually impossible for them to remain here after their visas expire. Like many CEOs, he thinks we should literally staple a green card to the diploma of foreign students who graduate from a university in the United States.

Gingrich might well have been hurt by the fact that, as he has said, he supports a middle ground between amnesty and the forcible removal of millions of people. As he said in the New Hampshire GOP debate two months ago, he rejects the suggestion that “you either have to ship 20 million people out of America or legalize all of them.â€

The 2012 presidential election likely will be about jobs and the economy — and not about immigration.

Screw you Ruben Navarette, in your dreams!

W

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

The 2012 presidential election likely will be about jobs and the economy — and not about immigration.

Screw you Ruben Navarette, in your dreams!

W

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

The 2012 presidential election likely will be about jobs and the economy — and not about immigration.

Screw you Ruben Navarette, in your dreams!

W

So you don't care for Mr. Navarette, W? Yeah, I've noticed he's pretty biased towards illegals!

Originally Posted by Ratbstard

Originally Posted by ALIPAC

The 2012 presidential election likely will be about jobs and the economy — and not about immigration.

Screw you Ruben Navarette, in your dreams!

W

Exactly!

I got a chuckle too.....

The 2012 presidential election likely will be about jobs and the economy — and not about immigration.

That's funny these 3 things go together like peas and carrots!
Eliminate the last one and the other 2 will fix themselves!