What makes you think a third party is the answer? It just so happens that most third party candidates during the 2008 Presidential elections supported a pathway to legalization for illegal aliens.

Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente, Green candidates for President and Vice President. Both are huge illegal alien advocates and support amnesty.

Bob Barr and Wayne Root, Libertarian candidates for President and Vice President. I don't know Root's position on amnesty but Bob Barr supports a pathway to legalization for illegal aliens.

Chuck Baldwin and Darrel Castle, Constitution Party candidates. This third party was the only one that didn't support amnesty for illegal aliens and they only received 199,314 votes, about .15% of the vote.

Ralph Nadar and Matt Gonzalez, Indepedents. Ralph Nadar - supports a driver's license for illegal aliens and a pathway to legaliation for some.

There will be no knight on a white horse rushing to our rescue. IMO, or best bet is to get rid of the RINOs in the Republican Party. It's a fact that most Republicans in the U.S. Congress do not support amnesty for illegal aliens, whereas the opposite is true of the Democratic Party.


Excerpt from the 2008 Republican Party Platform:

Immigration, National Security, and the Rule of Law

Immigration policy is a national security issue, for which we have one test: Does it serve the national interest? By that standard, Republicans know America can have a strong immigration system without sacrificing the rule of law.

Enforcing the Rule of Law at the Border and Throughout the Nation

Border security is essential to national security. In an age of terrorism, drug cartels, and criminal gangs, allowing millions of unidentified persons to enter and remain in this country poses grave risks to the sovereignty of the United States and the security of its people. We simply must be able to track who is entering and leaving our country.

Our determination to uphold the rule of law begins with more effective enforcement, giving our agents the tools and resources they need to protect our sovereignty, completing the border fence quickly and securing the borders, and employing complementary strategies to secure our ports of entry. Experience shows that enforcement of existing laws is effective in reducing and reversing illegal immigration.

Our commitment to the rule of law means smarter enforcement at the workplace, against illegal workers and lawbreaking employers alike, along with those who practice identity theft and traffic in fraudulent documents. As long as jobs are available in the United States, economic incentives to enter illegally will persist. But we must empower employers so they can know with confidence that those they hire are permitted to work. That means that the E-Verify system—which is an internet-based system that verifies the employment authorization and identity of employees—must be reauthorized. A phased-in requirement that employers use the E-Verify system must be enacted.

The rule of law means guaranteeing to law enforcement the tools and coordination to deport criminal aliens without delay – and correcting court decisions that have made deportation so difficult. It means enforcing the law against those who overstay their visas, rather than letting millions flout the generosity that gave them temporary entry. It means imposing maximum penalties on those who smuggle illegal aliens into the U.S., both for their lawbreaking and for their cruel exploitation. It means requiring cooperation among federal, state and local law enforcement and real consequences, including the denial of federal funds, for self-described sanctuary cities, which stand in open defiance of the federal and state statutes that expressly prohibit such sanctuary policies, and which endanger the lives of U.S. citizens. It does not mean driver's licenses for illegal aliens, nor does it mean that states should be allowed to flout the federal law barring them from giving in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens, nor does it mean that illegal aliens should receive social security benefits, or other public benefits, except as provided by federal law.

We oppose amnesty. The rule of law suffers if government policies encourage or reward illegal activity. The American people's rejection of en masse legalizations is especially appropriate given the federal government's past failures to enforce the law.

Excerpt from the 2008 Democratic Party Platform:

for the millions living here illegally but otherwise playing by the rules, we must require them to come out of the shadows and get right with the law. We support a system that requires undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, pay taxes, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens. They are our neighbors, and we can help them become full tax-paying, law abiding, productive members of our society.

Personally, I think our best bet in the next presidential elections is someone like Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) or Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL). However, Sessions would have a rough road because he does have a few skeletons in his closet. I say let's fix the Republican Party by getting rid of the handful of Republicans that think like Sen. McCain on the immigration issue. IMO, a third party candidate is not a viable option at this point in our history. The percentage of votes received by third party candidates during the last presidential election substantiate my claim. I'm a realist who believes that's a hill that can't be climbed in time to save us from the illegal alien advocates currently sitting in the U.S. Congress.

The grass isn't always greener on the other side of the fence, especially when you don't have time to water it. Sometimes it's more effective to just weed the yard you aleady have.